Private Parking in Webster Groves

TO: Webster Groves City Council
FR: Mad Bomber

I understand from recent news reports that the council is considering legislation which would dictate to property owners the number of maintained, functioning automobiles which may be legally parked on their property.

Just try it.

* * * * *

The above Memo was in response to a notice I saw in one of the small neighborhood newspapers this past fall; possibly this very one. The item stated that the Webster Groves City Council had "discussed a measure to limit the number of vehicles on residential property."

No - it can't be. Could they really be proposing to limit the number of vehicles I – we – you – can park on your own property?

No...not this administration. Not Mayor Terri Williams and this council who'd already danced with controversy. You'd think they know enough to keep a low profile for a while.

Though I'd just moved to Webster a few months ago, I'd heard of the alleged shenanigans of Williams and her bunch. I'd even written about it before, suggesting that in a democracy, people get the politicians they deserve; certainly, the ones they vote into office and, that said, the office-holder was entitled to the remainder of her elected term and that any move for a recount should be squelched.

Upon moving to Webster Groves, I was chided for such things as the need to "gift-wrap the trash." Indeed, after reading through some of the propaganda I'd picked up at city hall, I was surprised to learn, for example, that there is a limit to how high a backyard fence can be. (No more than four feet.) But as some clerical worker at Elm and Lockhart informed me, "in the end, it's for the overall good of the community."

For the overall good of the community, eh? Well, okay. I guess I can learn to appreciate such logic. After moving from an urban Chicago neighborhood, where my major concern was not fence height, but flying bullets, you'd think I'd be ready for a change. But news of the "car limit" ordinance was pushing things a bit far. That's when I issued the above Memo - the warning shot.

And then I sat back and waited.

* * * * *

In a city council meeting held on October 8th, an ordinance was passed that essentially limits how many vehicles one may own.

A few days later, I sent a note to City Hall requesting the minutes of each meeting in which this topic was discussed. I spoke to City Clerk Katie Nakazono who kindly explained that this mess started with "one resident complaint about cars parked in the street. So to correct this problem ... create a law which limits the number of cars which can be parked in a driveway.... it's really not something that's going to be enforced; only in response to calls."

Then, along with the information I requested, she answered my concern that the ordinance seemed to prohibit out-of-state licensed vehicles from parking on residential property, public or private, with a note which, with regards to out of town guests, the police "will investigate each situation cautiously, as there may be situations where out of state plates are acceptable in certain situations." That's your visiting relatives and mine, gang.

In reviewing the requested minutes Ms. Nakazono sent to me, I was astonished by what appeared to be a case of a lone squeaky wheel getting too much oil. Admittedly, I was also struck by the continuum of inane banter on the topic. Here are some pertinent highlights from the September 3, 1996, council meeting minutes:

- Police Chief (Gene) Young said there is no problem with unlicensed cars on the street. His officers can address that situation. If it is a licensed car, the driver can technically park anywhere in town.

- Councilmember (Richard) Gowan asked if there was a way to limit the number of unlicensed vehicles.

- (City Attorney) Mr. Starr said we don't want to get into court and have an ordinance that can't stand a chance.

- Councilmember (Steven) Beck said because of the discussion and the stipulations, the Bill was looking less and less appealing...

- Councilmember (Dotty) DeLassus said she would like to know if they have the right to limit the number of unlicensed vehicles on property.

Of course, in lieu of a new city law, the more simple solution would be to address each situation individually, as the Chief of Police claims will be done with out-of-state license plates that are going to be investigated.

* * * * *

While some folks collect stamps or antique furniture, some of us collect antique cars and they're just too big to store in the house and out of sight. (Besides, there's probably an ordinance prohibiting the operation of a carbon monoxide spewing device indoors.) If the city would let me build a fence high enough, (which they won't) nobody would be subjected to the sight of my own personal collection of Detroit iron in the event I opted to keep it at my home.

* * * * *

So what have we learned? That we have to sacrifice personal liberty for the sake of "the overall appearance of the community."

Indeed. But at what price do we enjoy the "appearance of the community?" Where is the line drawn? Should we continue to let the council draw the line for us? What's next? A "lights out" rule? A law prohibiting the running of a car motor only within certain hours of the day? Where will it end with this group? And when will this city council begin to focus on more important issues, beginning the sky-high taxes in Webster Groves.