City Council Minutes 2008 04 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes April 15, 2008 Page 6 of 10 Prosecuting Attorney Martin Staab explained the Court Staff reviews legislative changes on an ongoing basis. The State reviewed misdemeanor limits and increased the maximum amount of jurisdiction on municipal shoplifting and theft. Mayor Sisk opened the public hearing and requested the comments of City Attorney Light, City Clerk Varira and Prosecuting Attorney Staab be included in the records. He noted Mr. Randy Luallin spoke at the first reading of the ordinance and requested his comments also be included. PUBLIC COMMENT Randy Luallin, 301 East StreE;t, Louisville, CO addressed Ordinance No. 1532, Series 2008, which Council reviewed on first reading. He expressed concern over the proposed provisions of the parked trailers, inoperable vehicles and harassment. He was concerned over the language relative to parking an inoperable vehicle on private property. He read from the State Constitution, Section 10 -Freedom of Speech and asked the ordinance's section on harassment be removed as it restricts freedom of speech. (comments from April 1, 2008 meeting) Eva Koskinski, 1301 Jackson Court, Louisville, CO was relieved Subsection B - of Harassment was deleted. She asked whether the ordinance violations would be written into the municipal or county court. Prosecuting Attorney Staab explained violations of local concern are written into the municipal court. Ms. Kosinski asked if the fines collected are the property of the City of Louisville. Prosecuting Attorney Staab confirmed the fines collected are the City's. Ms. Kosinski addressed inoperable vehicles and urged the City to consider using the County's mediation service in lieu of writing violators into the municipal court. She voiced her concern the ordinance is intended to correct a cash flow problem for the City. Mayor Sisk stated the ordinance is not being considered to correct a cash flow problem and noted the City is in good financial condition. Ms. Kosinski stated she could see no reason other than financial for choosing this path when other alternatives are available and if the Council is asking people who have lived here for years; to make sacrifices, they had better have a good reason for it rather than just a~ small number of complaints. City Attorney Light addressee Mr. Luallin's concern relative to keeping an inoperable vehicle on private property and noted the ordinance does not apply to any vehicle in a fully enclosed structure, nor in connection to any business operating within the City, or to outdoor covered vehicles. The change to the