Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance:fines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodstock council reviews ordinance to raise fines for motorists who cut across private or non‑thoroughfare public property
Summary
Council discussed an ordinance that leaves existing language intact but increases fines for drivers who cross private property or areas not intended as thoroughfares to avoid traffic signals; no vote or fee amounts were recorded in the work session transcript.
Woodstock — Council members and staff discussed an ordinance on the maintenance work‑session agenda that would increase penalties for motorists who drive across private property or public property “not designed or intended to be [a] thoroughfare” to avoid a traffic signal or intersection. City staff read the ordinance title at the start of the item: “It’s amending article 11 of chapter 29 driving across private property and public property not designed or intended to be thoroughfare access to avoid traffic signal, control device, or intersection.”
City staff clarified the proposal is not new rulemaking but an adjustment to enforcement penalties, saying: “The ordinance is identical to the 02/2008 ordinance as you just alluded to. All it does is increase the fees for violations.”
Mayor Barrett said he supported the change and expressed hope it would reduce dangerous driving: “I would be thrilled if this ordinance was enough to stop people from doing this. It’s very reckless and, in my opinion, reckless and dangerous move that we see people… and I’m just hoping that, we can stop or curb that practice to some extent.”
The transcript of this work session does not record a council vote on the ordinance nor any specific fee amounts. The discussion in the session limited itself to confirming that the language of the ordinance mirrors the 2008 ordinance and that the current proposal raises penalties; no formal motion or final action is shown in the provided transcript.
Council members asked no additional substantive changes during the excerpted discussion. Next formal steps (scheduling for a vote or publishing the revised fee schedule) were not specified in the recorded segment.
