As I mentioned in a comment in a previous post, excessive regulation invites selective enforcement, especially where there is a questionable conscience among the powers that be. In this case, it is strange that the bylaw officers would lower the boom on such a benign and innocent enterprise. I strongly suspect that the orders came from "higher up". From past reports it seems as though the majority of our municipal council has it in for the homeless.
It reminds me of a street fighter mentality - put the boots to somebody who is down so they can't get up again but just have to crawl away and not bother you with their mere presence any more. It's a sad reflection on our community in so many ways.
One final note, for those who claim a religious affiliation, Matthew 25:40 comes to mind: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."
I went through the same BS in 2015! I had to operate out of a rental house trailer like they use on mining site because my new building wasn’t finished. The trailer was also private property. The town, notably the mayor,did everything to shut me down. But they didn’t succeed. I got 4 councillors on my side and called a vote and won. The mayor didn’t even want to allocate me a peddlers license. Was I was told she had a bias in favour of ASM, my competitor. But after my win, i was able to obtain one and operate. Was 500$ at the time. Imo, the vendor should be subject to a pedders permit. Could set a precedent that could cause problems in the future.
Ridiculous, is this what town is really about? "Let's sit around and punch a kitten, just for fun". Cause honesty I can't see a reason for them to be picking on these vendors and not others. Is being bias legal when it comes to such subjects in law? By-laws fall under that category. A law is a law, even if it's by. This is probably partly council trying to make up for all the money they're sending to sit on the sunshine list.
As I mentioned in a comment in a previous post, excessive regulation invites selective enforcement, especially where there is a questionable conscience among the powers that be. In this case, it is strange that the bylaw officers would lower the boom on such a benign and innocent enterprise. I strongly suspect that the orders came from "higher up". From past reports it seems as though the majority of our municipal council has it in for the homeless.
It reminds me of a street fighter mentality - put the boots to somebody who is down so they can't get up again but just have to crawl away and not bother you with their mere presence any more. It's a sad reflection on our community in so many ways.
One final note, for those who claim a religious affiliation, Matthew 25:40 comes to mind: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."
I went through the same BS in 2015! I had to operate out of a rental house trailer like they use on mining site because my new building wasn’t finished. The trailer was also private property. The town, notably the mayor,did everything to shut me down. But they didn’t succeed. I got 4 councillors on my side and called a vote and won. The mayor didn’t even want to allocate me a peddlers license. Was I was told she had a bias in favour of ASM, my competitor. But after my win, i was able to obtain one and operate. Was 500$ at the time. Imo, the vendor should be subject to a pedders permit. Could set a precedent that could cause problems in the future.
Ridiculous, is this what town is really about? "Let's sit around and punch a kitten, just for fun". Cause honesty I can't see a reason for them to be picking on these vendors and not others. Is being bias legal when it comes to such subjects in law? By-laws fall under that category. A law is a law, even if it's by. This is probably partly council trying to make up for all the money they're sending to sit on the sunshine list.