Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-11-09 TranscriptionNovember 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 1 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate 7:36 PM Council: Lehman, Kubby, Norton, Vanderhoef. Absent: Champion, O'Donnell, Thornberry. Staff: Dilkes, Karr, Hamey, Widmer. UI Student Senate: Brian White, Meghan Dolan, Josh Kreamer, Clay Cleveland, Jiger Desai. Tapes: 98-123, side 2; 98-125, side 1. Disorderly House Ordinance Forum 98-123 S2 Brian White/...copies of the city ordinance up here .... I want to welcome everybody here tonight to discuss the city ordinance .... Welcome the city council .... (recording mic problems). Eleanor Dilkes/The proposed changes to the ordinance... In order for an ordinance to pass, it requires three readings by the city council. This ordinance has had its first reading so in two more readings it will become law, local law. The changes to the disorderly house ordinance that are proposed. The first one is to broaden somewhat the types of behavior for which a party host is held responsible. It incorporates the disorderly conduct (mic problems). The second thing that the amendment does is to allow a police officer to be a complainant. Our local magistrates .... Who are the judges... hear these cases .... Local magistrate will hear that trial... One of the changes .... Police officer can .... The final change (mic problem). Issues a citation, they charge someone with a disorderly house violation. At that point, this ordinance allows the police officer to order the people at the party to disperse. That dispersal happened now but now in different ways .... Once that order is issued people at the party who disobey that order can be charged with a violation... I am just going to much briefly on what this ordinance doesn't do .... It doesn't change the constitutional rules concerning search and seizure .... I will let you all debate the issue of whether this provides additional discretion to the police officer .... One thing I did note .... Police officers exercise a lot ofjudgement, a lot of discretion ..... White/Thank you for that briefing .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 2 Pat Harney/Good evening (mic problems). Currently, if we get a complaint on a party in a neighborhood...officer... We have a procedure that we follow... verbal warning... written waming advising them of a complaint... We try to find the host of the party .... Advise them, inform them of what the problem is and ask them .... Take that problem inside, quiet it down. If we get a second complaint, citation is issued... At that point a decision is made by the officer who is responding to that as to whether further action needs to be taken .... Generally what happens .... They do find the host or the property tenant and we will issue them the verbal warning. However when we return, that person is unavailable .... And no one at the party is responsible for the gathering .... At that point the officer is somewhat at a loss at what to do... This is done through a variety of codes...different ordinances and state laws to accomplish this ....The main thing I want to say is this really cladties... host and officer as well ....As far as the officer having more authority to go in and quiet the party on their own, that would be very rare. What happens...complaints... neighbors are fearful of recognition .... They are being imposed upon... Ends up the officers do the best they can with what they have .... The officers will not be going into residences if they are driving by and stopping in just because a party is going on .... Continue to use the complaint basis .... A situation where an officer would stop and address a party is when people are obviously out of control .... Example... a year ago... apartment complex... young people .... Throwing things off the balconies... drinking... setting fires .... Tom Widmer/I think he pretty much said everything .... Compelled to say one of two things... The big thing I see on this ordinance is .... The ordinance that you have in front of you... What officers were asked to do are basically things that this ordinance now says that we can do .... Instructed to do to keep order, based on discretion ....Existing ordinance now gives us the authority to actually shut down a party ....The thing that I have heard ....There is no hidden agenda here by the Iowa City Police Department to go shut parties down .... We don't have time to go and look for parties... It cladties the things that we have actually been doing .... Adds more things that we would be judged by .... Limiting discretion... clarifies our discretion .... Bases upon the amount of time that they have to restore order... This new ordinance is simply a tool that cladties what they are suppose to do and how they are suppose to do it .... All in one ordinance .... Keep people safe...enforce the laws in the way we have been asked to enforce those laws .... Questions. White/ Just so you guys know how the rest of the meeting is going to go... Debate Forum ....Questions and answers .... Debate will approximately take 45 minutes to an hour ....Debaters are: 1 .Meghan Dolan , 2.Josh Kreamer, 3 .Clay Cleveland, and 4.Jiger Desai. So if you guys would like to .... Their coach is Craig Baird. They have been preparing for about a week and a half.... Debate is set up .... People will be able to talk for a certain amount of time period, rebuttal .