(03-04-2019, 07:49 AM)Canard Wrote: I thought it was the opposite, that virtually no one can achieve Bylaw’s ridiculously strict requirement of every square millimetre dry down to the concrete, which leads (likely) to Bylaw waffling and just not enforcing.
The problem is, it’s both. On the one hand, the way the bylaw is written/interpreted (I’m not totally clear on which it is), frequent snowfalls completely eliminate the requirement to clear, until the snowfalls stop for 24 hours. On the other, once they actually take a look at a specific property, it is apparently OK for them to ticket for even tiny patches of remaining ice, which is clearly unreasonable.
This is why these sorts of questions require actual analysis. I am neither in favour of stricter or less snow clearing policies — I want the policies to be better, which in this case can’t be captured by either of those simplistic words. I’m ignoring for the moment that I think the City should take on the job itself. So assuming we’re going to stick with the ridiculous approach of using bylaw to enforce that each house does its bit, we need to change the actual clearing standard to reflect what is actually feasible; while simultaneously changing the rules to actually require clearing during winter.
I think part of this needs to be an attitude change, whether on the part of the enforcement regime or in the bylaw itself I can’t say, to take reasonable inferences from evidence. With serious crimes we don’t require them to be caught in flagrante — if a dead body shows up with no witnesses to the murder, we don’t give up and say we’ll never know who did it. If we’re willing to send people to prison for decades on the basis of evidence, why can’t we fine people for not clearing the sidewalk on the basis of obvious evidence, such as their portion of the sidewalk having a 3cm layer of solid ice while the neighbours have only today’s 1cm of snow?
More generally, this is why I am opposed to “zero tolerance” policies. They’re really just an excuse for enforcement authorities to avoid thinking, no matter how many people are harmed or how badly by such behaviour. The only area on which zero tolerance is appropriate is zero tolerance: anybody who proposes, enacts, supports, or implements a zero tolerance policy should be [insert your choice of excessive satirical punishment here].