ORDINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
OCTOBER 4, 2016
Committee Chair Mr. Hoefle opened the meeting at approximately 6:00 p.m. Members of the Committee in attendance were Mr. Hoefle, Mr. Meyers and Mr. Spotton. Present from Council were Mr. Zuren, Mr. Kasunick and Mr. Evers and Council President Ms. DePledge.
In attendance from the Administration were Mayor Morley and Chief Reik.
Also in attendance were members of the public.
Members of the audience that were recording the meeting:
There was nothing under Proposed.
Discuss deer control.
Mr. Hoefle: We meet a couple of weeks ago and we had some information that was presented to us from ODNR. We have had a lot of information that has gone back since March that we have obtained. I have done a lot of research myself in regards to this and I did send out today to everybody a sample ordinance just so we had a starting point to go over. I am now going to turn it over to…I want to check with my committee and see if they have any comments. Mr. Meyers or Mr. Spotton do either one of you wants to go through and you have seen what my comments are as a starting point I will start with you guys. Mr. Spotton?
Mr. Spotton: With the email that I have sent you I do have some concerns about the size of the lots and the limit of only two lots. That will drastically limit basically almost anybody in the city on taking any action. That to me is a major problem with that initial proposal.
Mr. Hoefle: Is there anything else?
Mr. Spotton: That is about it for right now. The lot sizes are a problem.
Mr. Hoefle: Chief Reik did you have a chance to read it today.
Chief Reik: The ordinance looked pretty good. The trapping…did you want us to look into additional for the smaller or you want this to be inclusive?
Mr. Hoefle: I just went through this as a starting point. There are going to be other things as far as a sample template that we have. This was just going over…basically this is just mirroring some of the ordinances that are already in effect with Parma Heights, Parma, Broadview Heights, North Royalton and worked off of some of the sample ordinance that they had. I have samples of deer hunting packets from all of the committee meetings, the ODNR samples and facts about deer resistant plants if anybody has any questions on anything like that. I have sample from pretty much everything on my research. In most of the cities that I was looking at…at least the ones that did pass were five continues acres. We are a very small bedroom tight knit community. With about a quarter acre lots and most of them as some people think have very narrow lots. To could be like a bowling alley. We do have some larger areas in the city where we could do a controlled hunt in. I am not sure how the Mayor would feel about some of the parks in the City of Eastlake. We have Eastlake Gardens has probably close to fifty acres. I am not sure about Woodland Park. You have Yachtsmen Cove where they have 9.2 acres back there, but it has a homeowners association. There is some area over by DeMilta it is a Green Field Land that is about 27acrea. You have the property with CEI that is about 54 acres there. There is some area off of Curtis Boulevard that is almost 11 acres. Mr. DeMilta has almost 11 acres of property. There are some different areas in the city where you could have this. What I have in here is the boiler plate to start with was that we were going with five continues acres. No more than two parcels and we were looking at 200 yards. These are numbers that I just threw out there which was a starting point. Two hundred yards from a property line and seventy-five yards from the structure that is some of the starting points. Councilman Meyers did you have anything that you wanted to interject?
Mr. Meyers: I think that it is an interesting idea about possibly doing something in the public parks especially being a large size.
Mr. Hoefle: Mayor Morley?
Mayor Morley: I think that if you could stay with the five acres you mind as well just…especially for some of the areas where we’ve talked about that are complaints from our residents. It is not going to be of any use for our residents. I think that is more of the people that want to do this…I would say that I know that we talked about three and you are only using two parcels. If you are going to…I would lower that down to three acres and three to four parcels. I think that what we are doing and what we are looking at…the Division of Wildlife has opened their arms for us to use them. I don’t believe that they are going to do anything wrong to show us. They are going to lead us through it and I think that it takes care of it. We are going to give our residents something that they can use. If you guys think that the whole city is going to all of a sudden go deer hunting I don’t think that is going to happen. Some of the areas…especially and a majority of the calls are from Ward 4. Mr. Spotton’s calls and the calls that I get from Ward 4 and some are from Ward 3. I think that if you put five acres you mind as well not have any legislation at all and just do what the gentleman here have been asking and just say that you don’t want to move on it and be done with it.
