I have to respectfully disagree with you there Kathy. Ordinances codify limits to behavior as well as intrusion by government. That includes the misuse of governmental instruments (police, code enforcement) by people for their own interests. By enacting a reasonable ordinance for the keeping of bees, everyone is held to an objective standard. As it stands now, a catch-all nusance ordinance can be misused to limit beekeeping within this city. These, very broad codes are subjectively interpreted and do more damage to people's rights than a limited, precise code.
You're correct that it's likely that the beekeeper may be unhappy with the number of hives that he may be allowed after the ordinance is passed, but the complainant is likely to be just as unhappy that he didn't get beekeeping outlawed. that's called a reasonable compromise. The truth is that too many hives in a densely populated area WILL impact the community. There are beekeepers in downtown NYC who succesfully keep bees. They practice it in a reasonable manner to minimize impact.
Your definition of "actual harm" is also subjective. A homeowner's right to watch his grandchildren play in his yard is just as important as a beek's right to keep bees. If he is petrified of bees, he can't enjoy his property. That's actual harm. All of us know that living next to 33 hives is different than 4 hives. Fighting against a reasonable compromise in this case will probably doom beekeeping in this jurisdiction.
I also disagree with you in thinking that it's us against the government. Like you, I also love the Constitution. We ARE the governmemt, and the governement is US.