City ordinances--what's their motive?

[shella]

if its anything like the UK it is to stop people from living outside the system. they want us all to be subservient.
i could go on but i think you understand where i am coming from

 

[owl]

Think about it. Law and society are about control. If you have a problem being controlled, society and culture will try to break you. How you handle that will define you.

 

[Zil]

Gypseys have always have problems. That has never been a secret. If we chose the life style we have to live with the results.

 

[shella]

Think about it. Law and society are about control. If you have a problem being controlled, society and culture will try to break you. How you handle that will define you.

i totally agree.

 

[owl]

Sometimes minds converge. shella, if we ever meet I buy the first cup.

 

[Donedirtcheap]

City ordinances and code have evolved over the years not to control people but to provide safety and stability in communities. It would be a free for all if no laws or structure were in place. Those laws usually come into place because too many people basically suck. They have no regard for others property and only think of themselves.

Its also why home owners associations have come to be very common. They help maintain property vales. Its absolutely amazing that people buy a house in one and then complain about the rules. They give you a packet of information with all the rules listed BEFORE you buy the house. If the rules are ridiculous, don't buy. Go buy where there is no hoa and then complain when the goofball next door rolls an old pick up truck over on its roof in the front yard because he's pulling the transmission.

Why should someone who buys a house for $800,00 near the ocean and pays $12,000 a year in property taxes have to put up with the street turning into a used rv lot. Why do business owners have to put up with having someone crapping by their door step or in their alley? Why do people get a cat and then think its ok to let it run wild and urinate around other peoples houses, crap in flower beds and sand boxes, crawl up into engine compartments and cause damage, walk on peoples cars.

 

[Duck]

City ordinances and code have evolved over the years not to control people but to provide safety and stability in communities. It would be a free for all if no laws or structure were in place. Those laws usually come into place because too many people basically suck. They have no regard for others property and only think of themselves.

Its also why home owners associations have come to be very common. They help maintain property vales. Its absolutely amazing that people buy a house in one and then complain about the rules. They give you a packet of information with all the rules listed BEFORE you buy the house. If the rules are ridiculous, don't buy. Go buy where there is no hoa and then complain when the goofball next door rolls an old pick up truck over on its roof in the front yard because he's pulling the transmission.

Why should someone who buys a house for $800,00 near the ocean and pays $12,000 a year in property taxes have to put up with the street turning into a used rv lot. Why do business owners have to put up with having someone crapping by their door step or in their alley? Why do people get a cat and then think its ok to let it run wild and urinate around other peoples houses, crap in flower beds and sand boxes, crawl up into engine compartments and cause damage, walk on peoples cars.

Unfortunately true. Even as I am preparing to move into a van, I see there are issues with the things some people who live this way do, the liveaboard(boat) community suffers the same way. If people follow along with the idea of leaving no trace behind it wouldn't be an issue, and likely there wouldn't be as much. Some people leave terrible messes and cause a lot of property damage. And in the end many suffer for the actions of a few.
Not to say that land owners don't abuse their privileges too.
The way they go after boats for being in their lines of view of their property when the boats have been anchoring there for longer than the houses have existed, or getting rid of vehicles they don't like on public property by filing silly complaints and kicking up a fuss until they get what they want. People hate someone else paying less than they do to enjoy something, also part of human nature.

 

[Canine]

In the town of 60,000 where I live, I went to the Civic Center in the guise of having a "friend" visit for a couple weeks or so. I asked if "he" could stay in a 16 foot camper trailer during that time within the city limits or if there were any limitations on that. I figured if this fictional scenario had a good outcome, then a van would go over even better. The lady told me no one is allowed to stay in a camper or rv of any kind for any length of time unless it is in an rv park. She went on to inform me that staying in a tent overnight in the backyard is not permitted. Even parents camping out with their kids in their own yard was not permitted, although, she added this is never policed. This is in Montana, a place where we tend to have fewer restrictions than many other places.

I would also like to comment on the "few bad apples" replies. Yes, the "bad apple" excuse is often the cited reason for disallowing camping and similar situations, but that is an abuse of authority. Freedom takes a lot of work. Policing people who vandalize our communities is hard, but necessary to keep the people who contribute to society free to live in smaller, mobile dwellings. I believe living in a small, mobile dwelling is reasonable as long as we don't make the place where we live worse than when we moved in and that we continue to contribute positively to the society we share. Blanket legislation and overly punitive city codes is the result of some entity taking the easy way out. If vandwellers are allowed more freedom to live more integrated within a city, the city will see more vandalism from those "few bad apples". Then law enforcement and others will have to make the effort to police those criminals and the aftermath of their crimes. But that is the price law abiding people have to pay in a populated society. Freedom ain't free.

