mobilizing against idling

By Jim Stanford on March 11, 2010

Tags: , ,

Pearl Street Bagels and Jackson Whole Grocer are among the businesses that discourage idling, but they only can do so much without public support.

There are many good reasons not to leave your car idling: save gas, reduce pollution, save money, reduce engine wear, fight terrorism, improve public health. Also, the vehicle will warm up faster if you drive it.

But people still idle, anyway, mostly because we live in a cold climate and it sucks to be freezing all the time.

Willie Neal

At what point does the right to waste fuel and money interfere with the public’s right to clean air?

That’s bound to be the crux of the discussion Monday when the Town Council takes up the concept of an “idle-free” Jackson. Beginning at 3 p.m., councilors will consider a proposal to prohibit idling on public streets and parking lots.

A group of citizens has come together on this issue to honor the memory of Willie Neal, the all-world teenager hit and killed by a car last summer. Making Jackson an idle-free community was Willie’s signature issue.

I’m not in favor of a lot of nettlesome laws infringing on our personal liberty, but at some point we have an obligation to our fellow citizens and community. All it takes is one diesel dually left running to foul up the air on an entire side of the Town Square, for instance. (And I’ve observed this, especially during December — people leaving their SUVs running while they go inside to shop!)

It’s offensive, so much so that observers are motivated to leave notes on windshields or, even bolder, reach inside and turn off the engines.

This note was left on a vehicle in the vicinity of Pearl Avenue. I came across it today outside the Cloudveil store, discarded in the street.

Councilors discussed the issue back in January, at which time they instructed the town attorney to draft an ordinance. Since then the council has backtracked, and Monday’s meeting likely will focus on which approach is best to raise public awareness and change behavior: an ordinance enforced by law officers, or a resolution backed by an educational campaign (or some combination thereof).

I’m of the opinion that passing an ordinance — with the required three readings and concurrent media coverage and public dialogue it would generate — is itself the most effective way to inform and educate. But I’m keeping an open mind.

People feel strongly on both sides of this issue, but it’s worth noting that among younger residents like Willie and his peers, prohibiting idling is a no-brainer. It’s the lowest of the low-hanging fruits to reduce energy consumption and make Jackson a cleaner, more sustainable community — goals the mayor and council have targeted through their many environmental initiatives.

Wyoming law actually prohibits idling. State statute:

31-5-509.  Requirements before leaving motor vehicle unattended.

No person driving or in charge of a motor vehicle shall permit it to stand unattended without first stopping the engine, locking the ignition, removing the key from the ignition, effectively setting the brake thereon and, when standing upon any grade, turning the front wheels to the curb or side of the highway.

This provision is rarely enforced, but in Rawlins, for instance, it has been adopted into the municipal code and strengthened to include attended vehicles, likely to reduce idling of large trucks from I-80. Ketchum, Idaho, enacted a similar idle-free ordinance last year.

Mayor Mark Barron and councilors have questioned whether passing an ordinance would place too much of a burden on an understaffed police department. Instead, Jackson could pass a resolution calling on the department’s community safety officers, who are out on the streets writing parking tickets and citations for other nitpicky offenses, anyway, to enforce the Wyoming statute. First offenders could get a warning.

At the very least, the town should allow “idle-free” signs to be installed in highly visible public places where idling is a problem, like the Square and post offices. Currently, through the efforts of Willie and his family, many businesses in the valley have signs, but they only can be placed on private property.

Willie Neal’s Environmental Awareness Fund has 1,240 fans on Facebook. It would be great if the council heard from some of them in advance of Monday’s meeting. E-mail or call (307) 732-3932.

What do you think? Do we need a law to prohibit idling, or will people pay no heed and keep wasting fuel, anyway?

idle-free ordinance advances (March 15, 2010)


Posted under Crime, Environment, Politics, Town Government

41 Comments so far

  1. rachel. March 11, 2010 6:59 pm

    omg, that’s totally my note.

    first off, i’m insanely embarrassed that i misspelled “your”… the second one should be “you’re”. i HATE when people do that… look at me now. i was in a hurry!

    secondly, i am not the kinda girl to leave notes on cars… but this woman was in PSB for OVER ten minutes with her car just running! no one in the car… no dogs or anything… and it wasn’t that cold! uncalled for.

    alright, that’s all i have to say. mainly i’m embarrassed for my grammatical error.

