Who to contact for city regulations?

[fieldsjoe89]

I just recently moved to Alabama and I'm looking to metal detect in my local city but I'm not sure who to contact for laws and regulations? Is there a certain department in the PD I should contact? I'm used to just asking land owners for permission, but I'm looking to detect the grass areas between the roads and the sidewalks where I'm at now. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Slingshot]

Sounds kind of like a new twist to the asset forfeiture laws, after all we know the government owns everything, including us, or at least they think they do. It sort of makes you into a Privateer instead of a Buccaneer, since you have a letter of Marque from the local political power. Anyways , congratulations on getting some kind of permission to hunt public property there, so get out and dig Baby dig!! I hope you don't get underbid, or have your permission revoked, have a great time and find some real booty. I'll stay Pirate myself, just makes me feel better about myself and the system at large. Cheers!!

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I would be more than happy to except a letter from our mayor giving me the right to hunt all city property.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I would be more than happy to except a letter from our mayor giving me the right to hunt all city property.

Who wouldn't want such a "carte-blanche" ? But oddly, there is an implicit connotation in what you're saying: It infers that this "right" (permission) needs to be given, in order to do the activity. Or put another way: That we can not do said-activity, unless sanctioned with someone's say-so (the granting of the "right"). If this premise is true, then yes, everything else you're saying would logically follow. But I do not agree with the premise. To me it's a "right", until told otherwise (a rule stating to the contrary).

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Who wouldn't want such a "carte-blanche" ? But oddly, there is an implicit connotation in what you're saying: It infers that this "right" (permission) needs to be given, in order to do the activity. Or put another way: That we can not do said-activity, unless sanctioned with someone's say-so (the granting of the "right"). If this premise is true, then yes, everything else you're saying would logically follow. But I do not agree with the premise. To me it's a "right", until told otherwise (a rule stating to the contrary).

In my area you can not dig on city property, you can claim the right all you want, but that doesn't make it legal.... I think pot should be legal, it is a natural plant but state and federal says it isn't so I abide by the law..



Posted From My $50 Tablet....




“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
― James Madison
The Constitution of the United States of America

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

There is a difference between a code, ordinance etc. and a law. A city can set forth codes but they can not override a State or Federal law. A city can also interpret their codes and enforce them as they wish. I think you will find a "no digging " clause in most if not all city codes. That does no mean that all cities interpret that to mean no metal detecting as is evidenced by any park that is being hunted without objection by the city.

Kemper, I'm well aware of my local laws, I have done a lot of research on them..

 

[cudamark]

There is one town around here that I was leary of hunting. I did go to their city admin building to get a copy of the ordinances as there website offered since they had not put them online yet. The gentleman I was meeting with could not find a copy to give me so he asked what I was specifically needing the ordinances for. I mentioned that I was a hobbyist in metal detecting and wanted to know if this was banned in the parks. He chuckled and said no, but he did recommend that I not hunt the newest sports park since they treated the lawn not too long ago and to make sure I fill in my holes. Not all individuals in local government are bad.

Who's to say he knows the law himself? Stick a legal document giving you permission under his nose for him to sign and see if his attitude changes! On second thought, no, don't do that if you EVER want to detect public property in that state again.

 

[cudamark]

I started by contacting the mayor. He in turn talked to the city attorney. I got my letter of permission and all city property is my playground now.
Anything I find that is valued at $2000 or more is split between the city and myself. Anything under that is mine to keep.

You got lucky. That may work in Mayberry USA where everyone there is a friend or family, but, those of us who live in "realville" have to deal with bureaucrats who don't know us from the president. I'd like to see that letter myself. I think the city attorney is either ignorant of lost and find laws, incompetent, or crazy if he agreed with those provisions in writing.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

There is a difference between a code, ordinance etc. and a law. ....

Kemper, with all due respect for an ally, this logic sounds a little sketchy. I mean, you and I and TH'r can try, all we want, to split semantics hairs on "laws" versus "ordinances" versus "codes", etc.... But at the end of the day, I highly doubt that's going to mean much of anything. TH'r therefore does have a good point. Let me take a gander at it ...

 

[ezman604]

That may work in Mayberry USA where everyone there is a friend or family, but, those of us who live in "realville" have to deal with bureaucrats who don't know us from the president. I'd like to see that letter myself. I think the city attorney is either ignorant of lost and find laws, incompetent, or crazy if he agreed with those provisions in writing.

No Mayberry USA here, try Podunk USA? LOL
I guess your law degree out trumps a city attorney? You know, I really don't care if you make snide remarks of where I live or if we are all related....fact is I have written permission to MD all over property where I'm not even a city tax paying resident. Statements just smack of jealousy. I think I took the right approach, had the proper attitude about it and got the results I needed by doing so.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

In my area you can not dig on city property,...

TH'r, ok, let's cut to the chase then: Are you aware that laws (or rules or codes or ordinances, or whatever someone wants to call them) are on the books in EVERY park across the entire USA ? So if that boiler plate word is to stop us, then ..... hmmmm, we're all in a big heap of trouble! But last I looked, there was no shortage of md'rs hunting parks.

Even if it didn't use the exact word "dig", it will still be there in some form or fashion. Eg.: "alter", "deface", etc.... Now these latter types of words are much easier for us to deal with. Because they inherently infer the end result. Eg.: alter versus alterED, etc... But yes, the evil word "dig" (a present tense verb) is not as easy to get around.