 

[shella]

City ordinances and code have evolved over the years not to control people but to provide safety and stability in communities. It would be a free for all if no laws or structure were in place. Those laws usually come into place because too many people basically suck. They have no regard for others property and only think of themselves.

Its also why home owners associations have come to be very common. They help maintain property vales. Its absolutely amazing that people buy a house in one and then complain about the rules. They give you a packet of information with all the rules listed BEFORE you buy the house. If the rules are ridiculous, don't buy. Go buy where there is no hoa and then complain when the goofball next door rolls an old pick up truck over on its roof in the front yard because he's pulling the transmission.

Why should someone who buys a house for $800,00 near the ocean and pays $12,000 a year in property taxes have to put up with the street turning into a used rv lot. Why do business owners have to put up with having someone crapping by their door step or in their alley? Why do people get a cat and then think its ok to let it run wild and urinate around other peoples houses, crap in flower beds and sand boxes, crawl up into engine compartments and cause damage, walk on peoples cars.

so America isn't the land of the free.? your statements is valid but not the issue. if i want to live in a van and work. that is my choice. why should i have to live in a house or flat. you have made a blanket statement. which in my opinion is not fair. but a the same time i value what you have said.

 

[Donedirtcheap]

In the town of 60,000 where I live, I went to the Civic Center in the guise of having a "friend" visit for a couple weeks or so. I asked if "he" could stay in a 16 foot camper trailer during that time within the city limits or if there were any limitations on that. I figured if this fictional scenario had a good outcome, then a van would go over even better. The lady told me no one is allowed to stay in a camper or rv of any kind for any length of time unless it is in an rv park. She went on to inform me that staying in a tent overnight in the backyard is not permitted. Even parents camping out with their kids in their own yard was not permitted, although, she added this is never policed. This is in Montana, a place where we tend to have fewer restrictions than many other places.

I would also like to comment on the "few bad apples" replies. Yes, the "bad apple" excuse is often the cited reason for disallowing camping and similar situations, but that is an abuse of authority. Freedom takes a lot of work. Policing people who vandalize our communities is hard, but necessary to keep the people who contribute to society free to live in smaller, mobile dwellings. I believe living in a small, mobile dwelling is reasonable as long as we don't make the place where we live worse than when we moved in and that we continue to contribute positively to the society we share. Blanket legislation and overly punitive city codes is the result of some entity taking the easy way out. If vandwellers are allowed more freedom to live more integrated within a city, the city will see more vandalism from those "few bad apples". Then law enforcement and others will have to make the effort to police those criminals and the aftermath of their crimes. But that is the price law abiding people have to pay in a populated society. Freedom ain't free.

Yes, it is the price that is being paid. You or I or Bob or Katie or most of the people on this site could blend in and not bother anyone. In fact we could leave the place in better shape than we found it. I like to walk around our area when at Walmart and pick up any trash and do the same thing at state parks etc. You reap what you sow.

---

City ordinances and code have evolved over the years not to control people but to provide safety and stability in communities. It would be a free for all if no laws or structure were in place. Those laws usually come into place because too many people basically suck. They have no regard for others property and only think of themselves.

Its also why home owners associations have come to be very common. They help maintain property vales. Its absolutely amazing that people buy a house in one and then complain about the rules. They give you a packet of information with all the rules listed BEFORE you buy the house. If the rules are ridiculous, don't buy. Go buy where there is no hoa and then complain when the goofball next door rolls an old pick up truck over on its roof in the front yard because he's pulling the transmission.

Why should someone who buys a house for $800,00 near the ocean and pays $12,000 a year in property taxes have to put up with the street turning into a used rv lot. Why do business owners have to put up with having someone crapping by their door step or in their alley? Why do people get a cat and then think its ok to let it run wild and urinate around other peoples houses, crap in flower beds and sand boxes, crawl up into engine compartments and cause damage, walk on peoples cars.

so America isn't the land of the free.? your statements is valid but not the issue. if i want to live in a van and work. that is my choice. why should i have to live in a house or flat. you have made a blanket statement. which in my opinion is not fair. but a the same time i value what you have said.

You don't have to live in a house or flat. Im with you on the freedom part but it is what it is and its mainly come about from peoples actions or the need to provide stability and order in our communities. As I said if someone buys a house and pays the taxes why should they have an rv or van parked out in front with all the attached unpleasantness? Litter, cigarette butts, worn out lawn, someone urinating or crapping in the bushes. I know you or I are not like that but that's just us, not most people.
Just look at the number of cigarette butts laying around for example. Everyone doesn't throw them on the ground but from being around smokers I see most throw them on the ground.

The control aspect isnt in place just out of wanting to control people but control is needed to have a decent community. Policing is a big put of it. Imagine if you were trying to provide security in a neighborhoood and you had to contind with a moving, changing group of people. The bad ones among them could do crime, jump in their vehicle and head out. Maybe not a good explanation of it but I think you can see the problem.

When you mention no tents in the back yard it makes me think of other code issues. People always complain about permits and code rules. They are in place so that others property is not in danger. In many areas it is basically against code to do anything more than paint the interior of your house. YES, you are supposed to get a permit to replace water heaters, dishwashers, light fixtures, faucets and on and on. I have seen extension cords wired inside wall cavities. No big deal? Well not unless the house catches on fire and kills the idiots kids or the fire damages the neighbors house. You say he has homeowners insurance? He probably does but if too many houses burn we will all pay higher rates.

Actually from my experience the code issues are extremely under policed. Take Lowes or Home Depot for example, how many millions of dollars worth of items go out of those stores each day that should have a permit and be installed by a competent person. The idea behind it is that if you buy a house it should be basically safe because it has followed a code such as international wiring/electrical code etc.

 

[citytravelfotos]

I think one should assume that the most hostile environments for vandwelling are where people are more invested in something. We have to assume that property owners, being permanent residents that pay property taxes and vote, will always have a lot more power and respect than us. We should sense when we are likely to be unwelcome, whether it is in a place with an rv park, or an upper middle class place with mostly single family homes. It may also be fair to say that a neighborhood that doesn't look very clean might also be less restrictive. Renters stereotypically care less about the.neighborhood, so going on that notion, one may be less likely to get hassled if they live in an area of renters. Renters don't have to worry about property values going up or down like homeowners for one.

I think it's especially bad if we want to hang out in one place all the time. I personally wouldn't stay in the same street all the time unless I was in a place known by others to be relatively vandweller friendly (and that would likely not be in a residential street.

 

[Canine]

Donedirtcheap, building to code is a reasonable and just rule. But when a few people use an extension cord inside a wall, no ban is implemented on building/maintaining ones own home. Codes are seldom enforced partly because policing the rules is inherently difficult. The next owners of the house usually pay the price when they uncover shoddy construction. Sometimes code violations are discovered posthumously.

Vandwellers who violate the law by littering or vandalizing are often not caught because catching the criminals is inherently difficult and convicting someone from out of state is nearly impossible. But just like when law-abiding home owners aren't banned from building when others violate codes, law-abiding vandwellers shouldn't be banned from mobile living when others violate law.

Some rules are more easily enforceable, though. Vehicles over 84 inches parked along a street could be banned because wide vehicles prevent the safe travel of two-way traffic. Sharing a populated area would then be more reasonable, getting away with violating that ordinance would be inherently difficult, and policing would be relatively easy.

I don't want to challenge your analogies for the sake of picking them apart, but to point out certain differences to give readers some points to think about. I'm glad you brought up the housing codes example as it does contribute to the conversation.

I far and away prefer holding individuals accountable for their actions (despite that usually being a lot of work) and the unfortunate consequence of criminals getting away with it most of the time. Outright banning based on the actions of a few should be a last resort.

Most agree a balance should exist somewhere between no government at all and a totalitarian regime. I don't write that to sound sarcastic, but to put in perspective that some rule is needed- but how much? No one in the history of the world has perfectly agreed on that point!

Benjamin Franklin-
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

 

[Zil]

The voting members of the community elect representatives who enact laws to meet the needs and desires of said community. Those community members don't want people sleeping in vehicles. Find a community where they don't mind or except the inconvenience of hiding in a wal mart or something. no one is out to get you because they have your name, they just don't want people living in vehicles.

 

[Donedirtcheap]

Donedirtcheap, building to code is a reasonable and just rule. But when a few people use an extension cord inside a wall, no ban is implemented on building/maintaining ones own home. Codes are seldom enforced partly because policing the rules is inherently difficult. The next owners of the house usually pay the price when they uncover shoddy construction. Sometimes code violations are discovered posthumously.