  2. D. March 11, 2010 7:24 pm

    You didn’t need to say while you not driving either. You could have said parked, but obviously it was not driving because you could not have put the note on the window and everyone know that you must have your car on to drive. But that is beside the point your message was delivered loud and clear. I personally don’t leave my car idling do to $ and the environment. However there is a major assumption in this post that implies you have a right to clean air. Do you? Really? If so where do you draw the line what if I don’t have a car then I can tell you not to drive because I have a right to cleaner air? NO No I cant. I have the right to idle my car; as much as you have a right too not ideal your car this is the land of the free right? People need to learn that we can’t fix these kinds of problems with laws and mandates & signs. You have to do it by teaching all the younger generation why sound environmental practices are important and what will happen if we ignore the problems and causes. It has to be a culture change. Its kind of like the stupid seat belts law, I should have the right to not wear one if I chose, however if I am taught to wear one when I am a young and impressionable then I wont know any different. In my opinion that’s why so many environmental polices fail, because they try to take away peoples rights in order to change things in stead of teaching them they have right to change thing and why they should and why it is important to do so. My grandfather could care less about your sign your note or your wantabe law however my little brother will never know it any other way and his car will probably never idle. Is this right probably not but it is reality. Plus some type of vehicles must idle/warm up so they work properly mostly diesel trucks and older vehicles. We need to focus on the culture change starting when kids are young then they will grow up doing the right things.

  3. D. March 11, 2010 7:26 pm

    PS: I am preaty sure the previous law has nothing to do with clean air and everything to do with safety of unattended vehicles.

  4. DAVE March 11, 2010 9:28 pm

    what possible difference would it make if there was a dog in the car?

  5. rachel. March 12, 2010 1:47 am

    dude, i dunno… she might’ve been from driggs. people from driggs effing love their dogs.

    “hey sparky, i’m gonna run in for an everything bagel and a latte… you stay here and wait for me… i’ll leave the river playin’ and the heat on for ya… then i’ll go to work all day and you’ll try to not shit in my explorer.”

  6. j dipaola March 12, 2010 8:14 am

    I was in town the other day and i saw a bunch of cars running,it was 39 deg. If thats too cold for ya you need to move south. 20 below, fine.

  7. deeeezzzzzz March 12, 2010 8:17 am

    I’ve always wanted to open the door of a idling car, grab the keys and throw them as far as possible. An idiotic and thoughtless reaction to an idiotic and thoughtless action.

  8. js March 12, 2010 9:19 am

    I forgot to add that in December, the joint town-county Energy Efficiency Advisory Board unanimously endorsed an idle-free ordinance, while leaving it up to the town to work out the details.

  9. Mike March 12, 2010 9:22 am

    There’s always a good debate about what’s better – carrots or sticks – for changing behavior, but in this case, I’d like to see the ordinance passed. Basically, on a local level, it comes down to community values. This community seems to overwhelmingly favor idle-free for all of the obvious reasons, and some friendly education would go a long way (I do think there are people who would be happy to stop idling in many instances, but it just may not have occurred to them yet, or had the reasons for its importance illustrated.)

    The ordinance would help with education, reinforce the reasons why the community values the policies, enable law enforcement to still use ‘carrots’ while carrying ‘sticks’, and would be a way for individuals to approach owners of idling vehicles in a ‘friendly’ way – ‘hey, you might not know, but you can be ticketed for leaving your vehicle idling; just thought you’d like to know…’

    We’ve got ordinances for ‘no dogs in town parks’; if resolutions were good enough to change behavior, would these be necessary?

    Finally, Jim and I both know a guy who is completely happy to open idling vehicles and turn ‘em off (can’t say I don’t like the idea of hucking the keys, too, if going that far!), but although I know there are those who will never change, I do think there are many who would be happy to comply, if alerted to the ordinance in a friendly way.

    (Could be my naivete leaking out again, though….)

  10. aeh March 12, 2010 10:21 am

    how about a guerilla campaign where friendly mad hatters relocate cars that are idling in a different location–with a kind note attached: thank you for not idling.

  11. Sooz March 12, 2010 10:43 am

    My neighbor warms his car up for about a half hour while he walks his dog. It’s not even cold. I’m sorry…but what a wimp.

    Alltrans leaves their vehicles running outside Albertsons in the middle of summer (at night when air conditioning is not needed) while the people on the “charter,” go inside to shop, and the driver stands outside the vehicle to smoke his cigarette.