Council President DePledge has now joined the meeting.
Mr. Hoefle: Is there anyone else from Council or is there anyone else that…Chief Reik?
Chief Reik: The only other thing that I did see why you had two only. If four neighbors together…I don’t see how that would affect…actually the more people I guess in the same group of houses the better. Because if they hunt in the middle of five houses the farther the deer goes you have less and less complaints that are going to come to my desk, your desk or anywhere else. I would really put a limit as long as they are all continuous. You wouldn’t be able to add if you have the guy in the middle that isn’t for it. Obviously that would stop that chain.
Mr. Hoefle: Like I said I threw it out there. I had read somewhere else…I used where I live in the Valley Creek Drive developments. Most of the lots are sixty feet wide by a couple hundred to two hundred fifty feet deep. If you had enough property is that all agreed to do this…all continuous? We come up with three acres or whatever number we come up with…I just can’t see it happening over there. Because you have a lot of fenced in yards or where are they going to do it in someone’s from yard because they all agree to it? I don’t want to see a deer get shoot and I have no problem with the hunting part. I don’t want to see that if they don’t drop right away and it travels over into Mr. Zuren’s front yard. Mayor Morley?
Mayor Morley: A part of that I think and I don’t know if you are missing it is the Division of Wildlife and the Chief or whoever the representative is that he picks that is going to be their call. I’m going to give them enough common sense and knowledge that what they do to say no that can’t happen in Valley Creek or no it can’t happen there. That is my opinion.
Chief Reik: The ones on Lakeshore you couldn’t say that you have to do it in the back yard. The back yards are small and the front yards are big. Valley Creek it could be the opposite and I think that it would be like a site assessment. To say that this one makes sense but this one doesn’t for these reasons. I don’t want to see people with a six pack on their front porch…that is definitely no front yard stuff in the majority of the residential. Lakeshore is a different animal being that the houses sit so far back and with the bigger lots.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Zuren?
Mr. Zuren: I just wanted to say that I read the email and it looks very good. I also think that the number of acres and the two parcels agreeing to the maximum I think that it should be deemed safe by the Police Chief. I really like putting it on the property owner because what was presented to us last time where the property owner is responsible instead of putting it to a park or something. It seems the property owner is making the decision, which I like that part of the legislation.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Evers?
Mr. Evers: I am okay dropping it down to three acres, however like the Chief just said. If they have to hunt from the front yard on Lakeshore Blvd. is that deer going to run into Lakeshore Blvd. after it is hit and get hit by a car? Is that a possibility? It is something for us to think about. The other thing that I would like to see put in there is a restriction on how close to a playground, a school, and a church. And I would like to see the property posted by the land owners that is a controlled hunting area. So that everybody is aware like the mailman, UPS personnel and FedEx personnel. I am okay with three acres…if they can get three acres of continues and the neighbor’s agree I do not have a problem with it.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Kasunick?
Mr. Kasunick: I like the post statute or the ordinance. Class three hunting shall be conducted from an elevated platform but it doesn’t set the parameters as far as how elevated or anything like that. I think that there should be some type…because reading that you could just stand on a step or something like that would suffice. I think that the platform would have to be a certain number of feet high.
Mr. Hoefle: I believe that it was eight feet off the ground. Mr. Vogler?
Mr. Vogler: I have some suggestions…
Mr. Hoefle: You can interject with it.
Mr. Vogler: Most hunting stands that you buy are at least twelve feet off the ground. Your concern is do we know that it is reasonable? You might get some that are for a lack of a better term armature. I would also suggest that you do not allow homemade stands. You don’t someone coming out there with a bunch of 2x4’s and duck tape. A manufactured new stand that you can buy at any reputable business is going to be at least ten to twelve feet. Most of them are higher. You want the arrows to go in a downward direction that is safety 101.
