Board of Aldermen — 3/22/16 Page 15
MOTION BY ALDERMAN LEBRUN FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF R-16-019
MOTION CARRIED
Resolution R-16-019 declared duly adopted.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS — ORDINANCES
O-16-003
Endorsers: Mayor Jim Donchess
Alderman Ken Siegel
Alderman Don LeBrun
ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCES
Given its second reading;
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO AMEND O-16-003 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH THE
GOLDEN ROD COPY PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Siegel
In the tradition of ex-alderman Chasse, | will describe the brief changes. There were just a couple things in the
Table 4-1. The first NRO should be 170-2 instead of 170-3. The next line should be He-P 2303.01 + .02 (a)-
(0) instead of He-P 2303.01 + .02 (a)-(m). It’s a mouthful but that’s the changes. They are just referencing the
enabling ordinances.
MOTION CARRIED
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL FOR FINAL PASSAGE OF O-16-003 AS AMENDED
Alderman Siegel
| appreciate everybody coming out, both tonight for the public hearing that was held and for other meetings in
committee. I’d like to just go through a brief history. | don’t know how brief this can be; this is the thing
everybody has been concerned about. The thought behind this legislation came out of meetings that were held
over the course of several months of the Substandard Housing Committee. The thing | want to echo
immediately is that this legislation is not about substandard housing per se. It would have been nice if the
legislation had gone to that committee only because we had discussed it in there. | think that committee was
the natural vetting point. However, it went to Personnel/Administrative Affairs which is fairly traditional so that
is not an unusual decision. It’s just there might have been some confusion there. | just want to address some
of the comments that were made about being blindsided and confusion. That was the change that | believe
Ms. Marchant was referring to. It wasn’t a change of committee per se. It was where one thing was discussed
and where the legislation ended up. That’s what was going on there. One key takeaway here, if | had to sum
this up for everyone, and I’m going to go through what | believe are some of the concerns — | have taken note
of them and I’m going to try to address them as best as possible. The one thing that this involves is it is a
change to the enforcement of violations. The only thing that this affects is willful violators. Everything that is
listed in this ordinance, there’s a huge table, and | believe if you are not familiar with the blue book or other
things, the health code, the fire code, you could look at this legislation and say: “what the heck are they doing?”
We've got this brand new piece of legislation and there are four pages of tables with a bunch of fines
associated with that. In fact, this legislation changes absolutely nothing about the ordinances that govern what
code enforcement looks at, what the health department looks at, or what the fire department looks at. None of
that has changed. The only thing that is going on here is in the case of a willful violation, instead of going to
court to resolve the willful violation; the next step is equivalent to a parking ticket or some form of fine which is
an administrative fine. It is a step before going to court. Right now if you are a willful violator and you have
gotten to that point, we take you to court to enforce what’s defined already in the books. This is just a step
