Laserfiche WebLink
no one was opposed to that, but there was opposition to a bill that would reduce the ability of people to use <br />lighting to provide increased security. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said she would like to prohibit all lights at night. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor wanted more information. He wanted to know who currently used mercury vapor lamps and what <br />the current disposal system for them was. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor provided the second. The motion passed, 2:1, Ms. Taylor dissenting. <br /> <br />SB 642 <br /> <br />Ms. Wilson stated that there had been a hearing on SB 642 but it was unlikely that it would advance. She <br />noted that State Senator Vicki Walker had a lot of problems with the bill. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor averred that she never supported excluding anyone. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor moved to change the stance on the bill to Priority 3 Support. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor asked what the usual practice was in terms of how the City treated a person convicted of a crime <br />as opposed to someone who had been arrested. Mr. Cushman replied that the exclusion zone the City had <br />instituted on the downtown mall several years earlier was based on the arrest. He said people were not <br />typically penalized until after they had been convicted because of being presumed innocent until proven <br />guilty. However, he explained, the issue with the exclusion zones was that should a person be arrested for <br />dealing drugs, the time between that arrest and the subsequent trial could be significant. He averred that if a <br />person was excluded from an area there was potential that the behavior could be stopped during that period <br />of time. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor found the exclusion of people based on arrest to be troublesome. <br /> <br />Mr. Cushman stated that the bill preempted a jurisdiction from establishing an exclusion zone. Regarding <br />Mr. Pryor’s concern, he said local jurisdictions can establish the kinds of criteria for an exclusion zone, the <br />length could be limited and an appeal process could be part of it. Additionally, he noted that the Hearings <br />Official could separately establish probably cause for the arrest. <br /> <br />The motion died for lack of a second. <br /> <br />HB 3157 <br /> <br />Mr. Cushman stated that senior patrol enforced handicapped parking. He said this bill would allow the <br />volunteer patrol to ticket people with forged permits. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor said he would change the stance to a Priority 1 Support. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor preferred to adopt a neutral stance. Ms. Bettman ascertained from her colleagues that there <br />would be no second. <br /> <br />The staff recommendation to Support the bill as a Priority 3 Support stood. <br /> <br />HB 2839 <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 12, 2007 Page 7 <br />