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 3 Jiger Desai/The Iowa City City Council is proposing... amending section 8-5-5 entitled Keeping a Disorderly House .... Provide for police initiated complaints and provide the police authority to restore order and disperse persons... allow the Iowa City Police Department the power to shut down parties .... Under existing ordinances, someone in the neighborhood has to lodge a complaint .... We will argue that this amendment to the city code offers a number of significant advantages to the existing law. First, Iowa City has a significant problem with binge drinking... occurs in residential areas .... One would notice on many porches and in many apartments... drinking... loud, disturbing music .... Few beers tum into many beers... violent behavior... consequences... binge drinking... health injuries .... Serious injury to persons and properties. Iowa City also has a noise and vandalism problem .... Weekend parties .... These parties keep people awake at night... severe damage .... Neighbors are frighten to report parties... retaliation .... Giving the police the authority to disperse these parties would alleviate the pressure on neighbors .... Significantly reduce the risk of property damage... Some people may say police may abuse their rights .... The Iowa City police do a good job of dealing with party related violence .... Example... downtown area ....Police enforced public disturbances in the pedestrian city mall area ....Professional... enforce underage drinking laws .... They enforce laws with minimal intrusion... Current ordinances do not give them enough power to deal with parties in residential neighborhoods .... In conclusion, the ordinance would best serve the interests of the community at large .... Allowing police the authority to disperse these disturbing parties in a peaceful manner would help to prevent countless acts of vandalism and violence... prevent the serious health risk associated with binge drinking... people would be deterred from throwing loud paxties .... Josh Kreamer/You stated earlier that these laws would deter... people partying in private... What about people who binge drink in public?... So if people are willing to drink and people want to drink and you stop them from drinking in private but don't change their status of drinking in public, why would this statute not result in people increasing drinking in public? Jiger Desai/People would be forced to go to bars and our claim is that when people go to after bars to their parties at home... they drink more than they would .... Kreamer/Okay, so more people drink at the bars and then they get thrown out, right. So what happens then? They get thrown out and they walk back to their homes and cause all kinds of damage... What happens to these people if they do choose to drink in their bars instead of their homes on the way back home? .... end up driving? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work SessionFLlI Student Senate Page 4 Jiger Desai/First of all, the ICPD enforces OWl laws .... Kreamer/ Jiger Desai/Obviously people go to the bars now .... The ordinance would stop disturbing parties (mic problems). Kreamer/ .... Fact that these people are drank and not necessarily the fact that these people are simply partying .... Jiger Desai/When they are intoxicated... more likely to cause damage to others... disturbs the neighbors. The ordinance cannot stop people from going to bars... getting drunk and walking home (mic problems). There is nothing you can do to prevent people from going to bars .... When they walk home and vandalize properties .... (mic problems). Meghan Dolan/Problems ofbinge drinking and partying may be true. We believe this ordinance .... Counterproductive .... The problem ofbinge drinking cannot be solved by giving the police more power .... Systemic problem... Students drinking because they think it is fun and acceptable way to spend their evenings .... Giving police enforcement power to break up parties will simply cause students to backlash ....There is a strong sentiment that police enforcement is over-zealous at present ....A similar ordinance was instituted in Brunswick, New Jersey at Rutgers University. Students there were required to obtain permits for their parties .... Parties not directly sanctioned... are halted by the police .... Greater tensions... have been the result .... Risk is that people will find other places to drink .... Avoid persecution of that law .... No one who drinks actually wants to get caught .... Could also increase the likelihood of drunk driving .... On college campus, drinking is going to occur... seems logical that confining drinking to private residences would be better than forcing drinking in public .... The proposal would make this shift to drinking in public more .... People would choose to binge drink at bars ....Our second argument is that police cannot be trusted to use their power fairly ....There is not requirement that people use the decibel meter to measure noise violations .... Abuse their power. With this ordinance, the police could walk into anything arbitrarily .... Possibly search someone's house .... Likely that some police officer could use this authority to violate privacy rights, search and seizure laws and freedom of speech and association .... The Eric Shaw case shows that the Police Department has a long ways to go to improving their procedures under existing ordinances. Our question is why should they be given extra authority now when they may not be able to use it well ..... Fun_her argues that this ordinance will protect neighbors .... This is not a good enough reason to increase police power. If they aren't brave enough o invoke the law on their own behalf, they don't deserve police assistance. They can still inform police This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 5 anonymously now ..... In conclusion, the proposed ordinance is not an effective solution. Over regulating parties is likely to be counterproductive .... Desai/What happened in New Brunswick