Mr. Hoefle: Thank you.
Mr. Kasunick: If I may continue…some of these parameters I guess we could call them…200 yards from any property line. If you are 200 yards from every property line I think that would probably be more than five acres. You couldn’t even do that on a five acre lot. I think that 100 yards from any property line might be a better number. Just like others have said two parcels might be problematic for a couple of reasons. One is that it would severally limit the number of people who could participate and also some people own multiple parcels. If it is one owner who owns multiple parcels and maybe their land is broken up for possibilities of future development. It could be one person who owns a lot of land but they have their lots broken up…it wouldn’t make much sense because technically that person wouldn’t be allowed to participate in the deer hunting program as that is written. I would increase the number of parcels to maybe three or four.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Spotton?
Mr. Spotton: In that definition of any property line it should probably be the edge of your parcel that is participating. From edge to edge…three parcel or whatever instead of any parcels you would never have 100 yards between them. It would have to be worded that way.
Mr. Hoefle: It would have to be based on the continuous properties. Mayor Morley?
Mayor Morley: With the parcels and picking a number that everyone is comfortable with. If I am on Lakeshore Blvd. and Jim, Mr. Lemay, Mr. Vogler and Mr. Farwell have…there are ten of them in a row and they want to do it I think that we are just hand cuffing ourselves. I guess we would have to pick a happy medium for a number. If you have that many neighbors in a row or someone in a development and their back yard is full of deer. I will use the complaints that we get the most on from Valley View. They come out of the woods from the park at the end of my street and Valley View Dr. That is where a lot of the complaints are from they are from that area. We have all of the wooded land in the back and they are coming out. It is just everywhere and I get one almost every night. I know Mr. Pelts was here at the last meeting and he lives on Valley View Dr. and he is a big proponent and the Hornigs are over there along with everyone else. We just have to do a little bit more research…I guess you can’t do unlimited. We do agree that we can’t do unlimited parcels.
Chief Reik: If we put something in there that we inspect and we could cut it off and even say that you have twelve it is just too much roaming. You just cut it to six and six. This group hunts is this six or three fours or whatever. As long as…we talked about keeping it open as far as…rather than changing the ordinance all of the time. Under the direction of…that we could always tweak ours without three readings and ordinance changes. If we are going to break it down to three or four parcel lots and they are all together, but you just can’t roam from number one to number twelve.
Mayor Morley: That could be in there with the discretion of the Chief or his representative.
Mr. Hoefle: Ms. DePledge?
Ms. DePledge: I just hate coming late so I don’t know what you guys have said. My question for the Chief is “do you have the man power to do this and the time wise the commitment for it?”
Chief Reik: I know that Mr. Vogler talked about being able to help. We didn’t talk specifically about whether through his commission or part-time commission at our place. There would be some cost involved in that because I don’t ask anyone to volunteer for which time. If you are asking them to volunteer they are not volunteering either. It would take some individual time to get to the different spots and things like that. I don’t think that it would be a tremendous amount of money but there would be some cost involved.
Ms. DePledge: I was thinking that if it was four or five people it wouldn’t be a big deal but if you have thirty people.
Chief Reik: Plus you would want to spot check especially for the first year or two to make sure people are doing what they are supposed to be doing.
Ms. DePledge: I don’t know if I would want to be paying our officer’s overtime for this. I want to make sure there is a way around that. The other thing that I read over is the proposal I was wondering if there was…I didn’t see a reference in there to the application and we talked about there being future modifications to the application so that we don’t have to come back through ordinance. I think that should be stated in the ordinance that whoever is applying has to be in compliance with the application process and any subsequent modifications to that. I want us to have that in the legislation. Those are my thoughts.
Mr. Hoefle: Mayor Morley?