But just saying that that word, and a multitude of other concepts and words ("remove", "collect", "take", "annoy", etc...) that could, if you asked around enough, be applied to our hobby. So when you start down that path, then you might as well give up all public land everywhere

 

[Tom_in_CA]

While I know that word "dig" sounds black and white, yet here's some food for thought: No doubt you have seen scores of posts, where someone "gets permission" to detect their city's parks. Right? Ok, how much you want to make a bet, that in an awful lot of them, there are rules that forbid "digging" ? So what does that tell you? If the md'r "gets permission" to hunt at such places, then to me that simply confirms what I'm saying: That those words ARE IN FACT up-for-interpretation, grey, etc... Because can any city official *really* give a citizen "permission" to break a law ? ?

For example: if you walked in and asked that same city guy: "Can I shop-lift?", or "can I steal my neighbor's hubcaps?" or "can I exceed the speed limit?" What would he say? OF COURSE he can't "give permission" to break laws like those, right? Then what's the difference then with this dig law? To me that simply confirms that it need not *necessarily* mean "no detecting". I hunt a ton of places where, I'm sure if I looked long and hard, I too could find such things. But truth-be-told, the average person understands them to mean the end result.

 

[cudamark]

Snide? Really? I wasn't trying to be. I actually envy people who live in smaller towns. They usually have it much easier in dealing with politics. If you know who you're dealing with, that can be a huge advantage, as it probably was in your case. Bigger cities can be pretty cold when asking for favors or permission from people who have their jobs on the line.

 

[cudamark]

TH'r, ok, let's cut to the chase then: Are you aware that laws (or rules or codes or ordinances, or whatever someone wants to call them) are on the books in EVERY park across the entire USA ? So if that boiler plate word is to stop us, then ..... hmmmm, we're all in a big heap of trouble! But last I looked, there was no shortage of md'rs hunting parks.

Even if it didn't use the exact word "dig", it will still be there in some form or fashion. Eg.: "alter", "deface", etc.... Now these latter types of words are much easier for us to deal with. Because they inherently infer the end result. Eg.: alter versus alterED, etc... But yes, the evil word "dig" (a present tense verb) is not as easy to get around.

But just saying that that word, and a multitude of other concepts and words ("remove", "collect", "take", "annoy", etc...) that could, if you asked around enough, be applied to our hobby. So when you start down that path, then you might as well give up all public land everywhere

To take it a step further, with that sort of verbage, you couldn't "legally" do ANYTHNG in a park. After all, just walking on the grass "disturbs" it. If you walked on it enough, it would also " alter and deface" it. You also end up taking dirt and small pieces of grass home with you, whether you intend to or not. Those laws were INTENDED to be vague so they could be interpreted on an individual basis based on the complaint. The idea is to avoid the complaint.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Tom, I prefer to not make an issue of their rules, there are plenty of places to hunt so why draw undo attention to the hobby and have more restrictions added.

A lot of city property is considered historical due to history of Orlando.. I tried hunting some old city property and was ran off by a police officer. Now I could have been belligerent, argued and made a stink about it but what would that have really accomplished, nothing other than my possible arrest, cost of attorney and maybe even more regulations......

There are plenty of places to detect with no arguments...



Posted From My $50 Tablet....




“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
― James Madison
The Constitution of the United States of America

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I tried hunting some old city property and was ran off by a police officer. Now I could have been belligerent, argued and made a stink about it...

I agree with not "making a stink". Hope I didn't imply that we md'rs should. Was just saying that I don't necessarily take the "dig" word, to mean "no md'ing" . Even though ,... yes ...we "dig", yet it can and does get interpretted to mean the end result. Yes, sometimes we md'rs need to give lip service and move on.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I take it that even with the research you did you thought it to be okay to detect city property. I too would not have argued with the police officer. If your research shows nothing that would prevent you from detecting that area you could be more discrete if you decided to return there. Any law or code that would prevent you would be published.

No....It was when I first started and did not realize how much of Orlando is considered historical..



Posted From My $50 Tablet....




“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
― James Madison
The Constitution of the United States of America

 

[cudamark]

I always thought that designation "Historical" was curious. Is this a site that's in the process of being unearthed and studied by archeologists? In the near future? No? Didn't think so! Just what is so important buried there that the average Joe is not allowed to own it? And if it's so damned important, why is it allowed to stay buried in the ground where it's slowly (or maybe quickly) deteriorating? Cultural Heritage? Who benefits by that? If it's buried, nobody can see it, even if they knew what it was...which they don't because we haven't found it yet!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I always thought that designation "Historical" was curious....

My sentiments exactly. And for some reason, md'rs think that once that term gets applied to anything, it's "off-limits" now. But hold on just one second: Aren't "historic" spots EXACTLY and SPECIFICALLY where we want to go ? I don't know about you, but I want old coins, not new ones.

I guess the confusion occurs if something at a national park is deemed a "historic" site, then somehow the inference is, that ... therefore .... anything on-down-the-line (city, county, state, private, etc...) level that somehow has the word "historic" in it, must also therefore be off-limits too. This is simply not the case. I mean, ask yourself: If you take a 5 minute stroll through the "finds" forums, you will no doubt see people posting old coins they've found. Right? Well, do you think they found those coins at new modern places? Or old "historic" places ?

 

[Mackaydon]

OP, I'd start with the City Attorney's office.
Don.....
Happy New Year!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Sure the city attorney might let you know what the current opinion is but I think a "no digging" phrase in the code would be used against you ....

Perhaps. But the opposite might also happen too Kemper: That city attorney might hug you with a giant cuddly bear hug. And say "sure go ahead". And even hand you a shovel and list of parks to help get you started. So don't be a kill-joy and assume the answer will tend to be "no". Never hurts to ask. And if they said "no" well gee, needle-point isn't such a bad hobby afterall ?