for instance .... students backlashed? Dolan/...They have to obtain a permit in order to have a party .... If there is a party going on that doesn't have a permit, then the police have the authority to shut that party down at any time. From our research... caused students to be more resentful... Desai/ Dolarg Desai/This ordinance is designed to protect neighbors... before people get out of hand .... Dolan/That would only assume that people would stop having large parties .... Our claim is that once they start going in and breaking up these parties .... The only way that your argument is true is if parties don't continue to happen in the future .... Desai/Binge drinking occurs now in bars, fight? Dolan/I wouldn't necessarily say that people binge at bars .... Desai/So your claim .... They are going to drink more at bars? Dolan/Probably .... If they are going to drink in large amounts... do it in a place that is more sanctioned, like a bar. Desai/ Dolan/It is our claim that the behavior doesn't come because of a party, it comes because of alcohol .... Desai/ Dolan/They probably do cause some disturbing behavior but your claim is that most of that disturbing behavior is because of house parties .... Contradiction .... Desai/What was the Eric Shaw example? .... Dolan/...it was just an instance where the police department made an error .... Clay Cleveland/ .... it is not a law that is actually going to be preventing parties from occurring... The law is only going to prevent the violence and preventing these This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work SessiordUI Student Senate Page 6 parties from actually getting out of hand .... The process the police are going go use... does not change .... Finding the host .... Then .... They go back for a second time... then if the violence and the noise persist, issue citations. That process does not change. It makes the law actually a good thing by clafifying responsibilities of the ICPD .... At University of Iowa we do have a problem with binge drinking .... Give police the authority to prevent the violence .... Meghan talked about how binge drinking is a systemic problem .... Meghan says there is actually going to be a backlash against police. I see no reason... There is nothing in it at all that would suggest the students .... Would actually backlash... She talked about the Brunswick example. What happened in Brunswick... they actually have to file for a permit before hand .... This ordinance has nothing to do with .... She talks about there is problems with OWI .... Would increase violence... outside bars. There are laws that are out there to deal with such things .... OWI laws and public intoxi~cation .... Prevents such things... throwing furniture .... Arguments about how the policemen abuse power makes really sense in that all this law does is actually clarify the responsibilities that the police have .... What happens fight now is they have a hodge podge of different laws that they have to go to ..... by merely clarifying... reduces the results of any kind of police abuse that would be occurring .... Saying that this would actually lead to violation of search and seizure rules, those don't change .... When the police would actually go up and deal with a situation, they have to knock on the door. It doesn't give them free entry into the place .... All it does at this point... to be able to handle violence .... Meghan says they don't deserve this authority. The neighbors fight now are very fearful of violent retribution .... Have the police step in and protect .... Makes the City of Iowa City a much more livable place .... Dolard So you say the neighbors are afraid of violence and retribution from the partyers .... Cleveland/... they would be looking around for their neighbors because they know fight now that their call has to be filed. Dolan/The call can be anonymous .... Cleveland. They are still going to look for an individual that made that call .... Dolan/Let's talk about situation now... D.I ..... large list of people that are arrested... public drunkenness .... That occurs .... Cleveland/ Dolan/Why is it that consecutively, week after week... there is still a list that is longer .... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 7 Cleveland/This is a college campus... and they got out... they are intoxicated and they get picked up .... Dolan/...the violence... is still going to occur. Cleveland/They are not going to be able to prevent it outright .... This will improve the effectiveness of the police force to deal with it ....At parties... prevent these parties from getting out of hand. Dolan/ Cleveland/There is vandalism that occurs on the way home .... Dolan/People who are arrested now... are continuing that behavior. Why would they change their behavior because of the ordinance? .... Cleveland/Because when the party gets broken up, they don't have the chance to get so intoxicated .... Dolan/ Cleveland/I believe they will get quieter... end sooner. Josh Kreamer/I am a freshman in the class of 2002. Our entire national history from the Revolution to the writing of the Constitution... founded on the principle of checking governmental power. This is the reason we have due process and search and seizure laws ..... It is the fundamental principle and idea that maintains our freedom .... The statute in question would infringe on these rights .... Anytime that a police officer believes that a party is too loud, they can enter the premises .... Loud noise is not a standard that can possibly be standardized. The present statute by requiring neighbors to call the police, only brings the hand of the law into the situation when the party does... infringe on the fights of others. You cannot trust government to say