Bias and Hardship in RV Ordinance

I have been following, with interest, the proposed Thousand Oaks ordinance prohibiting the parking of recreational vehicles on city streets between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.

First, this proposal is discriminatory because it pertains only to vehicles over 20 feet in length or 92 inches high. There are motor homes and campers that are under this limit that can be seen parked, day after day (whether or not they are used as a primary vehicle) obstructing the view of traffic on many streets throughout the city.

Second, we keep our vehicle (at quite an expense) on a storage lot. However, we often bring our RV home for two or three days to load, unload, repair and clean it before and after a trip. This ordinance would prohibit us from parking our vehicle in front of our house to perform these things. Shall we bring it home at 10 p.m. and vacuum? Or what about an individual who works nights and sleeps days and uses the RV as a primary vehicle?

Finally, I feel that because this ordinance would be enforced only after resident complaints, this encourages neighborhood discord between feuding individuals, or those with a particular dislike for RVs. Councilwoman Elois Zeanah stated (as a argument for this proposed change) that she felt that too much valuable police time was being used to enforce the present ordinance. I fail to grasp how this would be modified if the proposed ordinance were enacted.

Why not just enforce the law we already have? This new ordinance would just be another case of excessive government. Or is it a misguided attempt by individuals who feel restrictive homeowners associations are the answer to neighborhood control?

MICHELE M. GRIMALDI

Newbury Park