[hmagazine]

Are flower sellers a bylaw priority?

April 15, 2009
Matt Jelly
The Hamilton Spectator
Hamilton
(Apr 15, 2009)

Re: 'City rooting out unlicensed flower stands' (April 11)

While I appreciate any effort to revamp and

improve Hamilton's approach to bylaw enforcement, I have to question whether cracking down on unlicensed flower stands or roadside fruit signs should be a priority.

When Hamilton's bylaw department began a revamp last year, emphasis was on prioritization of enforcement; some bylaws were deemed a lesser priority, whether because they proved to be harder (or impossible) to adequately enforce or were considered less crucial to residents' health and well-being. Seeing that bylaw enforcement personnel can't be everywhere at once, the notion of defining some basic priorities seems like a logical approach.

Considering this, I find it frustrating after several decades of spotty and selective bylaw enforcement that some people are facing fines for relatively trivial infractions, compared to, let's say, keeping a building vacant and derelict, or starting construction without a building permit.

We need to ensure bylaws are primarily focused on ensuring the health and safety of residents and the overall functionality of our city, instead of cracking down on a few people trying to make a living at a time when doing so is increasingly difficult.

Undoubtedly, there are instances of unenforced bylaw infractions that take place every day which should be of far more concern than a few illegal flowers or roadside signs advertising locally-grown produce.