Have you ever made a decision that had unintended consequences? For example, you decided to paint your house, and the color swatch you chose to pick the paint didn’t match the final outcome when the entire house was painted. The unintended consequence was that instead of admiring the paint job, all you got were complaints about the bold colors.
Well, it may shock you, but the government makes decisions that have unintended consequences more frequently than you might imagine. When making policy, it’s difficult to look beyond the immediate concern to try and imagine how the new policy or changing an old established policy might impact the entire community.
On April 2, Councilmember Gilda Cordova mentioned the ever-increasing number of street vendors and asked what the city could do about it. The city attorney gave an opinion based on his knowledge of legislation related to street vending that a city can require permits but cannot prevent street vending.
A few years ago, I was a member of the Planning Commission; we discussed street vendors based on an individual complaint to the City Council. The complainant operated a hot dog cart and wanted to peddle his dogs streetside in some areas of town but was precluded from doing so by a city ordinance that stipulated he couldn’t remain in one location for more than 10 minutes.
When we discussed this issue, we tried to visualize what would happen if we attempted to regulate street vendors. How would we accommodate some and not include others? How would we allow vendors at parades and street parties and not in everyday situations? And what about those ice cream pushcarts that we see in residential neighborhoods?
Finally, the Lompoc City Council addressed this on Sept. 18, 2018, by repealing the time limitations on street and sidewalk vendors.
So, what happened? Well, the unintended consequence was that we now have street vendors on the corners of some very busy intersections of the city several days a week. These vendors sell everything from flowers to decorative globes, produce, or shaved ice. When people stop to buy their products, they frequently block traffic trying to turn to their destination.
So, what did the council do about Councilmember Cordova’s observation? Nothing. What could they do about it other than discuss the matter once again and try to create a new standard that would likely produce another series of unintended consequences?
Governing and policy making is hard work. When you make a policy to satisfy a request from the public, it should be carefully thought out—what will happen as a result of this action? The first thing is that the person asking for the change will be happy; the next is it could create a situation whereby many other people are adversely impacted.
In this case, the matter should have been brought back at a later date for further review. It’s only a matter of time before a mishap may occur as a result of street vendors selling their goods at busy intersections or someone’s child is injured trying to buy ice cream from a pushcart.
Another recent unintended consequence befell a local nonprofit. A group known as Plant a Seed took it upon themselves to organize a cleanup effort in the riverbed. The homeless camps had mounds of trash, and in an earlier City Council meeting a cleanup was discussed but no action was taken.
The issue of scavenging was also discussed by the council; the city solid waste guru explained that scavenging by transients was helpful because it reduced the amount of waste in the landfill. How’s that for government logic—convert a violation of a city ordinance that forbids scavenging into a benefit simply because the rules aren’t enforced.
The volunteer group removed 26 tons of scavenged trash and took it to the landfill; they were charged $2,000 to dispose of waste collected from city property! Then when they asked that the fees be waived, they were informed that they couldn’t do the cleanup until they could provide proof that they had liability insurance. Talk about a slap in the face for trying to do a good deed.
Mayor Jenelle Osborne told local media, “We appreciate the work that is being done by the organization and its volunteers … unfortunately for the city we are under legal ramifications for not following rules out there that protect the homeless, that protect our citizens, the taxpayers, and that funding.”
Apparently, no such liability insurance requirement exists for illegal campers, vagrants scavenging and transporting trash to construct their camps in the riverbed, or off-road vehicle trespassers. And the homeless seem to have more influence with City Hall than do citizen groups that want to help clean up their mess.
The deliberative bodies of government are made up of elected and appointed people from the community. While they have the best intentions, they sometimes make unforced errors and create unintended consequences with the decisions they make.
Ron Fink writes to the Sun from Lompoc. Send your thoughts, comments, and opinionated letters to letters@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Apr 22-29, 2021.