Let's start by saying we think everyone who is physically capable of doing so should shovel snow from the public sidewalks in front of their homes. And, they should help each other shovel the snow from in front of the homes of their neighbors who are elderly or infirm.
That's being a good citizen.
But somewhere along in our history, relying on the goodwill of citizens to do the right thing was no longer enough. Municipalities began to mandate that homeowners must clear the sidewalks in front of their homes of snow or face fines.
Gloucester has such an ordinance - and, for good measure, another law requiring residents to sweep their sidewalks of sand in the spring so streetsweepers can pick it up. Newburyport, Haverhill and Lawrence are other North of Boston comunities that mandate sidewalk shoveling.
Sidewalk shoveling has been a hot topic lately with the unusually snowy December we've had. Callers and letter writers have complained about those who fail to follow the shoveling ordinances, even saying those physically incapable of doing so should hire someone who can.
As we said, good citizens will shovel the public sidewalks in front of their homes. But government ordinances mandating such shoveling seem fraught with legal peril and perhaps are even unconstitutional.
Think a moment and consider if there is any other municipal bylaw that requires citizens to perform unpaid labor on public property. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution says, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime ... shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Now a snow-shoveling mandate - even if it were actually enforced - surely is not to be equated with slavery. But it certainly may be involuntary for some and is "servitude" for all. If a community can mandate forced labor on a winter sidewalk, what other unpaid public work can it require of us?
Many of these ordinances state that homeowners are "responsible" for shoveling the snow from the public sidewalks. Indeed? Then who is responsible if a passer-by slips on that sidewalk and is injured? The city? Or the homeowner who shoveled the sidewalk? Is it wiser for a homeowner to take a chance at having to pay a small fine for not shoveling than to risk a life-altering lawsuit if he does shovel?
That's being a good citizen.
But somewhere along in our history, relying on the goodwill of citizens to do the right thing was no longer enough. Municipalities began to mandate that homeowners must clear the sidewalks in front of their homes of snow or face fines.
Gloucester has such an ordinance - and, for good measure, another law requiring residents to sweep their sidewalks of sand in the spring so streetsweepers can pick it up. Newburyport, Haverhill and Lawrence are other North of Boston comunities that mandate sidewalk shoveling.
Sidewalk shoveling has been a hot topic lately with the unusually snowy December we've had. Callers and letter writers have complained about those who fail to follow the shoveling ordinances, even saying those physically incapable of doing so should hire someone who can.
As we said, good citizens will shovel the public sidewalks in front of their homes. But government ordinances mandating such shoveling seem fraught with legal peril and perhaps are even unconstitutional.
Think a moment and consider if there is any other municipal bylaw that requires citizens to perform unpaid labor on public property. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution says, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime ... shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Now a snow-shoveling mandate - even if it were actually enforced - surely is not to be equated with slavery. But it certainly may be involuntary for some and is "servitude" for all. If a community can mandate forced labor on a winter sidewalk, what other unpaid public work can it require of us?
Many of these ordinances state that homeowners are "responsible" for shoveling the snow from the public sidewalks. Indeed? Then who is responsible if a passer-by slips on that sidewalk and is injured? The city? Or the homeowner who shoveled the sidewalk? Is it wiser for a homeowner to take a chance at having to pay a small fine for not shoveling than to risk a life-altering lawsuit if he does shovel?
What happens if an owner throws out his or her back, has a heart attack and dies, or slips and suffers another injury while clearing a public sidewalk? Is the city liable for the death or injury if it ordered the owner to do the work under the threat of a fine? Is the person shoveling the walk briefly an "employee" of the city?
Clearly, it is better for everybody to have passable sidewalks. But all the difficulties of winter cannot be eliminated by passing more laws. If people have the time, energy and inclination to clear their own sidewalks voluntarily, that's fine. But sidewalks are called public property for a reason - it is the public, collectively, that has the responsibility to maintain them.
If a city doesn't have the means to clear all the local sidewalks, it can set priorities by clearing only those that are close to local schools.
But ordering private individuals to maintain public property is asking for trouble.
