Editorial: Use laws now in place

Tuesday, Sept. 19, 2006 | 7:22 a.m.

The proponent of a proposed Las Vegas ordinance that would prohibit unruly public gatherings admits that details of the measure are vague and unclear.

Las Vegas City Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian told the Las Vegas Sun in a story published Monday that her measure still has some vague wording that poses challenges for law enforcement and that it was "not supposed to be on the agenda" for a City Council committee meeting today.

The Sun reports that the ordinance loosely defines unruly events as "neighborhood parties and other gatherings in residential areas that cause a disturbance of the quiet enjoyment of private or public property." But the definition is subjective at best, and leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

Existing laws address noise violations and underage drinking - two of the issues this proposed ordinance is designed to curb. But while laws and ordinances are enforced by Metro Police - by officers trained to enforce laws - the proposed measure authorizes representatives from the Department of Neighborhood Services to determine whether there has been a violation and also determine who should be held responsible and whether to impose penalties.

Tarkanian said she proposed the ordinance in response to complaints from residents "who were concerned about things that were happening in their neighborhood." These problems involve large, unruly groups of people and suspicions of underage drinking - actions that are illegal under existing laws and ordinances.

Enacting a layer of duplicate rules, and bringing the Department of Neighborhood Services into the mix as a primary or secondary enforcer, seems to confuse the issue. And it could lead to banning block parties, community rallies or other activities that may attract large groups that are noisy but not criminally so. What's to stop a resident who simply doesn't like block parties or disagrees with a particular point of view from complaining about their neighbors and having them charged with a misdemeanor under this vague, subjective ordinance?

Tarkanian was correct in that it is premature to seriously consider enacting this ordinance. We think residents need to talk with Metro Police about how to handle whatever is ailing their neighborhoods. A poorly constructed ordinance that gives too much authority to too many agencies and does so with too little detail is not a solution. It is only a recipe for more problems.