Billings, Montana now RV-Unfriendly?

[Bob Sammons]

Hey BPF,
Thanks for the input.
To answer your question.
In my opinion when you see folks like KOA and The Affinity Group (Check out who they are at http://www.affinitygroup.com) actively instigating this in many states across the country it is a large scale and growing.
Bob Sammons
97 Monaco Dynasty

Sure there are times and places where restrictions are needed but what we are seeing today is a movement across the country to ban RV parking on a large scale.
Bob Sammons
97 Monaco Dynasty


Yes, many communities have covenants/restrictions on how you can park your RV at your home. That has been around for a long time. But I am not aware of what you describe in the part I "bolded" above.

BPF
1998 TowLite 18TD
1999 Chevy Silverado

[Bob Sammons]

This web site is attempting to create lists of all RV Unfriendly
places. It might be of help with the WalMart issue.

http://www.rvunfriendly.com/?

Bob Sammons
97 Monaco Dynasty

[rhandley]

I would'nt be so quick to name KOA as the culprit. This is an issue with RV Park associations, not any one single company. I tend to side with the park owners on an individual basis, not as a whole. They, after all are in "business" and do provide a service. They deserve to be treated as such and not condemed when they voice their concerns through civic process. I cant help but snicker every once and awhile when we pass a Wal-Mart and see folks in their RV''s with thier slides out and chairs out. These are the folks that are generating all the fuss.

[Bob Sammons]

Bill Halberstadt wrote:

> Does anyone have good evidence? If so, let's document it and use it to
> really get the ball
> rolling!

I don't think that Sue Bray would ever pick up the phone and call some
city's management suggesting that they prohibit overnighting. However,
over the years, Good Sam's strong support of the goals of the ARVC (the
National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds) has been made quite clear. I
would be looking to ARVC's policies and practices rather than those of
Good Sam. (I do not have any print in front of me, but I believe that I
have seen some clear statements by ARVC that an agenda item is the
reduction of overnighting at places other than campgrounds.)
--
Bob Clerc FMCA85268 SKP44893 SMART7666
02 Windsor 40PST @ Camp Monaco, Elkhart

Copied and posted by Bob Sammons

[Bob Sammons]

Escapees News Release

ARVC Encourages Member Campgrounds to Combat Free Parking
8/18/2004

In a recent website posting, entitled "Are You a Victim of "Free" Overnight Parking?", ARVC President Linda Profaizer advises campground owners who are "plagued by this all-too-common problem" to contact ARVC for assistance. Linda states that ARVC will "explain how to get local government to take action, provide model legislative language that can be applied in such situations, and encourage the formation of a network of RV parks and campgrounds that have been confronted by the problem of free overnight parking."

"This is definitely a step backward in my opinion," states Cathie Carr, Escapees CEO. "I really believed that we had made positive progress with the campground industry on this issue, but now we find that nothing has changed, despite exhaustive discussions to reach a reasonable middle ground between consumers and campground owners."

"We had hoped that, over the past couple of years, campground owners and their associations had come to terms with free parking options and realized that the perceived competition is simply not real. Escapees is also in the RV park and campground business, yet we view Wal-Mart and other RV friendly roadside businesses as nothing more than goodwill ambassadors to RVers. We know that RVers will always look to campgrounds, RV parks, and resorts for the services, amenities, and support that they need. Free parking options (like Wal-Mart provides) are occasionally the most sensible solution for RVers who are simply passing through an area and nothing more."

"We will continue to educate our members not to abuse these options and, at the same time, work to protect the choices and rights of RVers."

Cathie Carr, CEO
Escapees RV Club

--------------------------
At this time, Escapees is attempting to open a dialog with ARVC to address what appears to be a fundamental shift in their position on boondocking and free parking. If a call to action among RV consumers becomes necessary, we will certainly let you know. We hope that this issue can be resolved without the need for an adversarial relationship between RV owners and campground owners, as that will certainly have a negative effect on the very campgrounds that ARVC is intending to protect.

