Letter: Proposed park ordinance poorly thought out

Thursday, June 21, 2007 | 7:19 a.m.

Regarding the Las Vegas Sun's June 18 article "Good intentions aside, Las Vegas parks another law that won't fly":

The proposal is being hyped as a way to keep children safer in city parks. However, when asked about the proportion of actual threats in past loitering arrests, Las Vegas Detention and Enforcement Chief Karen Coyne was unable to offer specifics. If a person intends to bring harm to a child despite the legal repercussions of doing so, I strongly doubt that an ordinance asking him to distance himself is going to effect much of a change.

The ordinance is also entirely unrealistic for other reasons. For instance, it would make it illegal for older siblings to take brothers and sisters to the park. It would also prohibit grandparents from taking grandchildren, as they are not legal guardians. Even leaning against a tree to take in a good book could cause a person a hefty fine.

Many people also use jogging tracks or workout areas at parks . Now, if these areas lie within 100 feet of play areas or water features, people would no longer be able to use the parks for these activities.

The article also mentions that city officials have said the ordinance "is intended to improve Las Vegans' quality of life." However, if a huge portion of the public is no longer able to use the facilities provided by the city, the proposal is actually detrimental to the population's quality of life.

Natasha Lovelace, North Las Vegas