    Bus drivers from Boston leave their busses idling in the Jenny Lake parking lot because “it’s a health issue,” for their riders. (They would be healthier if they got off the idling bus and got some fresh air and the bus driver would turn off his polluting bus)

    (I love deeeezzzz’s idea, but would never do it.) I do agree education and awareness, and perhaps a dose of shame might help people think a little more. I know someone who has preprinted cards to leave on windshields, with facts about idling on them.

  12. becky March 12, 2010 11:45 am

    When your behaviors impact general community health, you do not necessarily have the right to do whatever you want. If you don’t want to wear a seat belt, you are putting yourself at risk but not endangering the health of others. Idling your car is effectively spouting toxins directly into the air that the rest of us have no option but to breathe. There is a line there, but I see idling as falling squarely on the side of creating a public health hazard. It is time for our local leadership to step up to the challenge and make real, tangible commitments to a clean energy future and to being a leader in green communities nation-wide by enacting an ordinance and actually enforcing it … (although it should be noted that if we do get around to enacting an ordinance, we will by no means be the first to do so – we will be joining some pretty significant ranks of communities across the country who have had the foresight to enact regulations that protect their citizenry. As much as we like to think that this was our idea, we are, as Jim pointed out, picking the low hanging fruit that many before us have identified and done something about). So keep leaving notes, keep telling the kids, and please don’t tell me that old dogs can’t (or won’t?) learn new tricks. The more we learn about science and protecting the public health the more we can work to integrate it into our public policy. If we don’t continue learning and moving forward, we will fall even farther behind.

  13. dswift March 12, 2010 11:48 am

    I feel sorry for the poor guy who becomes an outlaw and social pariah while he scrapes together money for a new starter motor.

  14. Alli Noland March 12, 2010 12:06 pm

    Wasn’t there a case a number of years ago (10? 13?) about a woman who left her car running while she went into Domino’s to pick up a pizza… In the short time she was inside, her car was stolen and taken on a joyride in the Kmart parking lot, damaging a few other vehicles. It was determined to be HER fault (and thus, the liability for the other damaged cars was hers, too) for leaving the car running and unattended?
    Yet another reason not to leave your car running unattended… as if we needed one.

  15. D March 12, 2010 12:57 pm

    Becky: “I see idling as falling squarely on the side”
    That’s my point you see it that way maybe I don’t. Where is the line? I see having your house at 75 as super wasteful because I keep mine at 65 and you can survive at 65 or ever 60. Do I have the right to make law in place to make your thermostat only go to 65? My point is when your right is taken away to make that choice I think it wrong. It’s all well and good if you agree with the law but if you don’t its not, it’s the principal I am arguing. So you have to understand that the line is different for everyone and I don’t believe you should have the right to tell anyone where that line is. In my opinion we are better off focusing on culture change I can see all your points and I like all the ideas (except the idiot who suggested grand theft) I am just pointing out what I think the problems with them are. We collectively as a human race pollute the environment in TONS of ways that are not absolute necessities so again, where is the line? The line is where ever each individual thinks it is and that’s what we need to change. I do also think that if the overwhelming majorities in town want this and it is voted on I say go for it, even if I disagree. If you want to change the state or country as a whole which is what I think is important your best bet is teaching them the rewards not punishing them.

    Technically the seat belt law was passed because you do endanger others if you’re not buckled up for situations when you fly around the car when involved in an accident and in situation where if you were buckled up you would be able to regain control of the car.

    We’ve got ordinances for ‘no dogs in town parks’ I still see dogs in the park all the time that’s my point.

    Like I said I personally against people idling their car, but I am for freedom and rights and I don’t think I am entitled to tell other people what they can and can’t do with their life.

  16. Mike May March 12, 2010 1:05 pm

    Idling is a problem – and a health risk – and without an ordinance (and the necessary enforcement behind it) people will not change their behavior. Case in point – Principal Deb Roehrkasse from our new LEED certified elementary school has sent at least two letters home imploring parents to turn their cars off during drop-off and pick up. She points to a toxic haze that clouds the school and yet people seem to be blatantly ignoring her pleas and concern for the kids health. No ordinance and no enforcement = status quo…we really need to push the town council on this!

