Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee forwards proposed revisions to disruptive-property ordinance to council after staff, police review
Summary
The Government Operations Committee on May 5 voted to forward to the City Council proposed revisions to the city's Disruptive Property Ordinance that would expand the ordinance's scope and add two new disruption categories.
City Solicitor David Sopcak presented proposed revisions to the city's Disruptive Property Ordinance (Chapter 99) at the Government Operations Committee meeting on May 5 and the committee voted to forward the draft ordinance to the City Council for first reading.
Sopcak said the ordinance, originally passed in 2013, lists activities that can trigger a property being classified as "disruptive" when incidents accumulate within specified timeframes. Staff proposed four principal changes: add arrests for crime or civil infractions occurring at the property to the list of disruptive activities; add intoxication on public ways within 300 feet of the property to the list; remove the residential-only limitation so certain commercial properties that affect adjacent residential areas could be included; and remove the requirement that a building exist on the property so vacant lots used for disruptive activities could be covered.
Sopcak said the approach preserves the ordinance's progressive notice and enforcement steps but makes the definitions more objective and usable by police. A councilor asked whether the new wording would count incidents that did not result in arrest; Sopcak confirmed the proposed wording requires an arrest for the newly added arrest-based disruption category. Committee members discussed enforcement limitations and the importance of complaints and police documentation; Sopcak said the ordinance also contains a catchall for similar disruptive activity but that explicit definitions make enforcement easier.
A motion to forward the proposed revisions to the City Council for first reading was moved and seconded and carried; staff said the council will hold first reading and the second reading is typically where public comment and final vote occur. The committee noted the proposal could generate public comment and that the council could refer matters back to committee if needed after first reading.
