Proposed parking ordinance actually does contain goofy panhandling provision

Two days ago, when I first wrote about the proposed parking ordinance the City Council is scheduled to consider at its Tuesday evening meeting, I said this revised edition replaced the anti-panhandling plank in the original with one that put it in its proper context. Upon further review, upon additional study, this decision is being reversed. There’s no question that this proposal, which is identified on the council’s agenda as one designed "to prescribe the lawful time, manner and place for parking, stopping and/or standing of automobiles and trailers upon both public rights of way and private property" does much more than that. It does try to sneak in an anti-panhandling provision in there and it also contains an entire section on the use of wireless hand-held communication devices that could be completely nullified by action in the upcoming special session of the Texas Legislature.

First things first, however. That panhandling prohibition. Don’t get me wrong. I whole-heartedly support a ban on panhandlers. They can be a nuisance at best, dangerous and life-threatening at worse. I must also admit, however, in my almost three years as a Kyle resident, I have not once been troubled by a panhandler. In any case, if the city seeks such a ban, it should be in a completely different ordinance than one that regulates "parking, stopping and/or standing of automobiles" if, as it is in this case, the guilty party is going to be the panhandler, not the motorist.

But there it is in all its glory. Section 47.33 (c) reads "It is unlawful for a person to loiter in medians or near corners, sidewalks, crosswalks or intersections of congested roads for the solicitation of money." As an anti-panhandling ordinance, that's as straightforward as one can be. Now, if the section said it was unlawful for a motorist to stop his or her vehicle on congested roads to provide money, food or other aide to someone loitering in medians or near corners, sidewalks, crosswalks or intersections of said roads, then it would belong in this proposed ordinance. Because then the guilty party is the operator of the motor vehicle. But in this case, if someone is cited for violating this section it is clearly going to be the panhandler which, ipso facto, makes it anti-panhandling ordinance, which simply doesn’t fit here.

However, I can assure you such legalities have never stopped our local council from passing such non-sequiturs in the past, it will not stop them from passing this one Tuesday and will do absolutely nothing to keep them from doing it again many times in the future. And one could argue that goofiness has its own sense of charm. I, for one, have that type of personality where I can wear the fact that I live in a city with goofy ordinances that make no sense as a badge of honor. Going strictly by the book all the time is boring. C’mon, no harm, no foul, as "they" say.

Speaking of goofy, I still haven’t even spotted, let alone gotten my hands on, one of those "newspapers with a reflective vest" that’s referred to in Section 47.33 (c) (2) of the proposed ordinance.

Now to that second point.

One of the cardinal sins in my profession is to make assumptions, but on the moral ledger that is the account of my life, making the assumption I’m about to make is going to rank so significantly low that the morality police will stop reviewing my misdeeds long before they get to this one.

This version of the parking ordinance, which is labeled a second reading, but is actually an entirely new version of the one bounced to the city’s legal department on first reading, contains a section that wasn’t even included in the original — a ban on the use of hand-held wireless communications devices while operating a motor vehicle or bicycle. It begins right there at Section 47-187 of the proposed ordinance.

Now as a small handful of Kyle residents are aware, the city council has already passed such an unenforceable ordinance. (I say "a small handful" and "unenforceable" because I personally witness, at the minimum, three motor vehicle operators a day talking on a wireless phone while driving in Kyle. I will admit I’ve never seen someone using one while riding a bicycle.)

Now here’s the assumption I’m leaping to here. In the vernacular that’s so popular these days in our nation’s capitol, this proposal is a "repeal and replace," not just an addition to. And my assumption is the repeal includes an unavoidable repealing of those sections of the city’s code that currently contain the ban on using hand-held devices. This, then, is the necessary replacement mechanism.

Of course, the entire effort could be rendered moot by our happy-go-lucky legislature, the members of which appear to be so ego-driven they consider themselves the only elected officials in the entire state who are competent enough to make laws. One of the measures the governor is seeking passage of during the special session, that also begins Tuesday, is one that would (1) ban texting while driving throughout Texas and (2) prohibit local municipalities from passing any regulations governing the use of such communication devices and nullify any and all local provisions that are currently on local books regulating such uses.

So there’s that.

Two council members – Hervol, Tenorio – try in vain to keep city from raising property taxes

Here’s the scorecard: Council members Diane Hervol and Daphne Tenorio fought hard at last night’s City Council meeting to prevent a property tax increase. Mayor Todd Webster, Mayor Pro Tem David Wilson, and council members Becky Selbera, Shane Arabie and Damon Fogley fought just as hard to raise the tax rate and ultimately prevailed.