Vandwellers who violate the law by littering or vandalizing are often not caught because catching the criminals is inherently difficult and convicting someone from out of state is nearly impossible. But just like when law-abiding home owners aren't banned from building when others violate codes, law-abiding vandwellers shouldn't be banned from mobile living when others violate law.

Some rules are more easily enforceable, though. Vehicles over 84 inches parked along a street could be banned because wide vehicles prevent the safe travel of two-way traffic. Sharing a populated area would then be more reasonable, getting away with violating that ordinance would be inherently difficult, and policing would be relatively easy.

I don't want to challenge your analogies for the sake of picking them apart, but to point out certain differences to give readers some points to think about. I'm glad you brought up the housing codes example as it does contribute to the conversation.

I far and away prefer holding individuals accountable for their actions (despite that usually being a lot of work) and the unfortunate consequence of criminals getting away with it most of the time. Outright banning based on the actions of a few should be a last resort.

Most agree a balance should exist somewhere between no government at all and a totalitarian regime. I don't write that to sound sarcastic, but to put in perspective that some rule is needed- but how much? No one in the history of the world has perfectly agreed on that point!

Benjamin Franklin-
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Not sarcastic at all, in fact we probably agree on many things. I just gave my ideas as to why the rules are in place as far as ordinances and code. In fact I dont think anyone anywhere is sitting and concentrating on making rules against vehicle/rv dwellers.
These ordinances have been in effect for decades and enforced to varying degrees depending on local problems. Im not for more and more laws but issues such as ordinance or code have been here a long time and for good reason. It would be a free for all if the ordinances were changed to allow anyone in any type of vehicle to park anywhere they want for as long as they want. Again, they are there for good reason.
Not being able to sleep/camp/stealth are the least of our problems and not the core issue. As evidenced by web sites such as this, there is probably a huge increase in the number of people living in vehicles and its primarily for economic reasons.
To try to keep this short I will say the primary reason is because our freedom, our economy our money have been sold out by our leaders. You are now being ruled by corporations. They even came out 30 or so years ago and told us what would happen. They started shipping the jobs out and said things like "You need to get a higher education to adapt to the new work force", or we will be a " service based economy". Service based economy? I always took that to mean you come over and mow my lawn for $20.00 and I'll mow your lawn for $20.00. I'm not a protectionist but a country that ships its good paying jobs out and expects people to live off the income of much lesser paying wages is going to have a lower standard of living. So low that at some point more and more will seek alternative affordable ways to live. So here we are.

This is not to you canine but If I spelled anything wrong or you think I worded anything wrong just keep it to yourself and stfu.

 

[Canine]

Dirt cheap, now that I'm a bit older, those core issues you mentioned have certainly come to bite me in the butt. I've always been a relatively modest person in regards to living large and having lots of stuff, but the economic factor due to medical reasons is the biggest factor compelling me to live modestly. Being challenged like this has done me a lot of good, though. While things are tougher in many ways, I'm happier with less stuff and am happier being with myself. It is interesting how I had accepted the idea of acquiring stuff to make me feel better. Weird.

I like/dislike having discussions like this. Am still adapting to a different lifestyle and still learning how inflexible and unreasonable laws can be. I can't go 12 months without having some type of legal confrontation despite how incredibly hard I try to be a law abiding citizen. I'm trying not to be a Negative Nelly, but, man, am I getting tired of being jerked around for not doing anything wrong and having to front the cost of to defend myself. I find I'm developing a knee-jerk reaction when anyone mentions "code" or "ordinance". I don't want to be like that.

 

[Donedirtcheap]

Dirt cheap, now that I'm a bit older, those core issues you mentioned have certainly come to bite me in the butt. I've always been a relatively modest person in regards to living large and having lots of stuff, but the economic factor due to medical reasons is the biggest factor compelling me to live modestly. Being challenged like this has done me a lot of good, though. While things are tougher in many ways, I'm happier with less stuff and am happier being with myself. It is interesting how I had accepted the idea of acquiring stuff to make me feel better. Weird.

I like/dislike having discussions like this. Am still adapting to a different lifestyle and still learning how inflexible and unreasonable laws can be. I can't go 12 months without having some type of legal confrontation despite how incredibly hard I try to be a law abiding citizen. I'm trying not to be a Negative Nelly, but, man, am I getting tired of being jerked around for not doing anything wrong and having to front the cost of to defend myself. I find I'm developing a knee-jerk reaction when anyone mentions "code" or "ordinance". I don't want to be like that.

