City’s idling bylaw an idle threat
Officials say anti-idling rules passed in 2007 were meant to be more educational than punitive, as it’s hard to enforce
More than 12 years after the City of Hamilton prohibited the “unnecessary idling of vehicles,” not one driver has been successfully charged with the offence.
One charge was issued in 2016, but “was not successful in court,” city spokesperson Marie Fitzpatrick told the Spectator, saying she did not have more information.
“It is very difficult to enforce this bylaw … In most situations, by the time we receive the complaint and the officer responds to the location, the vehicle has already left,” said Fitzpatrick, in response to a request for ticket numbers since the bylaw’s enactment in 2007.
“Staff will be reviewing the bylaw and suggesting changes to it that would ensure better success with enforcement.”
The bylaw, brought forward by Mayor Fred Eisenberger during his previous stint in the position, prohibits idling a vehicle for more than three consecutive minutes within an hour, but makes numerous exceptions, including during temperatures above 27 C or lower than 5 C, or if a person has a medical condition that requires a certain temperature. Emergency, farm and transit vehicles are also largely excepted.
A driver’s first offence is not ticketed, but considered a warning, so an individual must be caught several times before being charged.
“Fines obviously encourage people to move more quickly, (but) all of our bylaws are intended to be preventive from the first instance,” said Eisenberger, adding a significant value of bringing the issue to council was providing antiidling education to the community. “It’s not like it’s speeding, or the kind of activity there’s less tolerance for.”
When debating the bylaw in 2007, councillors worried about “the practicality of enforcement,” said Ward 4 Coun. Sam Merulla, who supported the bylaw. Council in 2007 — which also included current members Brad Clark, Chad Collins, Tom Jackson, Terry Whitehead, Lloyd Ferguson and Maria Pearson — voted to hire an additional bylaw officer to help with the workload.
That staffer is not solely dedicated to idling, said Fitzpatrick, noting proactive enforcement is not always practical given that the city has more than 50 bylaws and “illegal activities” under its purview.
“A prioritization system has been adopted and implemented so that staff can focus on the enforcement issues deemed by the mayor and members of council to be most important,” she said.
Merulla said most city bylaws are enforced in response to complaints, and are meant to encourage desired behaviour, not to be punitive. “A lot of our bylaws have very little traction with charges and convictions. They are a little different than … other laws.”
In a report leading up to the idling bylaw’s creation, city staff cautioned councillors against enacting legislation without a “credible enforcement strategy.” It suggested doing so can cause a false expectation among the public and frustrate employees who lack the resources to enforce the law.
“Laws that are not seen to be enforced also lose the power to affect changes in behaviour and damage the credibility of the government that has passed them,” stated the December 2005 report. “The courts have held that there is a duty to enforce if standards are imposed. In some cases, Ontario municipalities have been found legally negligent for failure to enforce a bylaw.”
Durand resident Tom Flood, whose children attend Earl Kitchener Elementary School on Dundurn Street, says he finds it “sad” but not shocking that no one has been charged. He says idling is common near many schools in his area.
“With no sort of enforcement, why would they stop?” said Flood. “Pickup is the worst time … Parents will get there early and literally sit in their car with the car running.”
For a city that has declared a climate emergency, enforcing idling is an obvious way to back up those words, he said.
“If you see someone smoking in front of a school, people would ask them to stop,” Flood added. “But you can have people out there idling and no one says anything.”
Roberto Quinlan, whose children attend St. Joseph Catholic Elementary School on Locke Street, said he has asked school staff to call bylaw officers to report cars that idle and block traffic near that school. The school and Catholic school board did not respond to questions about whether they have done so.
So far this year, the city has received 53 idling complaints, Fitzpatrick said. Last year, there were 28, while in 2017 there were 77.
Quinlan noted that while he hasn’t picked his kids up yet this year, he would be surprised if anything has changed after witnessing five years of the same behaviour.
“Parents will show up early to stake out a spot immediately next to the exit,” he said. “Go any day at 3:15 p.m. and you’ll already see parents stopped and idling, waiting for the 3.30 p.m. dismissal.”