they will not abuse the power given to them. Only the checks on that power .... A few years ago .... Shoot and kill that owner. Knowing this, why should govemment have more authority to enter .... The ordinance does result in a change to the rules of search and seizure in our community .... It is entirely at the police officer's discretion... as to when the actual law enforcement is necessary. Clay says that this can be checked by the courts. However... a violation of the fights of a citizen... ahs already occurred .... Somebody has been infringed upon... broken rights... Hopefully these citizens can get some sort of reprise. Clay says the purpose of the statute is to prevent violence. By our argument... violence will shift to the bars and the streets ....If people will always want to drink or if they don't change the systemic nature ....Remember the statute allows for the police to immediately break up the party and it increases the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 8 discretion at what point the party is broken up .... In clarifying the law .... Increased the police power... It broadened it interpretation .... Clay says that a backlash is ridiculous... If this act is proven to be either unconstitutional or a violation of rights... it will undermine the legitimacy of other laws .... He says the New Brunswick example doesn't apply but it is still an example as when government chose to restrict the fights of people to party .... There is no reason why anyone should be allowed to enter a home simply because we are making loud noise .... There is no definition of what loud noise is .... Cleveland/What recourse does someone who fights are violated now have? .... Kreamer/They obviously can use the courts .... Cleveland/...That is what happens now .... Kreamer/No, going to the courts doesn't preserve your rights .... Cleveland/At that point the police will be punished for any violations that will occur. Doesn't that deter their conduct in the future? Kreamer/Our argument is the conduct is allowed by the law .... If you have to wait until someone's fights are violated .... I think that is too late to preserve the rights .... Cleveland/By clarification of the law .... Instead of using whatever justifications they have now .... Deter them from inappropriate means? Kreamer/You are assuming that the words clarify and change mean to limit the law .... Cleveland/The law as it is fight now, they go through several different means .... Kreamer/My argument is the means that they have... different steps... are steps that preserve the rights of the citizen .... Cleveland/That is a good point .... Don't the neighbors have a fight to be free from that? Kreamer/Most neighbors call long before someone actually breaks into their home and kills them ....Those fights aren't violated as often as you think ....Extreme examples. Cleveland/They are scared of their neighbors. Kreamer/ ....all you have to do is sit in your room and make a phone call. Cleveland/ This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 9 Kreamer/They go house to house and say who called? Cleveland/Yes .... CHANGE SIDE TO REEL 98-125 SIDE 1 Dolan/ ... all of those arguments serve to address if we have a problem and that binge drinking is high at the University of Iowa than the national average. Unfortunately he doesn't answer the arguments that we made as to why binge drinking won't stop as the result of this ordinance. Here is the situation I brought up... People walk home from the bars and they are drunk .... They cause damage to their neighbors property and there is violence .....There is no reason to believe that all of the problems that the affirmative stated necessarily come from house parties .... The ordinance wouldn't address that .... Arrest for public drunkenness, underage drinking... drunk driving are really high... These names don't seem to be decreasing. There is no reason to believe that the ordinance... would have any sort of deterrent affect... students are still drinking .... Students .... Drink because they want to drink... If the ordinance breaks down parties that are loud and violent, then the students are just going to drink elsewhere .... If they don't solve the root cause of over consumption of alcohol, then they won't solve any of the problems that they are talking about .... The ordinance doesn't restrict drinking. The ordinance only restricts drinking in your house .... When people crash at a private home or apartment, they remain of the streets. Dispersing parties only encourages drunk driving and public intoxification... Our claim is the way to stop binge drinking is education .... Stepping Up Program .... Trying to prohibit drinking or trying to prohibit drinking in private homes doesn't do anything to stop the problem .... Our claim is simply that the ordinance won't do anything. It will shif~ drinking to other places or possibly cause more violence and damages to OCCUr .... Desai/ Josh and Meghan make great claims... abuse their authority .... Josh's claim may seem fairly convincing but it is simply based on a lack of trust ....There is a law against search and seizure .... Police are simply not going to break down the door when there is a party going on .... Clay makes the argument... the person has to knock on the door... police said they aren't going to be going to parties... random parties .... Also, the police would only go if a neighbor complained or if the party got extremely out of hand. There is a line to be drawn .... Josh says that these people could go to the courts. But that doesn't do anything because people's rights have already been violated ..... Still sets a precedent against future abuse... It would set limits... create standards... They also make the claim that