Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance_302_08/11/1981.: ~ • ORDINANCE N0. 302 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA, PROHIBITING HITCHHIKING OR SOLICITATION OF RIDES UPON VILLAGE ROADS AND STREETS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABTLITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR CQDIFTCATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the Village Council hereby deems it necessary for the health, safety and welfare of Village residents to prohibit hitchhiking and solicitation of rides upon Village roads and streets; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA: Section 1 - That it shall be unlawful for any person to hitchhike or solicit a ride from the operator of any motor vehicle being driven upon any road, street or alley located in the Village, including state roads and county roads. Section 2 - That it shall be no defense to a prosecution under this section that the person soliciting the ride was standing on a sidewalk or on private property. Section 3 - That an emergency shall constitute a defense to a prosecution under this section as where a motor vehicle has become disabled, or some threat to person or property exists necessitating flight. Section 4 - That this section shall not be construed to prohibit a person from signalling or requesting transportation from a vehicle for hire such as a bus or taxicab. Section 5 - In the event that any section, subsection, clause, sentence or provision is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity. Section 6 - Any person found guilty of a violation of this Ordinance shall be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) or sixty (60) days in jail, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the County Judge. . ~ • • Section 7 - Permission to codify this Ordinance is hereby granted. Section 8 - This Ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and approval as provided by law. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was offered by Councilmember 'Thomas ~J. Little who moved its adoption. The Ordinance was seconded by Councilmember Carlton D. Stoddard and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: FOR ADOPTION AGAINST ADOPTION _Th ~ma G .1 _ T.i t.t.l P ~~a rl t.n n T) _ S t nr~C~a r3 Le e ~~'. B rown -. F1. T~;a nes, Jr. The Mayor thereupon declared the Ordinance duly passed and adopted this 11th day of August ~ A.D., 1981. MAYOR OF TEQUESTA ATTEST:,, ~~ ) ~/ ~/;~'~ Cyres olber Village Clerk ,/ . W. H. Mapes, Jr. 06-23--~3.1_ -Oo ~ • FO.iZ RI:VISIOTLT ITJ TTTE DETER'-ITdATION OF TEIE FILING FEE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERA}3ILITY; PP~OVIDIT~JG FOR CODlr'ICATION; PROVIDING FOR APJ EFFECTIVE DATE. He explained that Section 1 ~ p.rovides a failing period for candidates o_f' ,the tenth daft of February, frorr. and i-ncluding the tenth, to and including the t~~rontieth day o.f February in the year of the election, Section 2 he explained sets a filing fee of thirty dollars (;30,00) :•ahich shall be paid at the time of notice of candidacy. Little moved, "to approve first reading", Brown seconded and vote on the motion t,~as: Brown --far Caok -far Little --for Stoddard -for -and therefore the motion tiaas passed and adopted. The Village Attorney read by "title" -only. AN ORDINATdCE OF ^1 HE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA, PROT-IIBITITvG HITCHHIKING OF SOLICITATION OF RID S UPON} VILLAGE ROADS AT~}D STREETS ; PP~OVIDIT•1G F'OR SEVEP~~BILITY; PROVIDIi~IG FOR PENALT~S; PROVIDING FOR COD IF ICATION; PROVIDIi~TG FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, The Village Attorney briefly explained the Ordinance. Cook asked the Village T•Zanager t•~hy this Ordinance was being proposed and is there really a serious prob_lern_ in Tequesta with hitchhiJ;ers. The Village 14ianager told Cook that the Village Police Chief had requested this Ordinance and that there is no serious problem but there are people ~,,~ro hitchhike through Tequesta and if this Ordinance is passed th© Police could better control the people going through the Village. Little moved, "that we accept first reading of this Ordinance". Bro.an seconded and vote on the motion was: Bro~e n -for Cook --against Little -for Stoddard -for and therefore t}~e motion ti•:as passed and adopted, The Village ~~Ianager explained Resolution T}o, TS--f~O/~1 of the La xahatcYaee Co~~ncil of Governmentsrequestin~; all possible cooperation i.n anticipated beach rennur:i sh.tnent nro.iects in Southern I~7artin County and Northern Palm Beach Count~t. T}:e Resolution requeststhNt beach ren;~uri:>hmcr'.t nrojjects on JupitLr Island i.n T~Iartin County be coord:in:zted :,pith t}pose in Idor•thc:-rn Palm Beach County for t;he mutual benefit of all interests. The Rosalution does not su€;gest or request any particular funding rnF:thod for beacr~ renourishr.?ent projects in Southern ilartin County ,