Mayor Morley: You can put some language in here but again if Council decides to move forward on this we will bring back Jeffery from the Division of Wildlife again and work…from my perspective and with Ms. DePledge is…I have told Mr. Vogler the same thing I am not going to put a lot on the Chief or our officers. Mr. Vogler and the Chief from what I was told talking with the Chief he is okay with Mr. Vogler being a representative of them.
Ms. DePledge: Like a commissioned officer?
Chief Reik: That is something that we would have to bring up with the Union just to make sure that there isn’t going to be a problem.
Ms. DePledge: So not compensated and no PERS none of those issues. Nothing like that? Okay.
Mr. Vogler: I have been screwed by PERS.
Ms. DePledge: What about insurance for that? What happens with that?
Chief Reik: It would be the same as any other part-time officer. We have several officers in our department that were full-time at the Clinic and University Heights and they help supplement side jobs for court and things like that. Whatever liability we would have it would be no different than hiring anyone else. He would also be eligible toward those side jobs and that would be up to the boss of his full-time job.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Evers?
Mr. Evers: Mr. Vogler…if he is to oversee this program and something goes wrong…and this is probably going to have to be addressed to Mr. Klammer. If a law suit comes up whose insurance is going to cover is going to cover this?
Chief Reik: Ours.
Mr. Evers: Ours?
Chief Reik: I mean it is our ordinance and our program.
Mr. Evers: That I am fine with.
Chief Reik: He would be operating…
Mr. Evers: I am fine with.
Mayor Morley: It is under the city as.
Mr. Vogler: If I could just interject sir just to bring this to your attention. If a hunter has written permission to hunt on some bodies land the land owner is free from all liability associated with that hunter. That is a state law that hunters put into effect.
Mr. Evers: Correct except if that deer runs out into the road and gets hit by a car. That is the only concern. It has been addressed and you would be covered under our insurance so it would be a non-issue.
Mr. Vogler: Okay.
Mr. Evers: Thank you.
Mr. Hoefle: Chief off hand if we had implemented a program how many would you have out on a given day? If you have all of these different parcels what do you think would be manageable?
Chief Reik: It is kind of hard to say to start off, because I don’t know if we are going to be flooded or if we are going to have just three or four groups specifically. I think that the number will be probably lower than we expect for continuing for sure. Some may start it and then decide that they like the idea of traveling to where ever they travel to do their hunting. We would have the initial onsite to check where they are setting up at to make sure it conforms. Through a couple hours a week to spot check the places and go from there. I would guess about ten to fifteen hours a week for…how long is hunting season?
Mr. Vogler: It has been in effect for about a week and a half. Bowing season goes until early February.
Mr. Hoefle: I know that Mr. Evers brought up about the schools, churches and playground areas…we thought about how far away we would want to be from any of those…Mayor Morley?
Mayor Morley: I am just going to throw this out there what if Saint Justin, where there is a lot of deer, they want to hire someone to participate are we going to say “no?”
Mr. Hoefle: I am just throwing it out there.
Mayor Morley: It is the same thing with the school district and everything else. I get what we are saying but we are going to be smart enough again that we are not going to be doing any hunting while school is in session or in church or anything else.
Chief Reik: You can put that in there…a 1,000 feet during school hours and 1,000 feet on Sunday’s or near a church. Saint Justin’s there is not a lot of traffic other than on Sunday’s.
Ms. DePledge: Saturday nights for five o’clock mass.
Mr. Hoefle: So what you are saying like a 1,000 feet from a church or a school while they are in session or when they are having any events. I don’t know if anybody here wants to go with a three acre continuous, three to four parcels and we said one hundred yards…it dropped down to one hundred yards from the property line of a total perimeter. One thousand feet away from churches, schools or any kind of events going on…is that what we are hearing so far?
Mayor Morley: The parcel discretion that we talked about from the Chief to not set a number. Are you good with that? Or do you want a number?
