Myrtle Beach's efforts to kill motorcycle rallies have mounting costs
Of course, the cost is to the taxpayers, not the city government - since the city raised taxes to cover the costs of killing the rallies. So far, according to the Sun News, the cost has risen to $145,000 in legal fees defending the lawsuits brought against the city. I haven't seen any estimate of the income that city's ordinances cost the business owners this year, but I am sure it is substantial.
The city's ordinances, which include a helmet law, were passed in an effort to keep bikers out of Myrtle Beach. Like the inane crackdowns on drinking in Myrtle Beach which have resulted in busloads of high school and college students spending their vacations in a jail cell, the ordinances are designed to mold the beach's image into something more suitable for some. A family vacation spot, possibly suitable for golfers but no parties allowed.
The ordinances are unconstitutional under the South Carolina Constitution for at least two reasons: 1) No municipality can criminalize conduct that is not criminal under state law, which is exactly what Myrtle Beach has done with their helmet law; and 2) the city attempted to create a special court to handle the charges as "infraction" rather than "crimes," but that effort has already been shot down by the Chief Justice, who pointed out that there is no provision in the Constitution for municipalities to create an additional tier of administrative courts.
I'm disappointed at the effort with which some of the cases have been prosecuted - the attorneys for Mike Shank and Harley Davidson of Myrtle Beach have already withdrawn their federal suit, once their request for an injunction was denied in the district court. Don Emery, The Master's Club and Sonny Copeland also filed a suit in federal court but have missed filing deadlines and let the lawsuit founder. "Emery, who is a candidate for Myrtle Beach City Council, said the suit is not a priority right now."
Attorneys Thad Viers and Tim McGrath are now awaiting a decision from the South Carolina Supreme Court as to whether they will hear oral arguments on their challenges to the ordinances.
