Members of a citizens group opposing a minor offense ordinance have developed a battery of arguments against its passage, including that it would violate the preamble of the Haines Borough charter which establishes a right to live here “without unnecessarily restrictive or arbitrary laws.”

The 35-page ordinance establishes about 250 minor offenses and accompanying fines.

The assembly is scheduled to vote on the ordinance at its meeting Tuesday.

An April 2013 state Supreme Court ruling requiring municipalities to create a fine schedule with precise amounts for violations spurred the ordinance. The court ruling effectively rendered the violations on the borough books unenforceable, as the violations couldn’t be entered into the state’s court system.

When the borough introducted the fine schedule and accompanying ordinance in June, residents raised concerns, including that some violations were overreaching and unnecessary and that enforcement is proposed to be done by employees other than police officers.

Critics also are concerned that the laws “don’t allow a reasonable opportunity for remedy” and would amount to “policing for profit.”

Mike Denker, who on Saturday chaired a meeting of Haines Citizens for Sensible Regulations, said his concerns include that the assembly to date has not received reports from borough committees that support postponing the ordinance.

Enforcement of minor offense laws also could lead to arbitrary enforcement or chaos, former assembly member Debra Schnabel told the group. “Thirty people an hour jaywalk on Main Street,” she said.

Schnabel said the length of the list of offenses is more than four times as long as one in Wrangell. “There’s a police state attitude in our code. We need to start adjusting our code,” she said.

Manager David Sosa, who has pushed for adoption of the full ordinance, this week was asked why it’s important that the ordinance is passed in its entirety now.

He responded via email: “We have an opportunity to provide more clarity to our code. We can make it easier for everyone to understand what offenses are in code and what are the fines associated with those offenses.

“The work we have done so far has identified elements of code that some people are uncomfortable with. I think it is great that we have been able to identify these concerns because now we can do something about it, and we will do something about it.

“Some people fear these changes and are of the belief that there is a plot to divest them of their rights. If that were the case, the simplest thing we could do is to leave the code as it currently exists. In the current configuration of code, people need to wade through multiple sections to figure out basic information about violations and fines.

“This ordinance changes that and gives people a better understanding of the law and gives them increased opportunity to do something about those elements of the law with which they disagree. This action helps empower change and will pave the way for a more informed citizenry and a more responsive government.”