Consent 1.H.
Regular City Council Meeting
- Meeting Date:
- 08/09/2010
- TITLE
- Cell Phone/Texting While Driving Ordinance – 2nd Reading
- PRESENTED BY:
- Craig C. Hensel, Deputy City Attorney
- Department:
- Legal
Presentation:
PROBLEM/ISSUE STATEMENT
Pursuant to a Council Initiative, the City Attorney’s Office was directed to research a ban on text messaging and/or cell phone usage while driving an automobile and to draft a proposed ordinance banning varying degrees of cell phone usage while driving. The Council also directed development of an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Distracted Driving Prevention. The attached ordinance was presented to the City Council during a Work Session on July 6, 2010. Members of the Ad Hoc Committee also presented statistics and data collected from multiple sources detailing the dangers of distracted driving. The Ad Hoc Advisory Committee unanimously recommended approval of the proposed ordinance. A public hearing and first reading were held at the City Council meeting on July 26, 2010, and the ordinance was passed on first reading. The proposed ordinance has a delayed effective date of October 31, 2010, to allow sufficient time to educate the public about the new ordinance.
The City Attorney has prepared several brief proposed edits intended to clarify perceived ambiguities in the ordinance which were raised during and after the Council meeting on July 26th, and to expand the exemptions to include “emergency responders”. The brief edits to the ordinance made after First Reading are inserted in Attachment “A” and shown by strikethrough and underlined text. A clean copy of the the proposed ordinance reflecting these latest edits is attached as Attachment “B”.
The City Attorney has prepared several brief proposed edits intended to clarify perceived ambiguities in the ordinance which were raised during and after the Council meeting on July 26th, and to expand the exemptions to include “emergency responders”. The brief edits to the ordinance made after First Reading are inserted in Attachment “A” and shown by strikethrough and underlined text. A clean copy of the the proposed ordinance reflecting these latest edits is attached as Attachment “B”.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED
The Council may: pass the ordinance on second reading; or
Not pass the ordinance on second reading.
Not pass the ordinance on second reading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no anticipated cost to the City to enact any of these ordinances.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Council approve the attached ordinance on 2nd reading.