My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-10-11 Common Council Meeting Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
2011
>
01-10-11 Common Council Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2011 12:07:29 PM
Creation date
3/30/2011 12:06:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 10, 2011 <br /> Councilmember Henry Davis stated that he is trying to work with the sponsors of the bill <br /> so that they can make sure some of these things are being taken care of <br /> Kathy Cekanski-Farrand advised that because of the public safety concerns that they <br /> started last spring in giving a draft ordinance to the Council and the Administration. She <br /> stated that this is a good example of the administration sending all of their concerns <br /> which have been incorporated into the substitute bill to give again a mechanism, a tool <br /> for them to try address what has clearly been a safety factor now in a better way. She <br /> stated that if they don't provide that mechanism and continue to improve upon it they will <br /> never make any progress in this area. <br /> Councilmember Varner stated that he appreciates everyone's efforts on this bill. <br /> However, there are two things that strike him, one is that Ms. Toppel stated that during <br /> major snow falls the city goes out and cleans the sidewalks, why would he want to make <br /> his constituents fully responsible and place a burden on them for something the city can <br /> do. Secondly, what is a major snowfall? He stated that he is all in favor of public <br /> awareness and getting the word out to the citizens of South Bend, but what constitutes a <br /> major snowfall. He stated that a major snowfall is when the City determines that it is a <br /> major snowfall and his constituents are subject to a fine. He stated that it going to have <br /> to be defined or the Mayor's Office is going to have to define it. Other than that it <br /> becomes way too arbitrary however well it intended is meant to be and he does appreciate <br /> that. He stated that he is going to get calls from his constituents because this thing is too <br /> way open ended and some people are going to get cited while others are not. This has <br /> happened with parking tickets as well; someone got a ticket when the car either behind <br /> them or in front of them did not. He stated that if we could come up with some <br /> reasonable definitions telling people exactly what is going to happen then he would be <br /> okay with it. But this bill is way too arbitrary. <br /> Councilmember Puzzello stated that there is one very helpful tool that she is hopeful that <br /> they will be using and that is the Mayor's Public Service Announcements. She stated that <br /> he had on Saturday, noting that people should stay off the streets and roads unless in case <br /> of an emergency and will add to that if there is enough snow so that they are worried <br /> about sidewalk shoveling and will be keeping a close watch on schools, hospitals and <br /> churches and anything else that may be important. <br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis questioned that people cannot be fined with the ordinance <br /> that is currently on the books? <br /> Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand advised that the mechanism that the City of South Bend <br /> currently has is when the city through the Department of Code Enforcement goes there <br /> and removes the snow and then charges for that removal which is estimated at <br /> approximately $109.00, because in the listing of ordinance violation it shows $15.00 and <br /> does not show an amount in the guts of the ordinance there is no enabling legislation that <br /> authorizes that $15.00, it is merely a listing. <br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis stated that this has been on the books since 1972, and <br /> questioned that no citations have been issued because of this. <br /> Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand stated that to her knowledge there have been citations issued <br /> and if they had been challenged they could have been overturned. And that is why they <br /> are trying to close that loophole. <br /> Councilmember Rouse stated that Councilmember Varner wanted to know why the bill <br /> wasn't presented as closing a loop hole. <br /> Councilmember Varner stated that it doesn't change his decision that he will be making <br /> tonight, but wanted to know why it wasn't presented as such. <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.