[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6146724,"mediaKeyId","5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69","parentId",5524728,"title","Committee backs drafting legislation to raise parking fines to cover enforcement costs","audioSeconds",1502,"startMs",3054000,"endMs",4556000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69&start=3054&end=4556","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69/thumbnail_3054000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6146724/Findlay-City/Hancock-County/Ohio/Committee-backs-drafting-legislation-to-raise-parking-fines-to-cover-enforcement-costs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146724-e40f005d12574fd7a481cda25ce0c698/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163530&Signature=ny3K2030UHk4ifl~IwEja3bTxX-RhNM4E0M9Clq2lDtXRvC2yn1i9M~bPaQ4iSgT1ASbh-oWr~Kz6lUn8zXIgVw5FnQW4sNybg5roLrdI~V3N7bQinnkSS16u3-03R0c0bJkYPaYun1ASE5FzTgGnoj8G1thq74XxywRS3U738J0osfqv8YMZUtPgh65hppquvoIdNpsSeQGDGdF-19ZDebUTMgdyF44GkiIEgaDXYdSFloWsFoQ5pbWMSK0Yxzc4JZYYkrkyxzXttqdFQlPBspdtNLXZd~bppetLIaVf7dXhgx~prXhQYhpC50A5Zhy9sPofTj5YcoWP6AbEPii9A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Findlay, OH ","date","2025-08-02T12:08:42.753Z","article","The Streets, Sidewalks and Parking Committee voted unanimously to ask the administration to draft legislation to raise parking fines and fees so the parking enforcement program can cover its operating costs without a general‑fund subsidy.

Why it matters: city staff told the committee that parking fines and related revenue have not kept pace with rising costs; the parking enforcement program required a general‑fund subsidy this year largely because of wage increases and other cost pressures. Committee members said changes should improve turnover in high‑demand areas and create financial sustainability for the parking program.

Details and numbers presented: staff presented three options. Using 2024 revenue as a baseline (parking ticket revenue reported at roughly $49,000), proposed change 2 — highlighted by staff and supported in committee discussion — would raise the base single parking violation from $5 to $15 and raise other parking violation categories from $10 to $25 while leaving handicapped‑parking fines unchanged. Staff estimated that change would raise estimated fine revenue to about $96,000 under current assumptions, eliminating the need for a general‑fund subsidy and creating a modest positive variance in the parking enterprise budget. A third option (a single flat fine of $20 for most violations) would yield larger revenue but would require separate handling for serious violations such as blocking fire hydrants.

Enforcement and structure: committee members discussed progressive ticketing (additional citations for the same vehicle if it remains over time), late fees, and how modern enforcement software marks a vehicle’s position. Members raised common complaints, such as drivers who receive a short‑duration ticket and then return shortly afterward and are issued a subsequent progressive citation; staff explained the city’s current 24‑hour rule and plate/valve‑stem marking process used to track turnover.

Action and next steps: the committee asked administration and legal staff to prepare draft ordinances reflecting the preferred approach (staff recommended proposed change 2), to consider higher fines for high‑severity violations such as blocking fire hydrants, and to return the draft legislation to council for consideration. The committee endorsed sending the legislation to council; the motion to request drafting and submission carried unanimously.

Taper: members acknowledged these are politically sensitive changes and asked staff to present a clear comparison of old vs. new fine tables when the legislation is presented to council.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Streets, Sidewalks, and Parking Committee 7/31/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members endorsed administration proposals to increase parking fines to reduce or eliminate the department's subsidy from the general fund and to improve turnover; the committee asked administration to draft ordinances and return to council.","taxTitle","Findlay City, Hancock County , Ohio","taxId",52832,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6146729,"Committee asks law director to review e‑bike and scooter rules after reports of incidents",829,2002000,2831000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69&start=2002&end=2831","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69/thumbnail_2002000.jpg","/articles/6146729/Findlay-City/Hancock-County/Ohio/Committee-asks-law-director-to-review-ebike-and-scooter-rules-after-reports-of-incidents","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146729-b65ed5936bc1e207f9531f2dc7e6b435/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163530&Signature=EOQpFawCyy4oGkcFDt~LrfyPNyRwVE~SQ~2b0KLvnQiLnMcqLrU5nLltqd6kFdBdvL5ppkX8JV3QJQJiBcDam16Rl-lrMkVBSew8Wbcsvq0teyrlhxR0T0ttIks0z4LcidZZ97qdEIs-Kz7f2~Dhg~rBwBvFl0hJ-SGmQm2ezGTUtPATH1byXtDev3N9xdiUmZ6cLHzFA5TUkUOAd7030Iz39gVsAGmndFZeO3SyCkMCLGkVz8-BfUxssLWMVADQdVJWcpYJSUufmulbqUinwYZn~7SgcziQXWzHXhjRSSJV49j47KGvPjC9hAccGrMu~Ims0ZUoySKGwhV8HLlI6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The city’s Streets, Sidewalks and Parking Committee agreed to ask the law director to review municipal ordinances and state definitions that govern electric bicycles and motorized scooters, after staff and police reported several incidents and rising concern about vehicle speed and rider age and helmet use.

Why it matters: committee members said faster, more powerful e‑bikes and scooters operating on sidewalks and shared paths raise safety concerns for pedestrians, strollers and young cyclists. The committee asked legal staff to start by clarifying definitions and any conflicts with Ohio Revised Code provisions and to consider options for council review.

