If you don't pick up your dog's doo at parks around town, it may mean you and your pooch will lose access after the council gave the second of two necessary approvals to an ordinance change at its Tuesday, Nov. 10, meeting.

The amendment added language to Chapter 14 - Parks and Recreations*, Article III. Parks and Recreation Areas, Sec. 14-49. - Use of facilities generally. It was one of four actions taken amending the ordinance book.

Subsection (a) now includes the following: "To protect the public's health and safety, the Town reserves the right to limit or restrict access for dogs at any Town-owned park or field facility."

The change brought about a light-hearted discussion during which Councilor John Hanley wondered if the addition of "dogs" was actually a bit too canine-centric.

"Why are we just limited to dogs?" Hanley wondered somewhat in jest. " We want to limit it to cats? You know, people own weasels. It's discrimination. You know where I'm coming from? Somebody will come around and circumvent it with a pet giraffe or something."

On a serious note, Town Solicitor Anthony DeSisto explained, "I have to say that the issue that was brought up had to do with leashed animals, particularly dogs. In the event that, in the future, there's another type of a pet or animal that is creating a problem, then you can amend it at that time. But this addresses the specific issues that were brought up in the meeting."

Stop sign fines
The council, which opted to continue the item at its October meeting, gave the first of the necessary duel approvals to increase in the fine schedule of drivers who fail to obey stop signs (Chapter 12, Article II). It also added a new violation for blocking an intersection.

The language of the ordinance would be as follows: "Every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. In the event there is no crosswalk, the driver shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the driver has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering the intersection, except when directed to proceed by a police officer or traffic control signal."

The edited fine schedule would be: failure to halt at a stop sign $35 (remains the same); not acknowledging a traffic signal moves from $35 to $50; the same is true for driving on one-way street, up from $35-$50. Taking a left turn where prohibited also stays at $35 while the new violation for blocking an intersection comes in at $50.

Shoveling sanctions
On the heels of talks at multiple meetings previously, the council coalesced around a new slate of fines for violators of the town's snow shoveling ordinance (Chapter 18 - Streets and Sidewalks)

As per the initial amendment suggested by Councilor Derrik Trombley, the a fine of $250 would have been given for a first offense, incrementally increasing $50 per offense up to $500.

Councilor Louis Rego, as he did during previous discussion suggested the starting point be $100. Hanley concurred. Council President Joseph DePasquale interjected possibly beginning at $150.

An exchanged between Rego and Council Vice President Keri Cronin eventually led to a compromise.

"We're talking about snow that's impeding the pedestrian traffic, and the work of our DPW staff, I think it should be a little bit more hefty than what we might charge for traffic offense or something like that," Cronin said.

Rego countered, "My only concern is, you know, somebody might pay $100, and then learn a lesson from it versus getting charged 250 and want to like fight it, not learn a lesson from it, that's where I'm from. At the end of the day, we want the snow clean."

Cronin later suggested reducing the initial figure to $200 while keeping the incremental increases up to $500, which Rego agreed with calling the change "pretty fair."

Both the snow removal and stop sign changes would take effect upon second approval and a public hearing at future council meeting, which is most likely to occur at its December 10 session and is when the new members chosen at the November general election will be seated.

Trombley asked DeSisto for an opinion on how the reconstituted body could proceed on the items needed second approval.

"Now, you've said before, but just to reiterate, even though tonight is the first reading and the next council meeting will be a new slate of council people that will not prohibit us from moving forward with a second reading at the December meeting, correct?" said Trombley.

DeSisto answered, "It will not prohibit you from proceeding to a second reading at the meeting unless the new council members are not comfortable and would like to drop it down first. That's discretionary on their part. If they want to proceed, they can...There's no legal bar on that."

Nobert is now a "no"
Lastly, the council gave formal approval to a policy put into place by the administration of Town Manager Brian Sullivan, which added Nobert Street to the list of roads included in the existing ordinance (Chapter 12, Article III) where on-street parking is prohibited.

Already enforceable, there is now a no parking designation for both sides of Nobert Street.