Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews overhaul of towing ordinance, grapples with state preemption and yard-distance rules
Summary
Council held a first reading of a repeal-and-replace towing ordinance to align local code with recent state law changes; staff and city counsel warned about state preemption, and council debated how far vehicle-storage facilities (yards) should be allowed to be from town (10 miles in draft vs. suggested 1–5 miles or ETJ).
City staff presented a proposed repeal-and-replace towing ordinance designed to align Decatur’s code with recent state legislative changes that preempt some municipal regulation of towing and vehicle-storage facilities.
City counsel explained a 2023 uniformity act limited areas where cities can regulate towing and vehicle storage; the draft ordinance was intentionally circumscribed to avoid conflicts with state occupation-code requirements while preserving the city’s authority over essential health, safety and welfare functions. Staff noted an earlier local litigation matter in JP court where charges were found excessive because the ordinance did not specify certain fees.
The draft includes a schedule of fees (Appendix A, not yet provided), new definitions and an approach to rotational tow lists. Staff noted the draft currently references a 10-mile maximum distance for vehicle-storage facilities (measured from the Wise County courthouse in the current draft); council members expressed concern about forcing citizens to travel long distances to retrieve property and suggested a smaller radius (1–5 miles or using city limits/ETJ language instead). Council also discussed response-time expectations and whether the city can legally set response-time standards given state preemption.
Council asked staff and counsel to revise the draft (including Appendix A), to confirm how the 10-mile figure was chosen and to return with clarified options that balance consumer protection and enforcement under state law. No vote was taken; the item remains at first reading.
