There’s a proposal, offered at the request of a Madison businessman, to ban dogs, etc., from some public events, like fairs, in Madison. The businessman (Keith Peterson of Madison Festivals) runs some of these events, like the Taste of Madison. See, Proposal Would Ban Dogs (and Other Animals, Too) from Many Madison Events.
That the businessman who runs the events, rather than patrons, asks for the legal ban on dogs should trigger suspicion. That’s because it’s a classic case of special interest pleading, in which a private, well-connected party asks for a change in the law that benefits and makes its own endeavors easier.
Here’s the contention:
The proposed city ordinance would prohibit dogs and other animals from any Madison event where a street use permit is required and there are 10 or more food vendors.
“We love pets, but we just don’t think it’s appropriate to have them around 50,000 people and small children and food,” said Keith Peterson, event director for Madison Festivals Inc., which puts on Taste of Madison and requested the ordinance.
The tip off is Peterson’s use of the word ‘appropriate‘ — he doesn’t quantify harm or risk, just offers a justification not far removed from ‘we just don’t think it’s polite,” or ‘it’s not what proper people do.’ Perhaps he’s right, but one needn’t care, as it’s not law’s place to establish rules of mere politeness. The law should be used for bigger things.
One can guess that Peterson’s patrons disagree with him, as they’re the ones bringing dogs to his events. So what he really should admit is that some of his patrons are vulgar and inappropriate in his eyes, and he’d like the CIty of Madison to make unlawful their ongoing conduct (and his failure to discourage them).
Event organizers can ban pets now, of course, and if they can’t prevent patrons from bringing dogs, and they can’t show violations other existing criminal statutes, Peterson should be out of luck.
Government owes this private businessman no ordinance; a municipality should not extend legislation for him, or his festivals. If he can’t manage the area now, from the profits he derives, then he should find another line of work.
Legislation should have a broader origin than this.