Chief Reik: I don’t think that we need a specific number. If you have…it is more on the size I think that is the managing part then the number.
Ms. DePledge: You could use both. You can say three or four parcels or at the discretion of the Chief. So you could use both.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Kasunick?
Mr. Kasunick: If I could get something from Mr. Vogler or somebody who knows. What would be a safe distance from a structure like a home or something like that? Seventy-five yards is what’s in there right now. Is that too much?
Mr. Vogler: With all due respect it is twenty yards. I have taken down multiple deer already this year. I took down a deer last week…I scored 130 on the Open Young Scale. It was a monster it ran twenty-one yards before it crashed. When you are saying one hundred yards that is a huge distance for an archer and it is a huge distance for a deer to run. But when you are saying 1,000 feet, which is such a huge distance for someone who uses bow. I get that you want to air on the side of caution but it is not curtail right now where it is not achievable. I think that it is a good idea for the Chief to have the discretion of the Chief. I think that you should have it in there that the Chief or his designee deem suitable for hunting I think that it should be the key work there. If you have someone who has three acres and two and a half of it is asphalt. That is not suitable for hunting. It doesn’t make sense. As far as how far from a structure perhaps just…I am throwing out an idea. If you have a hunter that is right up against a structure but the field of view the game of play is away from the structure. It is able to hint a structure right here and you have a tree. He is up in the tree and the target acquisition is in the opposite direction of the structure that seems a little more applicable or more flexibility to allow for the program. You certainly don’t want any house, schools or churches down range. If you are twenty yards or less from a structure and as long as your target acquisition is in the opposite direction of any kind of hazard. Maybe that is a better way to phrase it. I am just throwing out ideas.
Ms. DePledge: You can put unoccupied public structure. That way if somebody wanted to do it by their home they could, but if it is a public structure I think that we need to air more on the side of caution. It would have to be an unoccupied public structure with a buffer zone. If you want to stand in your back yard or out of your second story window and you are twelve feet up in the air…you want to shot a deer in your back yard have at it.
Mayor Morley: With the Division of Wildlife they have the template on the ordinance along with everything else. We can bring them back in again and fix it.
Chief Reik: Don’t put the window thing in there.
Mr. Vogler: That is actually illegal.
Ms. DePledge: As long as it is clarified and I just threw that out there so that we could clear that one up so there are no mistakes.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Evers?
Mr. Evers: I still have a problem with the…and I am sorry but I had to go out and open the door for Ms. DePledge when she came in. What was the deciding factor on city land?
Mayor Morley: The way that I am looking at it I don’t…
Mr. Evers: I didn’t hear it.
Mayor Morley: We didn’t talk about it. We don’t have the resources to say that we are going to go down into Woodland or to Bruce Yee. I look at it that this is for the residents if the residents that live on Valley View Drive especially from the wooded area back there. They want to do something it has to be on them. I don’t plan on saying that we are going to hire Mr. Vogler or anyone else in the room that wants to hunt to go on there. That will be…if someone comes in to ask us if they want hunt there then we will look at it. I am agreeable on it and I talked to someone today about that it is going to be clearly marked. We would put the caution tape and we would put the announcements out there that say today from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. people will be hunting. That is from our end. That is the plan from my office.
Mr. Evers: I apologize.
Mayor Morley: We didn’t talk about it. Mr. Hoefle brought up those other areas and I didn’t answer at the time.
Mr. Hoefle: I think that it was approximately fifty acres in Eastlake Gardens, which back s up by Valley View. So what you are saying is that if there was a resident who wanted to do a controlled hunt back there they would get the permission from the city to go back there.
Mayor Morley: We would line up whatever we agree to for timing and what they have to mark and all of that. We could look at that.
Mr. Hoefle: Are there any other questions? Chief Reik?