  17. Mike March 12, 2010 2:57 pm

    D – Scrolled twice through your posts, but genuinely still not clear on your ‘point’ about what legislation (ordinance in this case) is appropriate to ‘telling people what they can and can’t do’? Legislation exists outlawing many things that are still ‘done’ regularly; do you have a point about when it’s appropriate for gov’t (society) to regulate individual behavior for the good of the whole?

  18. becky March 12, 2010 3:28 pm

    D – You raise an excellent question – where is the line? I don’t necessarily have a good answer to that question, rather than to reiterate what I said earlier. We do, as a human race, make tons of decisions and have tons of habits that pollute unnecessarily. But, little by little, initiative by initiative, we can take those unnecessary actions and change them. The “line,” as it were, is constantly moving. It is moving, like you said, relative to individual people’s tastes, but it is also moving relative to a larger sense of social palateability. The purpose of the initiative here in Jackson is to couple an ordinance with an educational/outreach campaign to simultaneously shift individual behavior and larger social norms. Is there a way that we can move the “line” for all of us at once?

  19. Amy March 13, 2010 7:38 am

    The mayor and Town Council need to listen to the recommendation of the EEAB and all the voices of the Environmental Awareness Fund. This can and should happen.

    p.s. congrats JH Underground on BEST BLOG!

  20. Pasquale March 13, 2010 9:51 am

    Why does it always seem to be a Volvo idling away unattended?

  21. Pete Muldoon March 13, 2010 11:14 am

    If it’s simply a question of enforcement priorities, maybe the city can direct the police department to change those priorities. Why should enforcing the statute on pot possession be more important than the enforcing the statute on idling?

    It’s obvious that these priorities are set politically, and so they can be changed politically. This seems like the easiest way to do it.

  22. rachel. March 13, 2010 12:00 pm

    p.s. i wrote “while you’re not driving” because of this exact argument. i didn’t want to write “please don’t idle” because that more aggressively associates my note to the issue at hand. and some people on one [or both] side[s] of this argument are very aggressive. i didn’t want this lady to be afraid that i was about to chunk her keys down to the western motel’s lot or even that i was angrily judging her. i wasn’t.

    friends smoke around me and i inhale that. it’s not good for me either, and definitely not good for them, but it’s their choice. every so often, i’ll bring up how bad it is for all of us, but i’m not gonna throw their cigs away or hand them anti-smoking literature on the regular. not my style.

    BUT i love the reasoning of one step at a time, moving forward. idling IS bad for our environment. and yes, heaps of things are, so one step at a time, let’s tackle them. hell, i was reminded yesterday that there’s a $75 fine for not pickin’ up dog poo. how is there not an idling law? i believe there would be less people idling and then all of us [except for D(avid?)] would be saved the trouble of writing notes, throwing keys, moving cars, etc.

  23. Mel A. Knee March 13, 2010 4:36 pm

    The town could require each business to post an inexpensive no-idling sign and possibly contract with a local business (Drive Signs?) to create them at cost plus 10%. Each business would be encouraged to erect their signs and as more and more businesses comply, there will be a growing sense of pressure to comply-but with no rights taken away by our legal system, just good old fashioned persuasion.

    Btw, diesel pick ups have a feature rhat warms your engine block and oil with the ingnition on but the car OFF. So no problem there. The only acception should be if you have a warm-blooded creature in your car who NEEDS a blast of heat on a freezing day when necessary-THAT’S IT.
    Piles of blankets in the back seat help too.

    Jim, will you be forwarding all our comments to Town Council so as to become part of the public record?

    I hate that our society seems to have lost it’s inherent sense of honor and doing good for others –too many of us live in with a “Me First Mentality; with a strong sense self-entitlement.”
    (Wildly Depressing)
    This leads to the need for more laws on the books because so many people no longer seem to live with an honor code.
    I am not in favor of more laws on the books but warnings would work; societal pressure and continued education that’s gentle and not preachy.
    Eternally a cynical idealist, I believe there’s a way to achieve this without a new law.
    Ooooh, here’s an idea: each person is granted three chances/grace periods/warnings for idling. When caught by community service officers for the fourth time, the driver will be required to speak to a group of students about the negative effects of idling.

    Good old fear of public speaking-THAT should be a sufficient deterrent

    Either way this should go through the standard open review process with lots of dialogue and people’s voices are heard.

    Open meetings that are well-advertised and serve donated pizza and beer would do wonders.

    Thanks Jim, for the thought-provoking story and of course … CONGRATS pn winning Best Blog in JH; it is hands down.

