Trash-burning ordinance question to make it to October ballot

Trash-burning ordinance question

to make it to October ballot

BY TERRY SCHMIDA

The smoldering question of burning yard waste will be decided by Marathon voters during the Nov. 3 election.

That’s following a decision by City Council to approve the wording of a ballot measure that could create an ordinance to ban the practice.

However, even as council members and Mayor Chris Bull voted to agree the plebiscite’s language, the issue behind it continues to divide the elected officials – if not exactly the public.

The confusion was palpable at the Sept. 8 budget hearing/City Council meeting at the Marathon Government Center, where new City Attorney David Migut sought to assure the pols that they were voting to approve the question, and not a ban ordinance itself.

In the event that was not enough to garner a unanimous consensus, with Councilman Bill Kelly and Vice-Mayor Mark Senmartin both voting “no.”

Part of the reason for the confusion was Migut’s contention that the city would likely be unable to enforce any such ordinance, should citizens give it a thumbs-up.

“In actuality, there is nothing we can do about [the burning of yard waste], is that correct?” Senmartin asked Migut before the roll call. He added that he felt it was “misleading to the public” to suggest that they had the power to decide the matter at the ballot box.

But Migut reminded council members that they were actually voting on a separate concern.

“The enforceability is not the issue before you today,” he said, adding that there could be a “potential issue in the future” with making any such ordinance work.

“If you deny this and it doesn’t go on the ballot, a lawsuit could be brought,” Migut claimed, citing legal precedents from mainland Florida cities.

Kelly soldiered on, asking the city attorney “if we say no to this . . . can we defend it?”

Migut replied, “it would be tough to defend, based on the case law I’ve read, when cases like this have arisen in the past. Your charter states that you shall submit the petition for approval.”

The petition in question contained the signatures of 706 Marathon residents worried about fires and air pollution. Several of them showed up at the last council meeting, on Aug. 25, to demand a chance to pronounce themselves on the controversy at the polls..

One emotional woman even advised council members that they “ought to fire [Migut] right now” over his handling of the brief.

Upon hearing that just 12 calls of complaint had been placed to code enforcement over the course of 18 months, Councilman Dan Zieg indicated his reluctance to politicize the rumpus.

“I’m not in favor of passing a law that will affect the whole city,” he said at the Aug. 25 meeting.

Mayor Bull, however, urged his colleagues to keep perspective on what they were actually voting on.

“I agree with what the attorney has said,” Bull stated on Tuesday. “As far as discussing the merits of enforceability, that’s not ours to judge . . . that’s for the public discussion to happen when this gets put on the ballot . . . We’re abiding by the charter. There’s not much we can do but pass this and move forward.”

A final budget hearing, to approve the millage rate and adopt the final budget, will take place at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 22, at the Marathon Government Center.