Monday, June 18, 2007 | 7:03 a.m.
Las Vegas has not had a very good track record lately in passing laws that are, well, legal.
An ordinance making it illegal to feed the homeless in city parks was struck down by the courts. Anticipated legal challenges scuttled a proposal to crack down on unruly gatherings.
And now the city wants to prohibit anyone over the age of 12 from being within 100 feet of play areas and water features in parks, except for parents or guardians accompanying children.
To critics, the latest proposal not only is patently unconstitutional, but also is absurd on its face and would have unintended negative consequences.
Does the city really want, they ask, to make it wrong for a 13-year-old to play in some parts of any park? Opponents also say strict enforcement of the distance restriction could make it impossible for adults to even enter some parks, and the proposed ordinance would create the ludicrous possibility that someone could get a criminal record for sitting on a swing or cooling off by a fountain on a hot day.
"This isn't just unconstitutional - it's crazy," City Hall activist Peter Christoff said.
Opponents have offered the same diagnosis - legal and psychological - about some of the city's other recent legislative efforts.
In July the city passed an ordinance that prohibited feeding the homeless in city parks. In November U.S. District Judge Robert Jones issued an injunction prohibiting enforcement of the measure. Although city officials said at the time they would try to tweak the ordinance to pass constitutional muster, for the time being it's still OK to give someone a sandwich in a city park.
In September Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian introduced an "unruly gatherings" ordinance, in part to reduce costs associated with providing police or emergency services at parties and other events.
The ordinance defined unruly gatherings as "neighborhood parties and other gatherings in residential areas that cause a disturbance of the quiet enjoyment of private or public property."
The proposal was shelved, however, after the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada pointed to the measure's legal shortcomings, prompting Tarkanian to acknowledge that the plan was vague and would be difficult to enforce.
In April, however, Tarkanian introduced a similar ordinance, this time gaining the co-sponsorship of Councilman Gary Reese. That proposal, though, also was shelved for more work when the ACLU and neighborhood leaders renewed their objections.
The city also passed an ordinance in August that included a provision making it illegal to sleep near feces. While that part of the ordinance was later repealed, three homeless men arrested for violating it were paid $45,000 by the city to settle a lawsuit.
The new ordinance restricting access around park playgrounds and water areas would exempt parents or guardians accompanying children 12 or younger, as well as individuals on an athletic field or court who are watching or participating in an event.
Introduced by Chief Karen Coyne, Metro Police's director of detention and enforcement, the measure has been touted as a way to keep children safer in city parks. (Certain top city officials, not simply council members, may introduce ordinances in Las Vegas.)
"In the last two years we had 368 incidents where individuals were cited or arrested for loitering in a children's play area," Coyne said at a June 5 council committee meeting. "We have an opportunity to be proactive ... and protect the children in the community."
However, when pressed on how many of those incidents involved actual threats to children, Coyne could not offer specifics.
Opponents, though, are less troubled by the proposal's statistical foundation - or lack thereof - than by what they view as the same insurmountable legal hurdles seen with the earlier measures.
Although protecting children is a priority with which no one disagrees, there in no reason for believing that the ordinance would further that goal, critics say.
Lee Rowland, an ACLU attorney, said the ordinance is vague and unenforceable , and would curtail the use of parks by those older than 12.
"Until the city draws 100-foot radii around every feature targeted by this bill, it cannot estimate the extent of park land that now becomes off limits to the general public," Rowland said.
The bill could prohibit people without children from walking - or even entering - some parks, or sitting on a park swing or bench, Rowland said.
Gail Sacco, a homeless advocate who routinely feeds people in city parks, thinks it is no coincidence that many of the proposed ordinances affect the homeless to a greater degree than others.
"That's the real purpose behind a lot of these things," Sacco said.
City officials have countered that each ordinance has been considered on its own merits and is intended to improve Las Vegans' quality of life.
Faced with familiar objections, the committee tabled the parks issue until an unspecified date.
Once again, council members say they hope to work out a compromise. And once again, opponents say the only acceptable solution is to kill the ordinance.
archive