  24. rachel. March 13, 2010 4:45 pm

    gosh, you must’ve won best blahg cuz of your sweetass banner and ads.

    …i guess the content is alright, too.

  25. D March 13, 2010 6:15 pm

    D(erek) FYI

  26. Mel A. Knee March 14, 2010 5:16 am

    As Jim said, we businesses can only do so much without backing from the public.
    I strongly favor an official public meeting schedule and open process to attempt to pass this as an ordinance. Whether it will pass is another question.

    Either way, ordinance passing or not, the process will raise awareness and spark healthy change–and that’s the whole point right?

    Motivate and send your commentd in to the Town Council.
    And Jim, is there any possible way you could copy all our comments and submit them to Town Council?
    I don’t need tell you from an activist perspective how effective that move would be.
    Congrats, too, on Best Activist!!!
    (You rock)


  27. dswift March 14, 2010 12:34 pm

    >Why does it always seem to be a Volvo idling away unattended?<

    If that's what you want to see, that's precisely what you'll see.

  28. D. March 14, 2010 6:24 pm

    You have to warm a diesel truck in order to make it operate properly. Try to start a cold diesel and tow a fifth wheel you won’t have much luck, until it warms up. I am just saying be careful what you wish for the next ordinance you may not agree with. If the overwhelming majority of people in the valley agree with this idea and only need a friendly reminder then a sign campaign would work as good as a ordinance. I think it may even work better actually, and over time if you are the outcast and the only one around with their car idling it will soon be very noticeable and the per pressure will eventually stop 90% of it. If of course the assumption that most people like this idea is correct. I believe without an ordinance you can achieve the same goal and you can do it without telling other people what they should or shouldn’t do. If you do go that way it’s only a matter of time before someone else will tell you what you should and shouldn’t be doing and eventually you wont agree. That’s why I caution people who think they know what’s best for me or anyone else. You can always try signs first and if it doesn’t work go for an ordinance as well.

    Mel A. Knee “The town could require each business to post an inexpensive no-idling sign” Maybe the town could suggest or inform businesses to post signs. Requiring would be doing the same thing I see wrong with an ordinance, telling someone else what he or she should be doing. I think business owners who want to have signs up will soon have them up, and after a while the ones that don’t must not care. You can show you disapproval by going somewhere else.

  29. DAVE March 14, 2010 7:27 pm

    the police dept will have neither the time nor the money nor the interest to monitor idlers. you csnt regulate everything. common sense and education are the keys.

  30. rachel. March 14, 2010 7:59 pm

    i’m gonna carry handcuffs and start citizens’ arrestin’ idlers. i think it’ll solve everything.

    …handcuffs or a whistle. or both. haven’t decided yet.

  31. js March 15, 2010 12:32 am

    Diesel engines don’t need to warm up as much as people might think:

    If you’ve driven to Pearl Street Bagels, the engine is as warm as it needs to be. An idle-free ordinance likely wouldn’t apply to your driveway. (That’s between you and your neighbors.)

    Only the worst offenders would merit law enforcement. And let’s trust officers’ judgment. I doubt granny is going to get a ticket at 20 below.

    Seems like a no-brainer to me.

  32. D March 15, 2010 9:02 am

    JS:I have a diesel I don’t need a site to tell me. But you’re right it would be plenty warm by the time you get to the beagle shop. There are many opinions on here talking about people idling outside of their own house. As far as public areas I say don’t go to places that wont put up No idle signs, and the business that do put up signs shouldn’t serve people that do idle problem solved. Then everyone is happy, you won’t be breathing it in if you’re at a store that doesn’t allow it, and if you are breathing it in it’s because you choose to go to a place that doesn’t think it matters showing it’s not as important to you as you thought. In the end it gives you the choice and doesn’t take away anyone else’s choice. If it is truly that popular eventually everyone will change their ways and if it‘s not they won’t. All of this will be done without an ordinance, leaving in place peoples right to make decision for themselves. If this person at the beagle shop was refused service she would have either left or went and turn off her car either way the car wouldn’t be idling.

    Side note: I received this email that makes it easy to scare our public officials on healthcare voting. I just changed a few words and sent my own in. Here is the link ( maybe it BS but I figured worth a shot. Below is my letter. I figured I would try and use this stupidity against them. I suggest using an email you don’t check a lot.