Copied and posted by Bob Sammons

[Bob Sammons]

This is the stated position of the ARVC before the Senate Committee on Government Affairs in Carson City, Nevada this year.
Folks these people are not the RVers friends.

Checkitout.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/73rd/Minu...Final/4090.pdf

Bob Sammons

[George Miklas]

Originally posted by BigPackFan:
If the CG owner was able to give away free food, clothes, RV supplies, etc. (the "stuff" you could buy at Wal-Mart), I'd be willing to bet that the WM corporation would make a stink over it. Obviously, an individual CG owner can't do that but that's exactly what WM is doing to the CG guy. WM is providing for free what the CG owner has to charge for. If somehow the shoe were on the other foot, you can bet the Walton family would not take it sitting down (based on their well-documented business practices).

I think that your point is in fact not "on point", but really out of proportion to invoke argument.

I think that Wal-Mart's discretion to allow people to park and sleep is no different than Flying J, TA, Pilot, Petro, Cracker Barrel, or the thousands of Roadside Rest Areas and Travel Plazas along the National highway system.

As so many have already submitted, they don't want to drive off-route to get to a campground (this can be 5-10 miles), then the extra time to check (this can be 30-40 minutes), when all they want to do is stop and go to bed. It just so happens to be that certain department stores and truckstops buy and develop property which has proximity to highway exits and are therefore more convenient than the location of most campgrounds in the area.

When professional drivers run their log books out of hours, they MUST pull over and stop for 8 hours logging it as "sleeper berth". Let's take this a step further. I wander if CG owners want to see 80,000# loaded rigs rolling through their gates to get their "sleeper berth" time.

Campgrounds have their place. Parking lots have their place too. Just because a person drives an RV, doesn't mean that they must sleep in a campground. And it doesn't mean that they should have regulations any more stringent than those placed upon professional drivers. For all intents and purposes, there are much less regulation on RVers than professional drivers.

Many things would likely change if there were a national agreement among states that required special RV licenses. Pennsylvania, for one, already has such a license. ALL owners of RVs over 26,001# GVWR in Pennsylvania are required to have a class B non-commercial operator's license. Owners of RVs pulling trailers greater than 10,001# in Pennsylvania are required to have a class A non-commercial license. Anyone with a Pennsylvania class C operators license AND driving a motor home over 26,001# GVWR or pulling a trailer over 10,001# is in violation of the law.

George

[Houndog]

Originally posted by Rick A:
Just my personal opinion! I seems people feel overnight parking on someone elses property is a right and not a privilidge and get very upset when that priviledge is taken away. I personally would be asking the question why is an ordinance that has never been enforced all the sudden being enforced and are the reasons for the ordinance being put in place to begin with still valid from 1967. The other question is what is their definition of "camping" ("It is
unlawful for any person to park any motor vehicle for <span class="ev_code_RED">camping purposes</span> in the city except in an authorized tourist park.") As this seems to be a growing trend "No Overnight Parking", everyone who wants to boycott a city because of this, will just be staying home in the future.

Rick has stated my thoughts on this as well..the people that cause these restrictions don't read these forums,,I mean the RV's that leave a mess,etc.

[Bob Sammons]

quote:
Originally posted by Rick A:
Just my personal opinion! I seems people feel overnight parking on someone elses property is a right and not a privilidge and get very upset when that priviledge is taken away. I personally would be asking the question why is an ordinance that has never been enforced all the sudden being enforced and are the reasons for the ordinance being put in place to begin with still valid from 1967. The other question is what is their definition of "camping" ("It is
unlawful for any person to park any motor vehicle for camping purposes in the city except in an authorized tourist park.") As this seems to be a growing trend "No Overnight Parking", everyone who wants to boycott a city because of this, will just be staying home in the future.

