tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post4212783205427534788..comments2024-03-28T17:34:21.418-07:00Comments on The South Fraser Blog: Proposed Bow Banning Bylaw May Miss MarkNathan Pachalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17647693133663879821noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post-46130950622115233662015-06-30T11:26:00.555-07:002015-06-30T11:26:00.555-07:00So the end result last night was that No one on Co...So the end result last night was that No one on Council would second a motion to have first/second reading and delay third until after questioning,debate and perhaps referral to the Public Safety Committee for recommendations. Council pressed on and a minor amendment that was suggested by this writer by e-mail to staff, mayor, and Council reflecting your expressed need for an authorization/exemption for approved recreational activities was plagiarized by another Councillor and did pass. The main motion, as flawed as I perceive it to be, passed with only me objecting. So now in effect is a bylaw that , with few exceptions, bans firearm and bow activities throughout the City based on what I learned to be 2 complaints. This heavy handed approach continues to prohibit any opportunity for indoor range/practice facilities in the City and adds to the list of prohibited activities that absurdly includes as well billiard/pool halls and auctions unless "grandfathered" prior to by-law adoption. The City did replace the ban on "methodone distribution and did pass business license regulations in concert with the College of Pharmacists. However, based on a single letter from the Downtown Merchants Association and a few anecdotal comments about "lingerers" outside pharmacies, the City is moving toward a zoning by-law that is intended to restrict the number of pharmacies through a "proximty" clause. So instead of addressing the "street" concerns, the City pushes forward on a zoning by-law that once again "grandfathers" existing pharmacies and discourages a fundamental element of true Capitalism--that being competition. Those that serve best the consumer should survive. A City that prides itself in being "open for business" through zoning, seemingly is intent on doing the opposite, ignoring both demand and demographics of the City. More to come next meeting. Dave Hallnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post-61442302969689079172015-06-29T10:48:36.381-07:002015-06-29T10:48:36.381-07:00Unfortunately, it's become fairly typical in m...<br />Unfortunately, it's become fairly typical in many jurisdictions around the Lower Mainland (and elsewhere, I'm sure) that a small number of complaints by residents results in a "sledgehammer" policy to deal with what is, in actuality, a very minor issue. In my experience, many municipal policy makers do not spend enough time examining unintended consequences and long-term impacts -- they want to be seen as "actively responding to the concerns of their citizens". Which is fine, when dealing with the application of policies and regulations (dealing with noise concerns, for example), but when creating new policy, time for sober second thought is often very useful in avoiding other problems down the road.M.Sakainoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post-48829725988093710052015-06-29T09:55:54.707-07:002015-06-29T09:55:54.707-07:00Let's hope that nerf arrows aren't part of...Let's hope that nerf arrows aren't part of the ban.Nathan Pachalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17647693133663879821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post-73661881069521119932015-06-29T09:54:11.682-07:002015-06-29T09:54:11.682-07:00Thanks for bringing this up!Thanks for bringing this up!Nathan Pachalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17647693133663879821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3299108886803608881.post-69919872819726661432015-06-29T09:46:25.984-07:002015-06-29T09:46:25.984-07:00Thanks for your input Nathan. This has come to Pub...Thanks for your input Nathan. This has come to Public Meeting tonight without any pre-consultation with Council as a staff stated "housekeeping" item. I will raise your concerns along with a questioning of the inclination to "ban" rather than regulate in a number of by-laws. As well, I have some concern regarding the conflict between this proposal and other zoning by-law provisions that would seem to be at odds as a previous argument had been that if something wasn't stated as "allowable", then it was prohibited. So why are some things banned and some things unstated, so not "allowable"???<br />Councillor Dave Hall Dave Hallnoreply@blogger.com