What was said: police and staff reported six incidents involving motorized personal devices from April 1, 2024, through the present; staff said the incidents recorded were not severe injuries but warranted review. Committee members and police described concerns about devices that can exceed 20 mph on sidewalks, riders' age and helmet compliance, and enforcement practicality. Staff referenced state and trail agency guidance that generally allows class 1 and class 2 e‑bikes on shared‑use paths when top speeds remain at or below 20 mph, and that class 3 e‑bikes (which can exceed 20 mph) are often excluded from those facilities.

Action and next steps: the committee asked the law director to review relevant city ordinances and state code definitions, to consult with police and other staff, and to return with draft ordinance language or recommendations for council consideration. No formal ordinance change was adopted at the meeting.

Taper: committee members said enforcement practicality will be an important factor in any recommended change; staff and police will supply incident data and legal analysis to inform draft language.","The Streets, Sidewalks and Parking Committee asked the law director to review city ordinances and Ohio Revised Code definitions related to electric bicycles and scooters after police reported six incidents since April 1, 2024; no ordinance changes were made at the meeting.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6146734,"Committee directs ordinance change for cul-de-sac sidewalks, discusses city cost‑share program",1943,75000,2018000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69&start=75&end=2018","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5524728-3bdad68f21de6938900f8c96238efd69/thumbnail_75000.jpg","/articles/6146734/Findlay-City/Hancock-County/Ohio/Committee-directs-ordinance-change-for-cul-de-sac-sidewalks-discusses-city-costshare-program","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146734-736642e7f1e4b91221d3b9b971f8c239/orig.mp4?Expires=1771163530&Signature=Ax3xIeFAP1oblNYY2Bb4IEZmZadC2BgrCtmHeM4TWoeSk2MX1Vx5ZNvUt72hjB3o~muu135~gupHmRXKBBHsFXMp3CeY4qrA7beR1PCzyNab9VjYFDUUO8HMoHMB0Zrdtw2k78NbqQ3k67Y8v4oeeHt5efoHbhDcKHLhHjtFj5WhQPFEwnebpWxoapWlEBu3ifzU0pQ8qVECacJBqvNDb655VW38NeQ3-j3hc5l2kbSqVi3FNHMnhq4aJrUCxBhxFK7NQ9OaNkKkzz9PXRmL-EFYaMwU-gEKmXP8fIVzezAPmryS~~UeLqzgOTRwDnZidlWx3xyplg7S~ehuW7OrVw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Streets, Sidewalks and Parking Committee unanimously voted to ask the law director to revise the city’s sidewalk ordinance to remove a cul‑de‑sac exemption for lots whose rear or side yards abut a thoroughfare, and held an extended discussion about possible cost‑share programs to spur sidewalk repairs.

Committee members said the change is intended to address safety and accessibility where sidewalks were omitted during development and now force pedestrians into roadways. The committee directed the law director to draft ordinance language and return to the committee for review before sending legislation to council.

Why it matters: committee members and staff framed the issue as public‑infrastructure and pedestrian‑safety driven. They said reliance on property owners alone has left many sidewalks in poor condition; the committee discussed tradeoffs between voluntary incentive programs and mandatory enforcement tied to property assessments, bonds or city‑led contracts.

Discussion highlights and background: members described several funding and program models. Staff and council members discussed a voluntary cost‑share or discount model in which the city could procure materials or arrange a contractor pool so homeowners pay a reduced share; alternatively, the city could run an assessment program in which homeowners are given an opportunity to prepay and, if they do not, the city completes the work and places an assessment on property tax rolls.

Costs and prior work: staff provided rough cost figures during the meeting. One staff estimate for concrete‑only material was reported as about $56,100 for what the presenter called a “1 meter mile” unit (staff clarified this as a high‑level, material‑only estimate). A contractor‑style estimate mentioned a contractor price in the range of $10–$12 per square foot to remove and replace concrete; meeting participants noted that those figures did not include labor, forms, traffic control or administration. Committee members recalled a past multi‑year, quadrant‑based plan and a previously awarded engineering management bid that nearly moved forward but was not implemented for affordability reasons.

Enforcement and program design: members emphasized that any city program would need “teeth,” meaning clear enforcement and council‑level backing to ensure property owners comply or that assessments can be collected. The law director was asked to review existing ordinance language (including technical specifications such as width and surface that may reference older concrete standards), federal and state standards that the city follows, and to prepare draft language that addresses cul‑de‑sac frontage and enforcement mechanisms.

Next steps: staff will develop several program options (voluntary cost‑share, assessment model, and mixed approaches), work with the law director on ordinance language, and return proposals to the committee. The committee voted unanimously to direct the law director to revise the ordinance so that cul‑de‑sac parcels fronting or abutting another street would be required to provide sidewalks; the motion was moved by Committee Chair Josh Palmer and seconded by Committee member James Niemeyer, and carried by the committee members present.

Taper: committee members and staff said they do not expect an immediate, citywide fix this year and stressed the need to refine costs and prioritization before recommending bond issuances or assessments to council.","The city's Streets, Sidewalks and Parking Committee voted unanimously to ask the law director to rewrite the municipal sidewalk ordinance so properties on cul‑de‑sacs that abut thoroughfares must install sidewalks; members also discussed multiple financing and enforcement options for a broader sidewalk repair program.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee backs drafting legislation to raise parking fines to cover enforcement costs

Committee asks law director to review e‑bike and scooter rules after reports of incidents

Committee directs ordinance change for cul-de-sac sidewalks, discusses city cost‑share program