Public Safety Review Committee and the Homeless Issues Committee had the same item on their agenda (city procedures for lost or abandoned property) on Tuesday and they had two very different reactions to the ordinance.
Public Safety Review Committee:
Approved without changes. The meeting started at 5. There were other items on the agenda in front of this issue. When I got there at 5:25 the chair called for the vote. After they rubber stamped it, one of the sponsors John Strasser asked when they were supposed to make all the “tweaks” he told them about. Paul Skidmore told them they could deal with it later.
BK Note: I don’t know why Skiddy recommended not to do the committee work in committee, but that sounds crazy. I suspect this will be a disaster at either BOE or on the Council floor unless the sponsors come up with a substitute, given the list of issues below. The ordinance is also going to Board of Public works and the Parks Commission. They may both be next Wednesday.
Homeless issues Committee passed a motion as follows:
Send suggestions to Mayor, Common Council and committees to whom the ordinance has been referred.
1. Provide at least as much protection as state law, e.g. minimum value of at least $25 and 90 day storage.
2. Post at least a 48 hour notice of removal on the property, so long as the property is not obstructive or otherwise exempt from the ordinance protections under (3)(b)(2)&(4) (contraband and dangerous materials and public health risk), prior to it being removed to (1) protect homeless people from unnecessary deprivation of their property and the hassle of trying to track it down and (2) prevent the city from having to store the property. Post an additional notice once property is removed as to how to recover the property, if it is being stored, or how it was disposed of if it was otherwise disposed of.
3. Recognize and protect property that has sentimental value, e.g. photos, memorabilia, from immediate disposal regardless of its fair market value.
4. Recognize and protect medication regardless of its fair market value,
5. Define public health risk with meaningful specificity. (Just because it is dirty doesn’t mean it should be thrown away.)
6. Recognize and protect legal documents and personal effects including, but not limited to personal IDs, bus passes, benefit cards and financial services cards.
7. Specify that the minimum value is an aggregated value, and does not apply to individual items that are found together in the same area.
8. Specify that the minimum value is the replacement value of the property.
9. Procedures should be standardized across city agencies.
10. If an ID is found with the property, the City shall notify the jail and homeless service providers alerting them to the lost or abandoned property so they can pass on the information.
11. Explore providing homeless service providers and the public limited access to the lost and abandoned property database.
12. Conduct an inspection and inventory of items in containers (e.g. bags) if it can be done consistent with constitutional protections from unreasonable searches and seizures.
13. Provide downtown personal storage space for the public.
14. Consider a policy for contraband items.
Clearly a more thorough and thoughtful look at the ordinance, but because it is a county committee, they couldn’t make amendments to the ordinance, they could only convey their thoughts.
I expect BOE and Parks will just follow staff recommendations, which are the folks who wrote the ordinance so there won’t be any changes there.
