My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-24-02 Council Meeting Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
2002
>
06-24-02 Council Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/17/2013 10:24:38 AM
Creation date
4/17/2013 9:38:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Council Mtg Minutes
City Counci - Date
6/24/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 <br />JUNE 24, 2002 <br />Ms. Rita Kopala, 66559 Ivy Road, Lakeville, Indiana, stated that she is against the loitering <br />ordinance. She noted that in 1998 she picketed the Century Center and was arrested for trespassing <br />and put in jail. In September of 2000 she picketed the College Football Hall of Fame and was again <br />arrested and put in jail. In 2001 the police picketed the same places and they were not even issued <br />a ticket. Ms. Kopala noted that she was using her first amendment rights the same as the police <br />were when they picketed for their raises. Now a law is being considered for arresting people for <br />loitering. She stated that nothing stopped the powers that be from arresting her in the past so why <br />would the City now need a loitering ordinance. She noted that she is 65 years old and was never <br />arrested before in her life. She asked that the City be very careful what ordinances are allowed as <br />she was intimidated by the very people who are supposed to protect her. <br />Ms. Cheryl Ashe, 3830 Langley Drive, South Bend, Indiana, advised that she understands problems <br />people have in dealing with drugs but believes the Council must look at what this ordinance says. <br />She is concerned about what individuals have said tonight which is that they know who belongs in <br />their neighborhood. How do they know who belongs in their neighborhood? Additionally, she is <br />concerned about the neighborhood associations making decisions about this ordinance. Her concern <br />is that this ordinance will be used basically to target young men because the neighborhood doesn't <br />like the way they wear their hair or their clothes and will be used to correct behavior that is not <br />illegal. She questions how someone will be able to tell the difference between gang members <br />standing on a corner for a legitimate reason. While people may dislike gang members, they also <br />have a legitimate right to stand on the corner. One of the biggest problems she has is the concept <br />that one neighborhood may vote that they want a law enforced in their neighborhood and another <br />neighborhood may vote that they do not want the law enforced in their neighborhood. She stated <br />that if the law is good, then the law should be good enough for the entire City. Additionally, Ms. <br />Ashe noted that she is concerned about how it was decided that the neighborhood associations will <br />make this decision. Having belonged to a neighborhood association she knows that they can be very <br />inclusive or very exclusive as it all depends upon the members. Ms. Ashe stated that she believes <br />that this ordinance needs to be a referendum where everyone who is legally of age can vote because <br />this ordinance will affect everyone. She asked the Council to do some serious consideration of this <br />ordinance and asked that they tell the public how the police will be trained. She further stated that <br />this ordinance may not be the panacea that the Council thinks it is. <br />Mr. Jim Cierzniak, 1156 East Victoria Street, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he is against drug <br />trafficking and gang loitering and asked the Council to beef up the laws and not go through the <br />charade of pretending that it all comes from the neighborhoods. Mr. Cierzniak questioned having <br />the neighborhood groups making these decisions and stated that he believes that leaving this <br />particular aspect to neighborhood associations makes the Council derelict in their duties as they <br />can't pass that obligation and responsibility along to someone else. He also questioned the idea that <br />the police will need hours and hours of training. As stated, the police need to know that a group <br />of people talking while standing on the street corner doesn't necessarily mean they are loitering. Mr. <br />Cierzniak noted that if the City needs tougher laws then they should be for the entire City. However, <br />suddenly the City will have laws chosen by neighborhoods. He noted that the Council was elected <br />and citizens know who they are and they conduct public meetings for input. He further noted that <br />he would rather go with what the Council says as far as toughening up the law and laws should be <br />enforced uniformly throughout the City. He asked that the Council turn down the ordinance when <br />the time comes. <br />There was no one else present wishing to speak to the Council concerning this matter. <br />In rebuttal, Councilmember Pfeifer stated that she would like to address and clarify the issue of <br />training for the police. She noted that police officers have been involved and support this ordinance <br />and have asked for training. They are not going to be trained to decide whether groups of people <br />are gang members or not but to know various aspects including the locations of the designated areas. <br />Councilmember King noted that another reason for the training is that there are constitutional issues <br />In <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.