06-10-74 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JUNE 10 1974 ICOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED) (rules and regulations. Councilman Parent stated that the ordinance that the Public Safety Committ had proposed eliminated the ordinance passed on April 8. He could see no reason to pass this ordinance. Council President Nemeth stated that this ordinance was filed on May 1, a couple weeks prior to the filing of another ordinance pertaining to bicycles. At this time, Council President Nemeth made a motion to combine the public hearings on both bicycle ordinances, seconded by Councilman Kopczynski. The motion carried. ((ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20, VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA (bicycles). This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on the above ordinance, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard. Councilman Parent made the presentation for the ordinance. He talked about the history of the bicycle ordinance. He indicated that he desired to re -open the issue because of the many questions raised after the passage of the ordinance on ,April 8th. He stated that the ordinance passed on April 8th contained no great changes from the present code. He indicated that the Public Safety Committee held three public hearings and recommended that the following amendments be made to the ordinance: In Section 20 -31: Strike (c) and (d). In Section 20 -32: Insert "by a law enforcement officer" after the word "request" in the sixth line. In Section 20 -35: Insert "by a law enforcement officer" after the word "request" in the sixth line. In Section 20 -41: Eliminate this section. Section II to read as follows: Anyone who violates the provisions or a ticket. The penalty for such ($5.00),. However, no person shall within five (5) days from the time of the bicycle licensing sites, sa has been licensed. of this ordinance may be issued a warning ticket offense shall not be.more than Five Dollars be charged with violating this ordinance who, of apprehension, obtains and produces at any one tisfactory evidence that the bicycle in question In Section IV: Substitute "Section II" for "Section 20 -41" in the third line. Councilman Parent stated that the Public Safety Committee had decided that South Bend needed a bicycle licensing ordinance because the traffic laws in the community are enforced through a revo- cation of a bicycle licensing ordinance, and because of the many number of bicycle thefts. He stated that easy identification of the licensed bikes would help in returning the stolen and lost bicycles. He indicated that the main differences in the new ordinances were that those persons wh have a valid license would only pay 75� instead of $1.00 to license their bikes; that a bike fund would be established and all fees would be deposited in said fund; that impoundment fees have been eliminated and a police officer can give a warning ticket.or ticket for which there would be a maximum fine of $5.00 if the individual did not purchase a license within five days. Councilman Parent stated that the Public Safety Committee further recommended that the Mayor's Traffic Safety Commission establish a committee to deal with the problem of bicycles and traffic, etc. Mr. Jim Zechiel, 1031 East LaSalle Avenue, a representative of the Valley Wheelers Bicycle Club, stated that the club favored mandatory licensing. He felt it would facilitate the police in return stolen bikes. 'He read an article which appeared in the May, 1974, issue of the Bicycling Magazine regarding stolen bikes and registered and unregistered.bicycles. He talked about the negligence on the part of the owners in keeping their bikes locked. Mr. Roman Kowalski, 802 Birchwood, wondered if the bike owners should carry insurance similar to that being carried by.an automobile owner in case of injuries to another person. Councilman Parent indicated that the ordinance did not cover that; however, if the bicyclist injured a person, that person could recover damages. He stated that he had requested an opinion from the City Attorney regarding the possibility of licensing bike outside the city if the owner wished to do so, and it was indicated that this would be possible. Mr. Kowalski talked about the bikes that were never recovered that had been licensed. Police Chief Urban talked about the procedure used concerning a theft and the transfer of the bike out of the community. Mr. Ray Hernandez, 702 East South Street, a member of the Valley. Wheelers Bicycle Club, hoped the sections pertaining to negligence on the part of the owners in keeping their bikes locked would be retained as stated by Mr. Zechiel. He talked about the need of an effective bicycle licensing ordinance. He stated that this type of legislation could be utilized as a model legisla- tion in the hopes that the same method could be adopted on a county -wide basis. He indicated that the most undesirable section in the previous ordinance was the penalty being.placed on the bicycle owners, and the new proposed ordinance now removes that hardship to the bike owners. Mr. Robert Gonderman, 1126 Irvington Avenue, felt that the Public Safety Committee had set out to do a job and had worked hard in the preparation of the proposed ordinance. He felt that the proposed ordina removed many of the punitive provisions contained in the previous ordinance. He talked about an instance when he had bikes stolen from his garage. He felt that, if South Bend showed this kind of leadership, other communities would follow and it would soon become a hardship for the bicycle thie in trying to resell the stolen bikes. Mr. Patrick Gallagher, Director of the Department of Public Safety, talked about a national computer program operating out of Dayton, Ohio. He felt that this would not be as effective in a city the size of South Bend. He stated that the statistics are that 300 bikes were stolen at Notre Dame and only 1 was recovered. He indicated that the city was experiencing the highest rate so far of 33 %. Bike thefts were down in May 29% over last May. This year, there has been a 12 -14% decrease. He talked about the computerization of the bikes at the computer center. Mr. Henry Vogtmann, 2610 Eisenhower, expressed support of the proposed ordinance. He felt that the ordinance provided reasonable service to the citizens of South Bend and further that it provided the surplus funds to go back to those persons "paying the tab ". He, too, cited an instance when his daughter's bike had been stolen and returned because the name was engraved on the bicycle. He felt that, simply because there was some sort of identification, the bike had been returned, and the proposed ordinance would provide that identification. Council President Nemeth indicated that many citizens objected to the previous ordinance passed by the Council on April 8th. He felt that the previous ordinance was not enforced, and he believed in the voluntary system that a person may or may not license his bike. IlCouncil President Nemeth made a motion to amend the ordinance as follows: In Sec. 20 -31, delete paragraphs (c) and (d). .ng e