12-30-87 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council Dec. 30, 1987 Tr•ain The City Attor~ney r•epor~ted that he has r~eviewed the cr•iminal statutes Whistles r•egar~ding this matter~ and it appears that this law does not apply in (Cont.) a city. Ther~efor~e, the matter~ is open to the discr~etion of the Council. The City Attor•ney stated that the City could pr•ohibit the sounding of tr•ain whistles within the City, except in life safety situations, if the Council felt the minor• inconvenience to a few people outweighed the public safety. The City Cler•k r•epor•ted that he also contacted neighbor~ing cities on this matter•, and none of the neighbor•ing cities have enacted such or•dinances nor• planned to do so. The P~ayor pointed out that at the last Council meeting the City Attorney stated that Minneapolis' or•dinance states that tr•ain whistles cannot be blown unless ther•e is the r~isk of imminent safety. Fahey stated that he fel t ther•e was cl ear•ly an ar~gument for• the r•ai 1 r•oad that ther•e is a r•isk to public safety and the whistles should be blown. Fahey pointed out that r~esear•ch into the matter• has not developed one compelling r•eason to enact an or~dinance pr~ohibiting the sounding of tr•ain whistles. Blesener~ felt that based on the r~ecommendation of the City Attor•ney and City's insur~ance company, the City should not enact such an ordinance. LaValle felt the situation would be unenfor•ceable anyway, noting that if a car• was a block or~ half a block away, the tr~ain engineer• could sound the whistle due to the concer~n for• public safety. Collova suggested that the City send a letter• to the r~epr~esentative fr•om the Oakmont Condominiums who initiated the matter• explaining the City's r~esear•ch into the matter• and based on the advice of the City Attorney and City insurance carrier, the suggested ordinance would not be adopted. Fahey also noted the lack of such an or•dinance in neighbor~ing cities, and that because of public safety the Council feels it ina.ppr•opr•iate to inter•fer•e with the r•ailr•oad's duty to public safety. Wages Of The Council r~eviewed the r•equest of Tom Hor•wath for• an incr~ease in Tr•ee salar~y as Tr•ee Inspector• fr~om $10 per• hour~ to $12 per~ hour•, and for~ Inspector• an incr•ease in salar•y as Weed Inspector~ fr~om $300 to $500 per• year•. Agenda Fahey noted the r•epor•t outlining the amount of hour•s Mr~. Horwath Item No. 10 spends per~for•ming the Tr•ee Inspector• function. Ther•e was no hour•ly br~eakdown available for• Weed Inspector~ duties. Fahey suggested that the two positions be combined, and an hour•ly r•ate paid for• the position. Fahey also noted that it has been thr~ee year•s since Mr•. Hor•wath r•eceived a sal ar•y i ncr•ease. Page -9-