    I write to encourage you to PASS government-run health care and any legislation which might broaden the federal government’s control over my health care. You KNOW AS WELL AS ANYONE WE CAN’T KEEP UP WITH WHAT WE CURRENTLEY ARE DOING. YOU SHULD BE ASSAHMED OF YOUR SELF FOR HOLDING IT UP THIS LONG. IT MAY NOT BE PERFECT BUT IT IS FAR BETTER THEN ANYTHING YOU HAVE SUGGESTED.

    Current health care legislation will result in Great health insurance and many jobs for the American people and will push out of this recession. We will be a better nation because of it.

    I hope that you fight for health care legislation that would lower costs, increase quality and improve access for all Americans. Please know that I’ll be looking to see how you vote this March so that I know how I should vote this November. VOTE FOR HEALTHCARE NOW.

  33. becky March 15, 2010 1:20 pm

    3pm today (Monday the 15th) – workshop with the Town Council at Town Hall to discuss this issue, if anyone is interested…

  34. js March 15, 2010 9:00 pm

    hooray! council votes 5-0 to prepare ordinance. your comments were heard. thank you to everyone who has worked on this.

  35. Peter Hudnut March 15, 2010 11:07 pm

    Rachel, I would comment that I see your rather large pathfinder in front of Stevens a lot:) I like your note though, but remember folks, it’s all about riding your bike. Hope the ordinance passes by a huge measure, but it is a pretty small step in a huge problem. Remember, shun a hummer driver!!!!

  36. j dipaola March 16, 2010 8:13 am

    I see a lot of police cars left running all over town, are they covered under the new ordinace?

  37. Agree with D (Greg in JH) March 16, 2010 5:18 pm

    Rarely do I fall on the side of the opposition, but once the comments became “Wait. Shouldn’t we all be riding our bikes?” I was finished. I completely agree with D that this is a problem that would be best solved through cultural change. Passing more ordinances just complicate driving code (anybody tried parking in Victor lately?) Sometimes it seems we carry things too far, while having all the right intentions. For a rare instance, I’ll fall on the side of citizen choice.
    Your choice to ride your bike.
    Your choice NOT to idle (while not driving.) Your choice to warm up your car, before going to work.
    Your choice to drive your large SUV.
    Your choice not to.
    There are a lot of rights and wrongs in all of those sentences, but ultimately ‘I believe’ these changes should come about culturally.

  38. D. March 16, 2010 8:14 pm

    Culture change is the only way to have a real impact on a national scale period, and that’s what’s important.

    Side note:

  39. well, i am very glad that a no idling ordinance was passed… BUT, i must say that i’m beginning to be convinced that it might not have been the best decision ever.

    [i know, i know.]

    but as peter hudnut [people person of the year, by the way] pointed out, yes… i drive a car… not a huge pathfinder, but i do drive a car and appreciate the right to do so [especially in the winter]. i’ve never seen peter drive a car, don’t know if he owns one. and i truly believe he shuns people who drive hummers. [which is great... yeah, let's ignore instead of educate. and if your kid litters, ignore him too.] if we had things peter’s way, cars would probably be illegal.

    all’s i’m saying is that i’m not sure where we should draw the line. i might’ve been swayed.

    BUT it is our community, our people [the people who speak up] that make the decisions. obviously, we’re a community that cares about the prevention of idling… so the ordinance was passed… there you go.

    hopefully it will make a difference for our environment.

  40. js March 16, 2010 10:21 pm

    Let me clarify: The ordinance has not been passed yet. The council voted to have staff prepare an ordinance for review. It must pass three readings before becoming law.

    In a few years, this will be a non-issue. Eventually even the stubborn will be swayed to go along. Occasionally officers will inform drivers unaware of the law or cite the worst offenders.

  41. Mel A. Knee March 23, 2010 2:45 am

    This support shown by Town Council is fantastic! Everyone needs to keep commenting publicly to continue the momentum and support for this proposed ordinance. As Jim said the proposed ordinance must pass three readings before it becomes law.

    Bottom line: this proposed ordinance is fighting the good fight. D, even YOU know this is true. In future, if/when a proposed law comes before local government that limits our freedoms in a negative way, then we can all take up that fight at that time. We all agree that idling sucks. So let’s back this thaang, okay? BTW, I cannot believe I misspelled “exception” in my last post.
    That’ll teach me to post an unedited comment while I’m in bed in the middle of the night when I should be asleep.

Leave a Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)



More Blog Posts