Enforcing Ordinances May Hinder Community Connections

I have resided in Lancaster City, Pennsylvania for most of the past 6 years. Our current mayor, Mayor Rick Gray, has pushed for a strong beautification effort within the city. I have seen a great number of changes occur in the past few years that has led to a more visually appealing city. However, in the past year, some of those changes have led to excessive and unnecessary traffic delays, overspending, and overstretching of our city government.

Last year, most of the city residents sat with me in one lane traffic down one of the main city routes, King Street, as well numerous busy intersections, while brick sidewalks and pavers were installed to "beautify" the city. I was happy to see leveling of sidewalks, as well as a more pedestrian friendly city come to life. The cost of $2.9 million (1) to install these brick pavers, however, is what is most distressing. This concern is amplified by the fact that repairs are already necessary on the King Street strip to jackhammer and repair sections of the brick pavers that did not settle. So again, like last year, I am sitting in one lane traffic and being delayed on my travels to work. I am quite sure that the $2.9 million allotted to this project does not cover yearly repairs of this beautification effort.

In the past week or so, extreme attention has been brought to Mayor Gray over his suggestion for an 'anti-sticker ordinance' (1). This ordinance was suggested to combat graffiti-like stickers that are placed on poles, mailboxes, etc . around the city. It would hold the names and images on the stickers responsible for the fine and removal of the sticker, only if the person who placed the sticker could not be identified. Ironically, one sticker placed on a public property is of Mayor Gray. I would hope he would be expected to pay the $50-$600 potential fine arriving in his mailbox as his introduced ordinance suggests.

At a recent council meeting, the city council voted to table the ordinance (2) and now plan to work with the local James Street Improvement District security officers to enforce the current ordinances of fine for those who place stickers, and even signs, around the city on public property. This would mean flyers for yard sales, community events, and even lost Fluffy, would be subject to penalties. Many residents are concerned at the enforcement of this ordinance in its entire coverage, and that it may lead to a less connected community.

If the Lancaster City Police, along with the help of the James Street Improvement District, hope to enforce this current ordinance, we should be provided with alternatives to keep our community connected. Bulletin boards or circular stations (like those found on college campuses) would be a great addition to the city to list local community events, fundraisers, and lost/missing reports, and would keep the signs to a minimum designated area. By doing this, you would eliminate the clutter throughout the city, and keep it in organized locations.

While many of the beautification efforts in the city have done great things for its visual appeal, it should be kept in mind that funds also need to be allotted for community assistance. While buildings, sidewalks, and structural details of our historic city do need to be addressed and properly maintained, it is the people that make this city so enhancing. Our diverse city offers many cultures and backgrounds that need to be supported. Enforcement of our current ordinances and laws is important to the city and its maintenance, but as a resident, I hope to see other issues considered and dealt with in a timely, efficient, and concerned manner.

1. "Mayor Calls for Anti-Sticker Ordinance" http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/253214

Harris, Bernard 5/3/2010 Lancaster New Era

2."City Sign Fine Plan Tabled" http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/254756

Harris, Bernard 5/11/2010 Lancaster New Era