Chocowinity adopts a house sign ordinance | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This article originally appeared in the Beaufort Observer.

    But the "solution" does not solve the problem

    At its regular monthly meeting this week the Chocowinity Town Board adopted a new ordinance requiring property owners within the town limits to post street number signs as prescribed by the ordinance. It passed unanimously with no one for the public speaking for or against. The ordinance had been recommended by the Town Planning Board.

    You can read the ordinance by clicking here.

    Mayor Jimmy Mobley indicated that the motivation for the ordinance came from emergency responders who report having had difficulty in locating addresses in some emergency calls.

    It is unclear how many residences within the town do not have numbering displayed that will or will not conform to the new ordinance. It requires numbers only, that they be at least 3 inches in height and "plainly visible in contrasting colors." The ordinance does not require it, but "recommends" that the number be on a reflective material. It also specifies where the numbers may be posted, depending on how far the house is from the street/road.

    Similar ordinances have caused a stir in some communities. From what we have been told the problems have come more in the enforcement of these ordinances than in the actual content of the ordinance. For example, the Chocowinity ordinance requires that the numbers be posted "at the property line adjacent to the walk or access drive to the residence." In some instances that precise placement may not be the best placement. So it becomes a judgment call as to what is in compliance and what is not. The Chocowinity ordinance leaves that call up to "the Code Enforcement Officer or his/her designee." The penalty is a $100 fine and "...other penalties."

    Although the ordinance does not make it clear, Mayor Jimmy Mobley told us that it does not apply in the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) but only within the municipal limits.

    We contacted the Chocowinity Fire Department and EMS. We were told that while locating residents on emergency calls had "can be a problem" neither the Fire Department of EMS could recall a specific instance in recent months within the town limits. In fact, every instance they cited involved a residence outside the town and most were even outside the ETJ. Thus, the ordinance will not correct those problems. A spokesperson for the Fire Department said he didn't know of a single instance of where a residence inside the municipal limits could not be located.

    We were told that emergency responders are dispatched by the Beaufort County communications center and they provide GPS data via radio to responding units. The Chocowinity EMS has GPS receivers but the fire department does not have such units. GPS units on the vehicles allows the responders to know both where the address being sought is and where the vehicle is actually located. But the only problem that was cited to us had nothing to do with street signs or GPS units. It had to do with inaccurate dispatch information.

    For example, the dispatcher knows the location of a 911 call (in most instances) and can dispatch to that location. But if the call is coming from another location, such as a neighbor's house then the inaccurate location might be given as the address from which the call originated rather than where the problem is actually located. Street numbering would not solve that problem.

    An emergency responder told us that more than not being able to locate a street number, they have a problem of arriving at the designated number but not being able to tell where the victim actually is. We were told this is particularly true for multi-family housing and mobile home parks. The spokesperson told us that it would be good if the public understood that it is helpful, if someone is able to, that they go or send someone to the street/road to direct the emergency unit precisely where to go once they get within the vicinity. "That would help much more than the street sign..." we were told. "It's easier to find the mailbox than it is the victim..." she said.

    Spokespersons for both the Fire Department and EMS told us that those orgnaizations had not been consulted or involved in the development of the ordinance.

    Commentary

    We don't know whose idea this was but it is not a very good idea. There are many reason it is not. Here's why:

    Helping emergency responders locate where they are going on a call is a great idea. But the problem with this plan is that it simply does not solve the problem.

    First, it only applies to the area within the Town of Chocowinity, not the emergency service area. If it is a sound idea for residents inside the corporate limits, why is it not a sound idea for those within the ETJ? Or within the county services area?

    The evidence is that there actually are fewer "problems" of locating an address inside town than there are in the areas this ordinance does not apply to.

    Secondly, there are better ways to locate an address than "reflective signs." GPS is an example. Why not put GPS units on emergency vehicles?

    Thirdly, if it is a legitimate need, they, the town, should pay for it. We don't favor that, but it raises some interesting points to ponder. We just think it is getting to be a habit of government to make unfunded mandates on us. Moreover, we see this as just another example of the "Nanny State" mentality. Why should four people tell 800 people how they should insure that the fire department can find them? Think about it. If there is a need for the rescue squad to be able to find me if I need help, why do I need four elitists to tell me how to meet that need? Applying this same logic, but with less expense, why not require everyone to have a cell phone to be able to call for help. The cell phone transmits its location to 911 and the dispatcher can then tell the responder precisely where the victim is. If you're really concerned about addressing the need, why not do it right?

    But then why would it not be a good idea to make everybody who lives more than "x" miles from the station get an EKG and if it shows heart abnormalities, purchase a defibrillator? Absurd? Certainly, but if you don't think one absurd elitist idea leads to another, you don't know about ObamaCare and the move to restrict fat intake and...you get the idea.

    The real problem here is the IDEA, not the signs. Mandating the signs is an elitist idea and that kind of thinking is a cancer on the American way of life. By elitist we mean the idea that a handful of people can and should tell the rest of us what is good for us and then mandate that we do it.

    We would have much less problem with a government entity placing a penalty on our not being locatable than to mandate specific kinds of actions we must take. For example, charge anyone who calls for help who cannot be located a $100 fine rather than charging a property owner a $100 fine for not putting up a sign when you know the signs are not going to solve the objective of making everybody locatable. Think about it, people. Do you really want a government that tells you what is best for you and then fines you if you don't do what a half dozen people decide is good for you? Do you really want a government with that kind of control over our lives?

    But the main objection to this idea is not so much in the rule but in its enforcement. We don't know who the "Code Enforcement Officer" is or will be a few years from now but this much we do know: The chances are very great that the Code Enforcement Officer will get to be what our grandmother used to call "too big for their britches." You know what she meant. Give a guy/gal a little power and before too long chances are they will abuse it. Every zoning operation in history has resulted in abuses. We'll just wait and see how this one plays out but remember we told you up-front to watch out for the knock on the door and the CEO standing there to tell you, "It's the law and it doesn't matter whether you don't need a sign (maybe because you've got a cell phone with a GPS on it) so you've got to take down those numbers you ordered from the Better Homes and Gardens catalog and put up one you've got to buy from the Chocowinity Fire Department."

    We don't know who, when or where it will come from but this much we know: Give the bureaucracy an inch of power and they will end up trying to take a mile of your fundamental right to be left alone by the government unless you're hurting somebody else.

    But go ahead and suck it up and put up the numbers...as long as they are at least 3 inches high, are of contrasting colors and preferably on a reflective....oh, what the heck. You get the idea.

    But really, we'll just be sure our cell phone's GPS is turned on and count on modern technology rather than those little green signs. And we'll still love our friends on the Planning Board even if they don't have enough to keep them busy. We would, however, commend to them the famous words of Thomas Paine, who said: "That government which governs least governs best." BTW, he also said: "When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon."