The Innsbrook Board of Trustees held a special meeting Feb. 11 to discuss a review of their city codes.
The village is currently reviewing their codes for possible revision.
During the …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active subscription, or you are a print subscriber who had access to our previous wesbite, then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you have not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
If you are a current print subscriber and did not have a user account on our previous website, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
The Innsbrook Board of Trustees held a special meeting Feb. 11 to discuss a review of their city codes.
The village is currently reviewing their codes for possible revision.
During the meeting, the board went through their current code page by page discussing potential corrections and modifications to the code.
One of the first matters discussed was who handles fines for municipal violations.
Village Attorney Bradley Pryor said municipal violations can be heard in the circuit court if there is no municipal court. He explained that smaller communities typically contract for court services. He said there needs to be a prosecutor to prosecute cases in the circuit court.
“My understanding is in the past violations have been handled in the Warren County Circuit Court,” he said.
Pryor said he did not feel like his contract with the village includes prosecution services, suggesting that the village possibly look into hiring attorneys that specialize in prosecution related services.
Later in the meeting, Trustee Mike Caton said the village would need to discuss going forward the procedure by which they would utilize the services of a village prosecutor.
One of the code provisions the board discussed required copies of ordinances to be made available to the public prior to meetings, which is apparently something that has not been done.
Pryor said providing ordinances is a statutory requirement, noting the village should be doing that going forward.
Later the board discussed separating out some chapters in the code. For instance Caton suggested separating out sign regulations from the subdivision section of the code.
The discussion later moved to preassembled factory homes. Pryor said with respect to a zoning question about manufactured homes he said more research would be necessary because he didn’t know if completely disallowing manufactured homes would be legal in the village.
Other discussions revolved around minor changes to verbiage and spelling corrections in the code.
The meeting was scheduled as a work session to discuss and review the code, so no formal action was taken to approve any changes. Several items were tabled for further discussion.
