OIL CITY, Pa. (EYT) — The Oil City Council took the first official steps to raising parking fines and modernizing and increasing fines for Disorderly Houses in the city at Thursday’s council meeting.

Two ordinances addressing the issues were passed on a first-reading basis — in all, three readings must be done, although two can be done at the same time as long as they are seven days after the first reading.

The first ordinance increases the fines for parking violations in the city, which will now be $5.00 for a first offense at an overtime parking meter as long as the fine is paid within the first 48 hours and $10.00 for a second violation at the same location occurring one hour after the first violation if paid within the first 48 hours of the ticket being issued. After the expiration of 48 hours, the first violation will increase to $10.00 and the second to $20.00. If the fine isn’t paid within 10 days, the matter will become a summary offense with penalties of $10.00 to $30.00 plus court costs and/or up to 10 days in jail for the first violation and penalties of $20.00 to $40.00 plus court costs and/or up to 10 days in jail for the second violation.

The ordinance also increases the fines for parking in a “No Loading Zone” and in a “Handicap Zone” without proper authorization to $50.00 if paid within the first 48 hours and $60.00 if paid after the first 48 hours with a failure to pay the fine in a 10-day period resulting in a summary offense punishable by a fine of no less than $60.00 plus court costs and/or imprisonment up to 10 days.

The Council originally agreed to raise parking fines at its August 24 meeting, but the increase in prices needed a city ordinance, which is what the council took the first step towards passing on Thursday.

In terms of the Disorderly Housing ordinance, some language needed to be changed, and fines need to be raised in an ordinance originally passed in 1928. The current ordinance on the books allows for the mayor to impose penalties, although that job has been taken care of by the district magistrate for many years now.

The revised ordinance takes out that language and increases fines to $300.00 and/or up to 90 in jail for a first offense and a fine of $500.00 to $1,000.00 and/or up to 90 days in jail for the second offense with all penalties being at the discretion of the district magistrate.

The ordinance continues to make it unlawful for “any person or persons within the limits of the City of Oil City to keep and maintain a common, ill-governed, or disorderly house or place to the encouragement of idleness, gaming, drinking, violation of liquor laws or misbehavior, to the common nuisance and disturbance of the neighborhood or orderly citizens.”

The second portion of the ordinance also makes it “unlawful for any person or persons to frequent, visit, or loiter about, except upon lawful business, any common, ill-governed or disorderly hour or place kept to the encouragement of idleness, gaming, drinking, violation of liquor laws or misbehavior” with the same punishment structure in place.

There was some debate from the council about the definition of “idleness” and city solicitor Robert Varsek said he wouldn’t even know how to argue that in court.

Oil City police Chief Robert Wenner said that his department doesn’t usually cite people on a first offense.

“This is something that you have to work hard to get, and some do,” Wenner said. “But, usually, on the first call out, we don’t cite them. It isn’t until we are called out a second time or we are called to the same house multiple times that we invoke this.”

Councilman Michael Poff told Wenner he trusted him but was worried about what might happen 30 years from now with a different council and a different police chief.

“We just want to make sure that 30 years from now this isn’t an issue,” Poff said.

Councilman Ron Gustafson suggested taking idleness out of the ordinance and adding excessive drinking before the drinking portion, but Wenner said that once you add a word like excessive then it becomes arbitrary.

At the end of the discussion, the ordinance was passed as written on the first reading.

COUNCIL DENIES REQUEST FOR STREET LIGHT

After receiving a request from Kellie Brazeale, who lives at 28 Keith Avenue, for the city to install a street light in front of her residence, the council rejected the request.

In a letter to the city, Brazeale said that she and her daughter work nights, and when they arrive home, they have to navigate three flights of stairs in the dark to enter the house, and those stairs can be quite “precarious” during the best of weather and even more so when covered in wet leaves or snow and ice. She also believed that the dark street is an issue of security for both her and her daughter, as well as their vehicles.

“With the street being so dark at night, it makes it easy for delinquents to prey upon a lone woman or unattended vehicle.”

City manager Mark Schroyer told the council he was a little “torn” about the request saying that one one hand with over 1,000 street lights in the city, it wasn’t a big deal for the city to add another one, which he estimates costs the city about $10.00 to $12.00 a month per light to operate, but that at the same time, if a resident wants their property lit up, it should be up to them to do so.

“The trend for municipalities is to get away from adding street lights and to have residence add the lights themselves,” Schroyer said. “A personal yard light illuminates more of your yard than a street light does.”

Gustafson said that in the case of the stairs being dark, it should be the resident’s responsibility to light the stairs, not the city’s.

“I also think that once you add a street light for one person, you open a can of worms,” Schroyer said.

Wenner stated that personally, lighting at residentials helps first-responders.

“It is beneficial to all the homeowners to have personal lighting,” Wenner said. “It is very helpful to us.”

FINAL TWO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS APPROVED

The council approved the final two community development plans that needed to be updated in order for the city to receive CDBG (Community Development Block Grants) from the government.

The two plans that were approved were the Minority and Women’s Business Enterprise Plan and the Citizen Participation Plan. Copies of both plans can be obtained by contacting the city office.

FUNDING FOR MAIN STREET PROGRAM DISCUSSED

Council also discussed funding for the Main Street Program but held off any action until a representative of the program could make it to next week’s council meeting.

It was mentioned that the city is already committed to funding the program for $40,000.00 in 2018, but the program would like to see a five-year financial commitment from the city.

Schroyer said it was hard for the city to know what its finances would look like in five years, although Kelly Amos, Director of Community Development for the city, said she believes the Main Street Program isn’t looking for a dollar amount five years out just that the city would be willing to contribute something.

COULTER SUGGESTS NO PARKING ON VO-TECH DRIVE

During the public comment period, city resident Stanley Coulter representing the First Presbyterian Church of Oil City suggested that the city looks into making Vo-Tech Drive near the church no parking on both sides of the street.

“There are always cars parked as you try to turn into the church parking lot, and it’s hard to get through there,” Coulter said.

Wenner said he agreed that there were people parking on both sides of the street making it difficult to get through that area.

Council agreed with Coulter and Wenner, and Schroyer said he would have the police department conduct a traffic study of the area with the purpose of making it no parking on one or both sides of the street.

REMINDER NEXT MEETING NEXT WEEK

The next meeting will be on Thursday, November 16, instead of November 23, as November 23 is Thanksgiving.