The reason I’m posting is because of a letter in my newspaper this morning. It stated that my town has passed an ordinance that any skateboarder who skateboards on any private lot without a sign specifically allowing skateboarding is breaking the law. The fine for skating in an unmarked lot is over $200. It’s like making business owners put up a sign that says: PARKING ALLOWED. IN the parking lot.
Ever see the commercial (I think it was ESPN, but I’m not sure) where there is a tennis court with a sign saying NO TENNIS? A bunch of people are playing tennis and a couple of skateboarders (or policemen? it’s been a while)come up to them and say, "HEY! WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU’RE DOING??? CAN’T YOU READ THE SIGN??? ect. . .
Anyway, the article got me thinking. The city has imposed an unfair law on a group, the majority of which has no say in the city government. Is this fair?
Would the law be better if it required all the parking lots to post NO SKATEBOARDING signs? The property is all privately owned, and the owners DO get to decide how it can be used. Parking lots are, by definition, for parking. How about getting the skaeboarders together and getting yourselves a board park? It took us a while here in Redding, but we finally did it. It’s a way better place to ride besides!
I understand that private property owners have a right to determine how their property is used. Yes, the law WOULD be better if it require those property owners who wish their lots not be used to skateboard to post signs stating that. It would be better because with the law as it is, the city is restricting private property. I don’t understand how the city is allowed to do this. If I OWN a business with a parking lot, I can’t skateboard in it unless I put up a sign specifically allowing me to. I (the OWNER OF THE BUSINESS) couldn’t! Is there something WRONG with this??? Am I the ONLY one who thinks so??? If the skaters got together an built a skate park, we’d have to put up a sign saying: SKATEBOARDING ALLOWED. By law.
While I don’t care for their phrasing, I’d like to clarify what they were probably thinking. I’m not taking a position for or against skateboarding, just explaining.
Clearly the presumption is that property owners did not purchase their property so that it could be used as a recreational facility by any and all passers-by.
This is probably not a bad assumption, especially given the existence of common law easements and conversions. Without going into legal details (which vary by jurisdiction), this means that a property owner who allows the public to use his property freely may find that, after many years, he’s created a right for the public to use his land (and all subsequent buyers will have to honor it) or he may lose he property entirely. Weird, but true – it’s a well-known common law, with arguably good reasons behind it.
It’s also so fair guess that the town council has recieved some complaints about skateboarders.
I very much doubt if a property owner would be prosecuted for skateboarding on his own property, any more than you would be prosecuted for skateboarding in you own driveway.
In real life, they simply don’t want people claiming the right to assume they can use other people’s property to skateboard. The fact that you are upset suggests that perhaps the local skateboarders assume exactly that.
I suspect your real concern is that not very many owners particularly want you using their property to skateboard, and you’d prefer that the burden be on them to keep you off.
The town council is making the same guess, but they don’t want fifty ‘no skateboarding’ signs on every block (and then there’s the problem of signs being torn down) The ‘least burdensome’ solution is to allow people to grant permission by posting a sign. Remember: you can’t assume permission anyway. This law just means that the property owner does not have to show up in court every time someone skateboards without permission. The lack of a sign speaks for him.