One reading to go for yard parking ordinance

WASHINGTON — The second of three public readings for a long-discussed city ordinance amendment passed in Washington last week, setting the stage for a potential final reading at next week’s council meeting on rules governing lawn parking in town.

If approved, the amendments will limit off-street parking to 24 hours at a time in front yards, but would allow vehicles — including trailers — to stay on concrete, asphalt or gravel parking pads in side and backyards indefinitely.

Vehicles in driveways would not be subject to the restrictions. The changes would also require that vehicles have current registrations and be capable of moving forward or backward to classify as “operable.”

City officials say the proposal strikes a balance between presentable property maintenance standards and residents’ right to use their land as they see fit. But a vocal group of locals disagree, saying the proposal doesn’t go far enough.

In several meetings since debate on the matter started early this year, Bob and Mary Ann Minick have called for an ordinance that limits the number of trailers in yards, complaining about several parked on a neighboring lot by its owner, who doesn’t live on the property.

The two have also argued the current proposal is unenforceable, claiming the city couldn’t consistently differentiate between front, side and backyards. At last week’s city council meeting, Mary Ann Minick said she worried about unequal enforcement of the code, claiming officials might not apply it to properties with front-yard gravel pads before it passed into law.

“We’ve all spent too damn much time on this, and it needs to be done right this time, so we aren’t back here all the time,” she said during the meeting’s public comment period.

City Attorney Kevin Olson said he disagreed, referencing definitions for each part of a yard already spelled out in city code.

“All the yards are defined in the zoning code,” he said. “When you say ‘front yard,’ you would be going to (that) definition.”

Others have argued the proposal is unenforceable, since the city can’t verify how long every car stays in one place. Municipal officials have said they don’t expect that to be a problem, with enforcement of yard parking complaints usually taking about a day to follow up on, ensuring alleged offenders have the requisite 24 hours to move their vehicle.

City Administrator Joe Gaa said the city hadn’t historically enforced its previous yard parking code, but he expects that to change if the proposed amendment passes.

“Once this is set in stone and on the books and has been published and everything, I will spend some time with codes enforcement, we’ll go around and evaluate,” he said.

Other critics, like Washington resident Bernard Singleton, claimed previous votes on the ordinance were invalid, arguing Council Member Ivan Rangel had a conflict of interest when he voted, since he owns a construction business and could benefit from trailer parking in town, which was more limited in an earlier draft of the code discussed in February.

That claim is likely false. The Iowa League of Cities says conflict of interest rules are “often misunderstood,” and apply mostly to decisions about government spending and compensation, not to policies that affect elected officials alongside the rest of the public.

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com