View Single Post
  #53  
Old 07-22-2019, 09:56 AM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 1,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
Is there any compelling reason why such a code should not read "If one should litter on the highway, they shall be fined $500"?
"Littering on the highway shall be punished by a fine of $500 for each incident."

Or, considerably better, "Littering on the highway shall be punished by a fine to be set annually by [X Municipality]." (And you'd better make it clear somewhere whether the fine is per incident or per piece of litter.) If the code lists a specific fine, inflation will make it nonsensical over the years; so specifying the amount means you're going to need to rewrite the code every few years anyway.

OF course, IME, you're going to need to do that anyway; because no matter how hard you tried to address in the code every situation that was going to come up (if only to specifically allow it), somebody's going to come in two months after you finally got the revision through all the hearings and votes with something you never thought of, and/or with new information about something you did think of which means that, going off the information you had at the time, you got something wrong.

I think most places have cleaned up their gendered references in municipal codes while in the process of doing otherwise necessary rewriting. Saves printing as many versions, and simplifies the hearing process (I don't know whether this change in this Berkeley code requires a public hearing process.)