violence is simply going to shift... The fact that the D.I. does have numerous lists of arrests may prove that binge drinking doesn't stop... When police do a good job to enforce... people who drive while under the influence... People do a good job of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 10 enforcing what goes on in public areas .... This ordinance would allow the police to do a good job to enforce vandalism in private areas .... It does create a deterrent against loud partied because the people who are throwing the parties are now held liable for what goes on at those parties ....People who throw the parties aren't going to throw the parties that get out of hand ....Also they talk about the New Brunswick example and how people backlash. This argument is simply nonsensical. People may be able to backlash against the law but that is only in the instance that there is some kind of unconstitutional thing going on with in the ordinance. The ordinance does not give police any unconstitutional fight to break down doors or violate search and seizure laws .... Kreamer/There is currently a binge drinking problem. The question before you is will this ordinance solve the problem or will it make things worse .... Every application of the law... in the present time... may result in an increase in enforcement but it doesn't result in a solution to the problem... The constitution itself is based on a lack of trust... checks on the powers... Our argument is that this law is in violation of those checks. Yes, Jiger, it is seizure. He says that people would stop going to private parties. Our argument is that people dfink now when they are underage and that people are loud now... They would go to public parties... at the presence of police, they would quickly flee those parties, resulting in people rummaging through neighborhoods and driving dnmk... dangerous. He says the neighbors' fights are already being violated...most of the time the neighbors call when the party is getting too loud .... That is a lot better than having all of the citizens fights violated .... He says the police could use a decibel meter. But my argument is that they could always have a search warrant as well .... He says this law will search as a deterrent but he is fight, the police are enforcing laws very strongly now. Yet people continue to drink which insures that this law would not be a deterrent. Jiger fails to answer Meghan's argument that the violation of the law now only prove that there is going to be violations in the future .... Education programs now that serve to deal with the systemic problem of binge drinking .... Proves that over-enforcement, increasing punishments and attempting to establish penalties won't solve that problem .... The statute can only result in people drinking more in public and increasing the potential for govemment power. Drinking more in public is dangerous ..... Cleveland/Partyers should not have the fight to light furniture on fire, throw it off balconies... vandalism... violent noisy activity in neighborhoods. That is what this law is designed to prevent. It is not designed to prevent anybody from going to parties .... Making sure it does not get out of hand .... This ordinance does not change any constitutional fights whatsoever .... Josh talks about how these problems are going to occur even with the law .... That is true ....Police are doing a good job of stopping things right now .... Vandalism... should be stopped. This law is a good deterrent about that ..... Josh says how neighbors are fearful about calling .... When they are calling .... Something is already happened .... Walls This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 11 have been punched through... This law removes their fear of retribution ..... Discussion about whether or not using a decibel meter really does not make any sense. The police officers are not allowed to enter into the apartment now... Constitutional rights are still fully in place .... Standards here only clarify what the police officers can do .... Discussing about whether this is a systemic problem or not is totally irrelevant to this discussion .... just means that we should also being doing things to increase educational awareness about the problems ofbinge drinking .... New Brimswick example really does not have anything to do with anything that is going on .... Supreme Court has already found that such policies as this ordinance are constitutional and don't violate any principles of free speech or search and seizure laws ....In this policy would prevent the harms and violence and vandalism that occurs .... White/I want to thank the debaters .... The rest of the time we are going to up to questions from the audience .... Jeff Lucci/I am a graduate student here .... Point to address here... Right now an officer can only break up a party if there is a complaint or if there is a plain view disturbance ..... the modification of this law will do nothing to change that .... The question is when can an officer break up a fight? If nothing is happening in plain view .... If there is a disturbance to the general public, then by definition there must be a disturbance .... If no one has a problem with what is going on, there is no disturbance. I am trying to think of an instance of when this law would be applied... Right now we hear that officers don't have time to go around driving looking for parties and try to break them up .... When would they actually do it? There is no reason to believe that any party would maybe become violent .... Going back to whether or not the student council should support or oppose this amendment, I think we have to look at what the student government is here for and that is the students .... Students are