Obsolete ordinances

Local laws need updating
MORE than a dozen of city ordinances are already obsolete and needed to either be scrapped or updated.

With this, the city council will likely be doing a massive overhaul of the city’s existing ordinances.

Councilor Maria Belen Acosta, who was given the helm of the committee on publications, has submitted to the city council at least 14 existing ordinances that needed amendment.

The proposal was supposed to be tackled on first reading yesterday. However, the session was cancelled due to lack of attending councilors (see related story).

In the explanatory resolutions for each item, Acosta suggested to increase the fine of the ordinances to make up for inflation on some of the items. Three items were listed for revocation.

The existing ordinances that needed to be updates include:

-       Ordinance No. 195, Series of 1965 (Ordinance requiring all movie houses, theaters and coliseums to provide the public with safe and sanitary drinking water at all times during screening hours);

-       Ordinance No. 332, Series of 1968 (Ordinance prohibiting the defacing, scribbling and/or writing on walls of public and private buildings and/or fences exposed to public view);

-       Ordinance No. 1457, Series of 1974 (Ordinance prohibiting the loosening or letting astray of dogs, providing for the catching and impounding the same);

-       Ordinance No. 105, Series of 1986 (Ordinance penalizing acts of littering, scattering or any careless disposal of waste materials, refuse, and other insanitary things in streets, parks, public buildings and other public places);

-       Ordinance No. 51, Series of 1989 (Ordinance regulating the operation of video game machines for commercial purposes);

-       Ordinance No. 130, Series of 1989 (Ordinance prohibiting the pasting of any kind of propaganda materials in the city streets and in any public place);

-       Ordinance No. 212, Series of 1991 (Ordinance banning the distribution of Bandera magazine and other papers, magazines and other printed materials displaying obscene pictures);

-       Ordinance No. 568, Series of 1992 (Ordinance prohibiting the selling of immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions and the showing of indecent shows and pornographic films and such other films disapproved for public exhibitions and regulating admission to movie houses).

-       Ordinance No. 86, Series of 2000 (Ordinance enacting the Red Tide Monitoring and Quarantine);

-       Ordinance No. 92, Series of 2000 (Ordinance regulating the construction, repair, renovation, erection, installation and maintenance of outdoor advertising materials); and

-       Ordinance No. 95, Series of 2000 (Ordinance requiring all food establishments to use only iodized salt).

Those needed to be revoked include:

-       Ordinance No. 156, Series of 1960 (Ordinance banning the use, playing, operation and maintenance of pinball machines and other similar devices);

-       Ordinance No. 1710-A. Series of 1975 (Ordinance banning the operation of jukeboxes within the city public markets); and

-       Ordinance No. 1329, Series of 1993 (Ordinance penalizing recruiters, pimps, funhouses, operators and customers who victimize women to commit a life of prostitution and other lewd activities).

Acosta said the ordinance against pimps and customers are already included in the comprehensive women’s code.

The two other ordinances are no longer applicable because there are no longer pinball machine and jukeboxes.

The listed items will be referred to the committee on rules and privileges to review.

Posted in HEADLINES