Sorry to hear that. I know the feeling from the few thousand miles we have traveled this year. I know on a very small scale compared to many on this board, especially the ones that are still working and confined to a certain area. Its like ok ok where are we staying tonight. Gotta find a Walmart cant just pull over there. Sometimes Walmarts suck too.
I cant pay for campgrounds every night.

I may seem insensitive to some but it is what it is.
Im not mister rules by any means but if its the law its the law and if I camp out in a place I know is illegal I'm going to pay the price. The system has all the money they need to enforce the rules and crush you. I dont know the answer but ponder what solutions there might be. Sometimes I think that cities should provide some type of parking area that would let people park for a certain amount of time even at a small price just like a house is taxed then I think well that's asking for more government. Then I think well....they have created this problem. They fully participate with off shoring good jobs. It wasn't like this 40 years ago. There were good paying jobs with that pay going out into the community. RV's were primarily used to vacation in not live in. vans were fixed up to party in.

To see 5000 people registered here makes me think that there are 10's of thousands in similar shape. I'm not saying everyone is poor, we are all of varying incomes or net worth but basically all in the same boat. Any of us can go from hero to zero over medical/health issues or any number of things. It seems as though it will continue to get worse.

There have always been as certain number of homeless/poor/underpaid but the problem is getting worse as the middle class is crushed. Along with it, what will 10,000 people a day turning 62 years old do? Hey I know, lets have the government control their health care. Yeah that's the ticket!!!!

 

[flying kurbmaster]

I think you have hit it on the head by creating a spot or parkup for vandwellers within cities. It could be an empty city street or a municipal parking lot, after a certain time it is open to park there and everyone has to be gone by a certain time or perhaps a limited time site or a van village. Here in NZ they have been talking a lot of about freedom campers dirtying up rest areas and some inner city parks parking spots and have been clamping down on them. If you go back into the bushes there are little bits of toilet paper, diapers etc everywhere which is a problem that could easily be solved by putting in a drop loo or one of those portables, a few garbage cans and servicing it. I am not sure why we always have to take the confrontational approach everyone should have a right to feel safe and live the life they choose if they are not harming anyone else

 

[Zil]

In 1973 while visiting Arizona, i stayed in a municipal parking lot near downtown that cost a quarter for all night. This was the only place in Phoenix where the police would leave me alone. Any other parking and i was rousted in the night. After a week visiting all the attractions of Phoenix, i was gone, to the Canyon. First night in the parking lot, 2nd in the lot, 3rd in the bottom, 4th in the parking lot, 5th in the lodge (hot shower). 'an on the road.

 

[Duck]

I think you have hit it on the head by creating a spot or parkup for vandwellers within cities. It could be an empty city street or a municipal parking lot, after a certain time it is open to park there and everyone has to be gone by a certain time or perhaps a limited time site or a van village. Here in NZ they have been talking a lot of about freedom campers dirtying up rest areas and some inner city parks parking spots and have been clamping down on them. If you go back into the bushes there are little bits of toilet paper, diapers etc everywhere which is a problem that could easily be solved by putting in a drop loo or one of those portables, a few garbage cans and servicing it. I am not sure why we always have to take the confrontational approach everyone should have a right to feel safe and live the life they choose if they are not harming anyone else

These places already exist. They then take those services, the space and the cost of servicing, and a profit margin and charge people to be there and call them RV parks or campsites.

The toilet paper, garbage, damage etc is exactly what the city is solving. It's cheaper and simpler to solve it by simply banning the activity entirely rather than determine the participants who are causing the problem. It isn't fair, but the law is a blunt instrument. Figuring out who is crapping there and chasing them away is much less simple, more expensive and usually those are the first people to howl discrimination and kick up a big fuss when they get told to go away.
A few people behaving badly often manage to wreck a good situation for most, then they move on and repeat the behavior elsewhere.

A better solution, unfortunately unlikely is for people to clean up after themselves, dispose of their waste appropriately and not do things that add extra expense to the lives of others. Part of living with a lot of freedom is the extra effort that needs to be put in to keep from being a burden to others.

 

[flying kurbmaster]

allowing a park up zone with a toilet and a garbage bin is a little different from an rv park. With the increase in this lifestyle it might be wiser for councils to dance with them instead of waging war. No one has ever won a war.