Perhaps those advocating for no rate increase can take solace in the fact that it could have been worse. The city manager’s proposed budget would have raised the tax rate from $.4870 per $100 valuation effective rate to $.6145. By the time the council completed its spending spree last night, the tax rate stood at $.5848. That means the owner of a median priced home in Kyle will see the city’s share of his property tax increase from $1,076.27 annually to $1,292.41 instead of $1,358.05.

One of the more interesting votes of the evening came when Mayor Todd Webster recommended adding four more police officers and two more police vehicles than the city manager had proposed to the budget. The vote on that idea was 6-1 with Arabie casting the one "nay" vote.

The council also wisely, I think, increased funding to the Kyle Chamber of Commerce by $32,000 but still clings to the belief that the Greater San Marcos Partnership will do the city some huge economic development favor and voted to keep funneling money to that organization. I’m apologize for not sharing their optimism on this subject. I would rather the council use that money to join with the local Chamber and others to fund its own Greater Kyle Economic Development Corporation, but then I’m a "root, root, root for the home team" kind of guy, which, perhaps, is the reason I purchased season tickets to Lehman’s and Hays’s football games. I do not know Kyle Chamber CEO Julie Snyder well, but I have been positively impressed by what I have seen from a distance of her in action. The council did, however, add $25,000 for generic "economic development."

Of course, a lot of pork barrel was added at the last minute last night including a whopping $700,000 to fund a drastically overpriced (according to city staff) one-half mile sidewalk project along Rebel Road between Center Street and Silverado Drive (courtesy of Wilson) and another council member’s contribution to a friend’s slush friend by handing over $30,000.to the library, while, at the same time, gutting programs that provide funds to such much-needed programs as Meals on Wheels and area food banks.

Only Selbera and Wilson sided with the mayor when he tried to strip away the additional protective equipment for fire fighters which had been approved at the council’s budget workshop last month.

The council also voted to set aside $10,000 to pay for a salary increase for City Manager Scott Sellers following his performance review which will take place at the end of the year.

Your tax dollars at work.

In other action last night the council voted unanimously to approve a pair of unenforceable ordinances, one prohibiting a number of vehicles from parking in Kyle neighborhoods and another banning the use of hand-held electronic devices even though many studies, including this one from the National Safety Council, argue that hands-free electronic devices are just as dangerous. But although such ordinances are not effective, they are fashionable and heaven knows Kyle wants to be fashionable. I will still argue that if the council had the courage of its convictions it would have amended the hand-held ordinance to increase the fines of those found disobeying the ordinance in school zones during school hours.

Hand-held ban to include bicyclists

It appears it might be OK for this guy to use a hand-held device will driving in Kyle

 

The proposed ordinance to go before the City Council Tuesday would not only prohibit the operators of motor vehicles from using hand-held electronic devices but would also apply to bicyclists as well. Violators could be fined up to $500 (or more for a third violation), although no fines will be issued between the date the ordinance goes into effect and Nov. 1.
 

 A public hearing is scheduled prior to the council’s debate on the proposal for those citizens who would like to make their opinions known.
 

The following devices would be included in the ban: a "text-messaging device or other electronic, two-way communication device that uses a commercial mobile service ... mobile telephones, personal digital assistants (PDA), MP3 or other portable music players, electronic reading devices, laptop computers or tablets, portable computing devices, portable global positioning or navigation systems, pagers, electronic game devices and broadband personal communication devices." The use of hands-free electronic devices are permitted.
 

There will be some exceptions to the rule including reporting a possible illegal activity, communicating with an emergency response operator, a medical emergency, or if there is some other reason to believe a person’s "life or safety is in immediate danger."
 

The prohibition will be in effect even if the vehicle in question is not moving — stopped at a red light, for instance. However, someone in the driver’s seat of a vehicle may use a device if a car is parked, presumably in a legitimate parking space with the ignition off. "For the purposes of this ordinance, ‘parked’ does not mean a vehicle stopped in a lane of traffic due to either a lawful traffic control device, or the conditions on the roadway, or traffic congestion patterns then existing," the proposed ordinance reads.
 

Specifically, here are the activities operators of motor vehicles and bicycles could not do under the proposed ordinance:

• Engage in a call
• Send, read or write a text message
• Take or view pictures or written text whether transmitted by internet or other electronic means, or access or view an internet website or software application
• Engage in gaming
• Engage in any other use of the device while operating a motor vehicle. This includes holding the hand-held wireless communication device.

 

No fines will be attached to offenses until Nov. 1 "so that an educational effort by the City of Kyle may be conducted to inform the public about the importance and requirements" of the ordinance. However, beginning Nov. 1 offenders can be fined anywhere from $100 to $500 for a first offense, between $200 and $500 for a second offense and a minimum $500 fine for a third offense.

(Personal note: I wouldn't mind seeing the fines doubled if the offense occurred within a school zone.)