minps 07-01-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ordinances of the City of Lakewood in order toupdate the Code so as to regulate the use of st mobile phones while driving in the City. (Placed on 1reading and referred to Public Safety nd 1/22/19; 2reading 2/4/19) Chairman Bullock deferred to Director Butler to explain changes made to Ordinance 05-19 and its impact on the existing code. Council President O’Leary introduced a version that banned use of mobile phones while driving, which includes dialing, talking, answering, and listening. Since the ordinance’s introduction, the Law Department noted that Section 331.5 of the code already bans texting while driving and could simply be updated with the President O’Leary’s proposed regulations. This would avoid creating confusion in the traffic code. The committee discussed with Chief Malley the differences in driving-related citations and how they are reported by police. It was determined that citations focusing on not having adequate stopping distance are the cleaner and clearer citations for police to write, as opposed to attention related citations. The committee debated amongst itself the standard by which city council should want to regulate the behavior of using mobile phones while driving. Chairman Bullock noted that the current laws are strict but have a long series of exceptions. President O’Leary expressed a desire for council to remain tough in its language of the law but allow for a period of time where the city take a public education approach to the matter. The committee talked about specifics of the ordinance and whether its passage could affect Uber/Lyft drivers or drivers of lesser means who do not have cars with hands free Bluetooth systems. Some members expressed concern that section 7 of the legislation effectively bans Uber/Lyft services, while others stated that the law will merely require those drivers to pull over and park their cars in order to accept a new pickup address. It was noted by Mayor Summers that anything that requires more than 2 seconds of distraction puts drivers in peril. There were questions as to whether there was any state law concerning a ban on mobile phone use while talking.Director Butler clarified that there is no state law banning this type of legislation from being passed by a municipality and noted that signs notifying drivers of the law must be placed at the city’s borders if it were to pass.There wasalsodiscussion as to whether there is any age distinction in the law, such as making a violation a primary offense for younger drivers and a secondary offense for more seasoned drivers. It was determinedthat there is no age distinction in the law and that President O’Leary intended it to be a primary offense, based on a police officer seeing someone use a phone while driving and citing that action. Chairman Bullock discussed the benefits of a distracted driving law. It was concluded that it is underreported, similar to drunken driving, and should be made a primary offense. The administration should take on a major enforcement effort along with a public education effort. President O’Leary reviewed technological options that can enable people to talk on the phone while keeping both hands on the wheel. Councilwoman George warned of an impact on lower income drivers who may not have modern cars equipped with hands free technology. Mayor Summers highlighted that New York state’s vigorous enforcement on distracted driving, as it is considered a primary offense on the state’s highways. Chief Malley gauged that enforcing