Chief Reik: For clarification I would be more comfortable starting with the private property of others. Mr. Zuren touched on it…it is basically the government giving back the rights of property owners back to the property. Rather than worrying about the public property and I think that trying to cordon off or mark off a large area…you could cut through my house all the way through the Gardens and up to Lost Nation. If you want and I know that a lot of kids use that area. If it was my choice I would start with the private property and see how that goes then we could always add on if we find that there is going to be a need. It has gone well for a couple of years with just the private property. If someone who backs up to the parks on Valley View Drive and they could get their own permit or a group could get a permit they lore the deer into that area anyway. It wouldn’t be that difficult by taking down barriers and having non-deer resistant plants. They would be able to entice deer into that same area that they want to hunt from if that’s what they want to do.
Mr. Hoefle: So what you’re saying is if someone lives on Valley View Dr. and they have ten properties that all agree to it and their lots are 200 feet deep. They aren’t going to be going into the Eastlake Gardens area.
Mayor Morley: They are going to lure them to their yards or however they are going to do it.
Mr. Hoefle: That would be up to your discretion or your designee to determine if it is a viable solution to do it back there.
Mr. Hoefle: It will be up to the committee if we want to move it forward with some of the stuff that we have here. We can go back and listen to the tape again and we will condense it down to three acres continuous and three to four parcels to start out with if that is what you want to do. That can be negotiable based on your discretion. One hundred yards from the property lines and 1,000 feet from churches, schools or any events that are going on. Twenty yards from an existing occupied structure or…
Ms. DePledge: From an unoccupied public structure and further from an unoccupied public structure.
Mr. Hoefle: That would be up to the committee if you want to move it forward we could get this drafted up and over to Mr. Klammer and get his input on it to make sure all of the wording….Chief Reik?
Chief Reik: Maybe to settle some nerves too I think that on the application we could put an area and have a sketch drawing. As too here is the house, here is where the stand is going to be and here is the field of fire. So if there is a question or if someone is not following the rules and you end up with an arrow over here. When that guy applied for his application talked about his field of fire going this way and that is what was approved, and then it just gives us more to go back on the individual violator. Rather than we allowed a dangerous situation. Because this field of fire which is approved we determined to be safe and he fired over here and can’t control the people who aren’t following the rules. Most hunters I think are pretty…you have some poachers but you want to talk about big fines and these guys are used to following the rules. They can’t afford to not do it.
Ms. DePledge: The last paragraph talked about the penalty. Like what it would be and I again I don’t know if you guys discussed that…I know that there was a blank in there.
Mr. Hoefle: We didn’t discuss it.
Ms. DePledge: You didn’t discuss it. If you make it a minor misdemeanor you can make the fine whatever you want. You can make it $1,000.00 fine. You can make it up to an M-1six months in jail and a $1,000.00 fine. M-4’s, M-3’s and M-2’s but once you start imposing jail time then the person is entitled to an attorney. Then there are attorney fees and if they qualify then the city ends up paying for attorney fees and that becomes a problem. But a minor misdemeanor you can classify it however you and put your fine in however you want. They won’t qualify for an attorney.
Chief Reik: Or an unclassified misdemeanor. That is what they have gone with the driving under a suspension and you are fined up to $1,000.00 but there is no jail time so there is no right to an attorney. If god forbid property was injured your at criminal damage. We already have laws on the books if anything goes a rye or assault or anything like that. That is already covered in other statutes. I think that unclassified and with the work of the Law Department and prosecutor you could determine what type of fine it should be depending on the violation.
Ms. DePledge: I would like to see if…I would really want there to be strictly compliance with all of the hunters out there. I would want the fine to be a $1,000.00 on an unclassified misdemeanor, because I don’t want somebody to go “oh it’s $50.00.” It’s worth it to me and it may not be worth it to them if it is $1,000.00.
Mr. Hoefle: Are there any other comments from Council or the Administration? Before we decide if we are going to move it forward or not I am going to do recognition of the public.
Mayor Morley had nothing to report.
There were no further questions or comments.
Mr. Klammer was absent and excused.