This quote misses the point completely. It gos without saying that when you park somewhere other than on your own property you are on someone elses property. And parking without permission is not legal anywhere.
This is about legal free parking, not camping,(I am aware of the fact that some folks don't know the difference) with the land owners permission.
No, I don't think "we will just be staying home in the future" but to the contrary we will be enjoying the facilities of the RV friendly places. This is not a boycott but rather the free market place at work in spite of a few and I do believe it is a few powerful people who claim to be RV friendly but in reality are trying control the money flow though their own coffers.
Some cities are already taking a second look at their past actions against RV parking. Others have taken an RV friendly position from the git go. The free market with the help of concerned RVers will sort this out and the RV unfriendlys will be identified and avoided. There are just too many of us and we spend a lot of money at their places.
Bill Gates became the richest man by giving away free and cheap software. Free parking is no threat to the campgrounds that meet the RVer's needs and many of them know that.
Out of the way places, small sites, poor water, narrow roads and higher prices just won't work for todays RVer.
Just my opinion,
Bob Sammons
97 Monaco Dynasty
03 Yukon XL

[BigPackFan]

Originally posted by George Miklas:
I think that your point is in fact not "on point", but really out of proportion to invoke argument.

Well, you'd be wrong about that George. And that's all I'll say about that assumption of yours.

Originally posted by George Miklas:
I think that Wal-Mart's discretion to allow people to park and sleep is no different than Flying J, TA, Pilot, Petro, Cracker Barrel, or the thousands of Roadside Rest Areas and Travel Plazas along the National highway system.

Here's the point I'm attempting to make. Flying J, TA & Pilot have two things in common - to cater to the traveler & to make money. Rest areas also cater to the traveler but they don't turn a profit. (By the way, I don't believe that it's legal in all 50 states to "overnight" in rest areas.) Your other examples, WM & Cracker Barrel, have a primary business goal of making money by serving a community. Sure, travelers make up some small percentage of their business but the vast majority comes from the people living in the immediate area which they service. These places offer "free overnight parking" as a way to bring in business to their stores, not because they believe they are providing a necessary service to RVers. CGs are upset because this takes away their business. WM & CB would be uspet if someone took some of their business by giving away free food. I don't think that's an unreasonable conclusion on my part.

Originally posted by George Miklas:
As so many have already submitted, they don't want to drive off-route to get to a campground (this can be 5-10 miles), then the extra time to check (this can be 30-40 minutes), when all they want to do is stop and go to bed. It just so happens to be that certain department stores and truckstops buy and develop property which has proximity to highway exits and are therefore more convenient than the location of most campgrounds in the area.

I would submit that if CGs only existed a half mile off the interstates that RVing would not be the big business that it is. What did campers 20 years ago do before WM? I imagine they drove to a CG.

Originally posted by George Miklas:
When professional drivers run their log books out of hours, they MUST pull over and stop for 8 hours logging it as "sleeper berth". Let's take this a step further. I wander if CG owners want to see 80,000# loaded rigs rolling through their gates to get their "sleeper berth" time.

Trucker's have truck stops specifically for them. Unfortunately, campers don't have similar facilities specifically for their use.

Originally posted by George Miklas:
Campgrounds have their place. Parking lots have their place too. Just because a person drives an RV, doesn't mean that they must sleep in a campground. And it doesn't mean that they should have regulations any more stringent than those placed upon professional drivers. For all intents and purposes, there are much less regulation on RVers than professional drivers.

IMO, campers should sleep in a place that was intended for camping & that's not a paved parking lot.

Originally posted by George Miklas:
Many things would likely change if there were a national agreement among states that required special RV licenses. Pennsylvania, for one, already has such a license. ALL owners of RVs over 26,001# GVWR in Pennsylvania are required to have a class B non-commercial operator's license. Owners of RVs pulling trailers greater than 10,001# in Pennsylvania are required to have a class A non-commercial license. Anyone with a Pennsylvania class C operators license AND driving a motor home over 26,001# GVWR or pulling a trailer over 10,001# is in violation of the law.

George

It wouldn't bother me in the least if RVers had to demonstrate a certain aptitude to earn a license endorsement of some sort.

