05/15/2001 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 5/15/2001 in detail last night and have been discussed on many occasions, and again the purpose is to increase the police presence on the street with no cost to the taxpayers. In addition, STOP officers on duty have apprehended stalkers, been the first to respond to major accidents, prevented a car theft and, as was mentioned as recently as this weekend, a STOP officer was credited with making the largest drug bust that this city has ever seen-simply by being on the street, being alert and attuned to suspicious activity and being in the right place at the right time when needed. Additional facts are that the program does pay for itself. The number of tickets have gone up. However, with twenty-five percent more officers on the street, that would be expected. Arise in the number of tickets issued does not automatically translate into a rise in bad tickets. The discussions with residents who were concerned about tickets that they have received, their question was: "How do we know it was a STOP ticket?" That was not determined. So it could have been a ticket of any officer on duty. The fact is, through this program, we have more officers on the street for the safety of the residents. She is concerned about the objection to the ordinance and objection made by Mr. O'Grady that the police are being paid overtime to do their job. There is an implication which was publicly stated that the ordinance was created to provide overtime to officers. That is entirely untrue, and it is that type of convoluted thinking that astounds her. Never did it cross her mind that officers would be the beneficiaries of the ordinance. That's the beauty of the ordinance, that's what makes it so attractive: wages are not an issue. Because of the fact we do not have to use General Fund money to pay the officers, wages are not an issue in this ordinance. The officers are paid for their time just as everyone expects to be paid when they perform their duties at work. We're fortunate that the work performed under the ordinance has been sufficient to sustain the officers who enforce it. She also finds it deplorable that Councilman O'Grady has questioned the integrity of ow officers and ow Police Department in the newspapers. It is astounding to her that Councilman O'Grady finds fault with the Council who passed the legislation that has successfully made this city a safer place to live. It appears to her, that certain Councilmen missed the point entirely and are more concerned with politicizing the issuance of a speeding ticket as opposed to being concerned with the safety of the residents. While no one likes to receive a ticket, the fact is that, when someone has violated the law, when someone speeds, for example, our residents are at risk. Laws are made to protect the residents, and tickets are issued when violations occw. Thereby, people are educated to the law that exist and ow children are safer for it. It's a timeless philosophy. But, when Councilmen sympathize with the minority of people who have received tickets, they're disregarding the majority of the residents who have not received tickets and appreciate the enforcement of the law. Certain Councilmen have also implied and publicly stated that through this ordinance the police are making too much money. The reality is the North. Olmsted Police Department is doing its job, enforcing the laws and protecting the residents. When did enforcing the law become the crime? If anyone is willing to risk the safety of the majority by questioning legitimate tickets and none on the STOP program have been proven to be unwarranted-she would like to know how many tickets issued by the STOP program were issued to North Olmsted residents. How many of those were unjustly issued and, if the concern is over the increase of tickets, then what is the 6