Resumption: Council Members Resume Discussion on Resolution No. 105 | News, Sports, Vacancies

(Photo by Michelle Dillon) The Marietta City Council had a full table discussing several ordinances at its City Council meeting Thursday night, including a ban on camping on city property.

The Marietta City Council was scheduled to hold its first reading of a proposed camping ban on city property Thursday night at a meeting that was still in progress at the time of publication.

It was a continuation of a conversation that began at Wednesday’s Police and Fire Committee meeting.

Council members discussed Resolution No. 105 (24-25), which was introduced by At-Large Councilmember John Grimm. He would ban camping on city property except in designated areas and possibly pass a law banning aggressive panhandling.

Attached to the ordinance is a section that will be added to the Marietta City Code that prohibits camping on city property, which is defined as alleys, public or private doorways adjacent to public sidewalks, multi-use paths, bike paths. paths, streets, sidewalks, public rights of way, parking lots, easements, parks, public lands, buildings or other public lands owned, leased, controlled or operated by the City – for more than 24 hours, making unauthorized encampments a Level 4 offense. misdemeanor and repeat violations are a misdemeanor of the third degree. It will also be prohibited to spend the night in the city.

The exhibit defines camping as a place where camping materials—tents, cabins, sheds, awnings, campers, RVs, camping trailers, chairs, tarps, portable stoves, and/or collections of personal property—are stored and used as living quarters. for camping – installed.

The penalty for unauthorized camping will be determined by the court, but regardless of whether all of their property and trash were immediately removed upon request or if, prior to the hearing, the person violating the code section used private resources or service providers to remove the cause they gave them. The placement of an unauthorized camp will be considered by the court as a mitigating circumstance when deciding on punishment.

The effort to enact a ban on tents on city property stemmed from complaints shared Sept. 23 at a joint meeting of the Planning, Zoning, Annexation and Housing (PZAH) and Public Lands and Buildings committees. During the meeting, several downtown business owners located near the Washington County Homeless Project’s homeless intake center on Front Street shared their concerns about downtown safety, particularly issues related to noise, shouting or people swearing, people disrupting business.” employees, people camping near or behind businesses on Front and Second streets and more.

During Wednesday’s meeting, the council also discussed possible locations that would be designated as places where people would be allowed to camp on city property.

City Law Director Paul Bertram said the council discussed during the Oct. 28 Police and Fire Committee meeting the use of Gunlock Park as a possible site for permitted camping. The park is located behind Lowe’s house on Pike Street.

Grimm said he heard questions from community members about the use of Gunlock Park shortly after the Oct. 28 meeting, and then he introduced a community member who did not want tents allowed at Gunlock Park.

Marietta Adventure owner and River Valley Mountain Bike Association President Ryan Smith shared his concerns, saying the association is trying to get Marietta recognized as a mountain biking destination by the International Mountain Bicycle Association.

“It’s quite a prestigious thing” – said Smith.

According to Smith, the RVMBA wants to create a destination-worthy destination in the region with Marietta as the centerpiece, and there are currently no ride centers in Ohio and only one in West Virginia, so getting Marietta that status would give the Convention Bureau and Marietta-Washington County visitors have something on the market.

Smith installed bike paths in Gunlock Park eight to 10 years ago, he said, and he supports them and the park. “is critical to our overall goal of creating a ride center” – he said.

He said his organization has already submitted an initial application to the International Mountain Biking Association and met with them last week to review the application, and while he doesn’t have an exact date for when they might receive the status, he expects the process to be completed. done within a few months.

He said if Gunlock Park were designated as a camping site, Marietta would become an attraction hub.

“If you go out there, you will see that these are parents with children … they will not be there,” – he said. “In cases where people moved and camped there, I would usually get a call within a week… because someone was there with their little child and said, ‘Oh, there’s a scary man back there.’

Smith stressed that he doesn’t think the homeless people camping at Gunlock Park are bad people, but he doesn’t think they care about the park’s cleanliness.

Ward 2 Councilman Bret Allphin shared information about other possible sites, saying he went with city safety director Steven Wetz and city development director Jeff Schenkel and toured the Douglas Avenue site and the area at the southwest corner of the Washington County Fairgrounds next to the trail next to the site where the old swimming pool was located, and after that the factor to consider is what constitutes realistic access to services for the people who camped at the site.

Grimm said he also looked at those sites and that privacy should be considered on possible sites.

“All I saw there was just an open field.” – he said.

Washington County Homeless Project Chair Robyn Bozian was present at the meeting and shared her views on some of the sites mentioned, stating “An open field with no fuss is definitely preferable.”

She said the Homeless Project’s first goal, before it opened the drop-in center and before it began working to open overnight shelters, was to find a place where people could camp and where there would be tiny houses.

“The problem, as we saw it, was that there was nothing in the zoning that allowed any of this…if you allowed us to do something like that, we would structure it,” – said Bozian. “We would put a fence around it. We will control all of this.”

The idea of ​​creating a homeless camp in Marietta as part of the Homeless Project was not discussed further at the meeting.

Grimm shared with Bozian his concerns about homeless people coming to Marietta.

“Obviously we attract people from other communities here.” he said, and the community is concerned that Marietta is attracting homeless people because the city gives them a better quality of life.

“This is a community opinion and should be part of the conversation.” – said Grimm.

Bozian replied that she did not believe that.

“If the best quality of life is, ‘Oh yeah, you can have lunch at the shelter,’ I mean, guys, don’t come here from Zanesville.”

She said there are many more opportunities to help the homeless in other places than in Marietta.

Grimm said he wanted the council to be involved in the process of the city safety director determining where tents would be allowed, and then said the ordinance would be presented at Thursday’s council meeting, but the council would not suspend second and third readings.

“I want this to pass all three readings.” – he said.

During Wednesday’s meeting, Grimm also presented the possibility of passing an ordinance to ban aggressive panhandling.

Bertram gave everyone a copy of Columbus’s ordinance against aggressive panhandling and shared some information about Columbus and his ordinance.

“What you see is if you’re driving into Columbus and you get off the (highway), you get on and there are people on the exits and they’re approaching you…it’s not uncommon for people to want to clean your windshield and then ask for money or from them there’s a sign and they kind of get to your car.” – said Bertram. “We have that to a lesser extent.”

According to Bertram, Marietta used to have a lot more aggressive panhandling, then it decreased for a while, but is starting to increase again.

Grimm asked how one might define aggressive panhandling, and Bertham said the Columbus ordinance would likely apply to a person standing with a sign if he’s out on the road, but might not apply if he’s standing on a sidewalk. He also said the behavior of stopped drivers could violate the Columbus ordinance, not just the behavior of the person asking for money.

Bertram asked council members to read Columbus’ ordinance, and Grimm said it would need to be studied before the council moved forward.

“I’ll include this in the upcoming meeting.” – he said.