[George Miklas]

BigPackFan, We are not going to agree. I am a consumer and believe in consumer's rights. I also believe in free enterprise for the businessman. In either case, governmental interference is unconstitutional. If campgrounds are guaranteed business because laws are passed, then where is the free enterprise and competition? Laws that dictate how I can freely move in this great constitutional republic are communist dictates, and not laws at all.

George

[Rick A]

I have no personal interest in whether a person parks for the night at Wal-Mart. Each of us has their own preference in how they travel. I do agree it is wrong for govermental inteference soley on the basis that one buisness' practice is interferring with anothers ability to do buisness. I believe FREE enterprise is part of doing buisness in this country. I do also believe that their are some valid reasons for banning overnight parking in some areas. One example is a Wal-Mart near Baltimore that has no overnight parking signs posted and they are enforced. This particular store is just off an interstate and would be very convienent for trucker's and RV'ers alike. No campground within 40 miles except for one, and they cater primarily to seasonal campers, not the overnighter. This is soley to keep the parking lot from turning into a used truck and RV lot over night.

[George Miklas]

Originally posted by Rick A:
...I do also believe that their are some valid reasons for banning overnight parking in some areas...

Hi Rick,
I understand and agree that in some areas, there maybe valid reasons. Though the feeling I'm getting from all of the various posts from various geographical locations on this subject, is that the phenomenon is wide spreading.

George

[Bob Sammons]

Well, you'd be wrong about that George. And that's all I'll say about that assumption of yours.


quote:
Originally posted by George Miklas:
I think that Wal-Mart's discretion to allow people to park and sleep is no different than Flying J, TA, Pilot, Petro, Cracker Barrel, or the thousands of Roadside Rest Areas and Travel Plazas along the National highway system.


Here's the point I'm attempting to make. Flying J, TA & Pilot have two things in common - to cater to the traveler & to make money. Rest areas also cater to the traveler but they don't turn a profit. (By the way, I don't believe that it's legal in all 50 states to "overnight" in rest areas.) Your other examples, WM & Cracker Barrel, have a primary business goal of making money by serving a community. Sure, travelers make up some small percentage of their business but the vast majority comes from the people living in the immediate area which they service. These places offer "free overnight parking" as a way to bring in business to their stores, not because they believe they are providing a necessary service to RVers. CGs are upset because this takes away their business. WM & CB would be uspet if someone took some of their business by giving away free food. I don't think that's an unreasonable conclusion on my part.

Great discussion and very good points by all but I agree with George.
Wal-Mart offers "free overnight parking" as a way to bring in business to their stores, not because they believe they are providing a necessary service to RVers. Most RVers that I have heard from say they spend from $50 to $100 almost every time they stop at a Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart has become a great place to restock almost anything one needs on their way to a campground somewhere that does not meet this need.

But this is not about parking at Wal-Mart. Its about free parking everywhere. Its about those organizations that claim to be the RVers friend in their publications and then try to use the cities to funnel our money back to their own pockets.

This is a perceived problem by the pinhead leaders of these groups and not a real threat to the campgrounds that provide good service at a reasonable price.

The "Camp on the Heart" (http://www.campontheheart.homestead.com) RV park in Dickinson, SD, responded to the opening of a WalMart in their town by offering free dry camping. They hope to earn a little revenue from dry campers at their restaurant and gift shop.
Beth, the owner of the "Camp on the Heart" RV park in Dikinson, ND and the OWNER COMFIRMED that YES RV's may dry camp FREE on her property, she has 30 acres in the grass with a river view available.(about 120 SW of Minot and 100 W of Bismarck)

She feels that why not attract potential customer with a comp, naturally those RV'ers should patronize her store and other facilities and, there will be a charge for using the dump station and other services. Perhaps if you wish to stay longer and pay for full hookups she probably can accomodate you.

Thanks for your time,
Bob Sammons
97 Monaco Dynasty
03 Yukon XL