treated differently .... I fail to see how this law or the amendment to this law would be ever applied to local residents... By definition then it is discriminatory .... In the opening remarks .... One of the officers discussed the limitation of discretion. According to Black's Law Dictionary, discretion is defined as liberty or power of deciding or acting .... Discretion has no limits other than one's own. Should we allow police officers to have no limitations? I think not .... I think out city attomey would agree that juries are admonished that officers testimonies are to be given no more and no less weight than any other .... In deciding the truth of the matter .... I would like to know where- Can you give me an instance of where this law would be used? Harney/...example of the party that got out of control where the officers could have gone in sooner before they got to the point where they are throwing furniture off the balcony and setting fires... Additional situation... high school... have had parties in homes... gotten calls that their parents are out of town... calls about the noise... everyone dispersed as the officers had arrived. All they can do is knock This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 12 on the door, if no one answers, that is it ..... These parties... a parent's homes are literally destroyed .... Stealing alcohol .... Lucci/How would that change?...they still don't have the authority to enter .... Harney/It would have given the officers the opportunity when they open that door .... To go further and make sure everything is all right .... Lucci/ Hamey/As far as going in? It is not going to change going into the property .... What is does .... officers take an oath... to protect the individual that cannot protect themselves .... Complainant ... afraid of retribution .... Lucci/...they have no idea of who complained, where is the fear of retribution? Harney/ .... is the court system .... Magistrates prefer...demand that they have a complainant ....If the officer... testifies... that person would not have to come forward. Lucci/At the time the complaint is taken, it is allowed to be completely anonymous, correct? Hamey/That is correct. Lucci/In that instance the party would be effectively broken up upon an anonymous tip?... Hamey/Your saying if it is broken up .... Someone to appear in court .... Lucci/ Hamey/...as far as noise... it is the adjacent property owner or neighbor ....You need a complainant to come forward .... Lucci/So you are saying that if you don't have a name of a private citizen... you cannot pursue that? Hamey/I am not saying that... as far as the noise level... officer sees some misconduct... they can take action on that ....noise, they cannot address other than asking them to be quiet. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work Session/UI Student Senate Page 13 Lucci/If somebody anonymously calls, and the officer issues a warning... I don't understand how this law would change anything the way it is right now except for allowing police to just drive by... Hamey/... the way the ordinance is written as proposed is to assist those people that are complaining and want to remain anonymous... Widmer/The way that I see that this ordinance is written... I don't see that we would change a whole lot of things we would do... When would this be used? I am hard pressed myself to find out when this would be used because a police officer who is on the street and observes something, generally there is going to be a violation of the law .... Most of the time it is not violence. It is the loud pulsating noises, the disturbances of people not being able to sleep... I see this as being a valuable tool that we would have for that case that is 1 in 100 .... A joint party with multiple people .... What I see now... clarifies what we are to look for and also brings it together under one package how we can enforce... This gives us the authority to then say look, the party is going to be shut down .... One of the things that we do now .... A person working on their stockcar at 2:00 AM .... A loud teenage party... many times when we get the complaints... Sometimes the person calls back... It gives us a tool... that will be used rarely... officers using discretion .... You have to grant police officers discretion .... Controls to that discretion .... Common sense can be entered into it .... Make that law workable .... Make it where discretion is proper .... This is something that is not going to be used very much at all... allows us to go in and take action when something would have gotten out of hand .... Used very rarely. Lucci/ .... a tool that can be more of a chain saw than a coping saw .... It is not the presence of any impropriety, it is the possibility and we have to be sure .... Widmer/We would be ridiculous to say it can't happen to us .... There is a bit, we are taking a chance with everybody... price we pay for freedom... When people call in... we take those things very seriously ....We realize the power that the public has granted us. Lucci/I just want to make sure it doesn't blow up in our faces. Hamey/We take that risk with any law .... I did want to make a comment... New Brunswick type of a law .... Last summer... close to a similar ordinance... after discussing this at length, it was decided we did not want to get into a law like that... This is a much better, more workable ordinance .... White/Any other questions, comments? .... I want to thank the debaters... thank you city council... police officers... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598 November 9, 1998 Council Work SessionFUI Student Senate Page 14 Adjourned: 7:40 PM This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of November 9, 1998 WS100598