There were no further questions or comments.
Ms. Schindel was absent and excused.
There were no further questions or comments.
There was nothing under Miscellaneous.
RECOGNITION OF PUBLIC
Mr. Lemay, North Lakehurst Drive, Eastlake
Mr. Lemay: You talked about penalties instead of jail time you might consider loss of hunting privileges for the State of Ohio or that type of thing.
Ms. DePledge: We would have to talk to Mr. Klammer about that if it is possible.
Mr. Evers: That would be up to ODNR. Wouldn’t that be up to ODNR?
Mr. Vogler: I understand what he is suggesting but that is actually a state issue not a city issue. You could say loss of hunting privileges within the city indefinitely. I would also be so bold as to suggest not just the monetary crime but a loss of the harvest. So if somebody was rolling dirty and didn’t comply with our rules and regulations not only would they get the fine but we take your deer. Take away the prize.
Mr. Lemay: When you are talking about distances from property lines and structures could you just not say “Hunting on this property with an approved location of a tree stand and an approved field of fire?” That way you don’t have to worry about distance, because each lot is going to be structured differently.
Mr. Hoefle: I think that what we are saying is that if you have three or four parcels…it is trying to draw you to the middle. So if you have four parcels and they did come up with the three acres. I think that it would be up to the Chief or his designee to try and draw them into a proper spot to put the tree stand. I think that it would be up to their discretion.
Mr. Lemay: From a selfish point of view I have a half acre. It is on a colda-sac so it is not conducive to hunting, but right behind me on Lakeshore Blvd. or on my street is Lake Erie. So there is a very good field of fire out into a public hunting zone. But the way that you are writing the ordinance you would exclude my property.
Mr. Hoefle: Chief Reik do you have anything?
Chief Reik: No.
Mr. Lemay: Each piece of property is unique. That is what I am getting at with the distances from the property.
Chief Reik: Do you want me in the middle of these two properties that are anti hunters to be…that would be the issue. I would say and I don’t even know how you would word it. If you had three Lakehurst properties that go together and it might not reach the three acres, but it backs up to Lake Erie and they have other contingencies. Rather than that one guy in the middle of four anti hunters…again we are not trying to make anymore work for any of us. With the concerns we are going to have some people regardless of how safe it is are not going to be for it. I will have to think about how we would have to do that.
Mr. Lemay: I don’t think that my property would qualify, but there are other rectangular properties on Lakeshore with back yard and front yard facing Lake Erie. Those might qualify but the less than five acres or twenty yards from the property line structure. That is still an ideal safe area to hunt because of Lake Erie.
John Farwell, 36823 Lakeshore Blvd., Eastlake
Mr. Farwell: I think that you guys are on the right track and I really think that you’re over thinking and over rotating here in trying to get the triangular that you are going to get. I really think that every piece of property and every situation is going to be unique. You’re not going to be able to put definitions around exactly what you have. This all boils down to common sense. If you have a piece of property and you have owners that are together that want to do it and it makes sense and it is safe. Chief Reik and Mr. Vogler or whoever they designate as the experts and they say “yes this is safe.” We are not jeopardizing anything and again the last thing a hunter wants to do is to be unsafe. They all want to be safe. They don’t want to run and chase deer they want the deer to go down quick and to die quickly. They want to harvest the meat from that deer. This really needs to boil down too common sense, safety and let the designee’s that experts in this determine whether or not this particular piece of property or group of properties makes sense.
Todd Vogler, 568 Howells Ct., Eastlake
Mr. Vogler: The one thing that I just want clear up with you, Council and Chief Reik is the one thing that I was thinking about doing is…you could take a screen shot from Lake County Auditors.
Mayor Morley: GIS
Mr. Vogler: The GIS and you could actually point on and put arrows that you have this field of vision. When you go out and inspect the tree stand I would bring a can of orange spray paint. Put a little circle on the tree stand saying that this is the tree. So that if you spot check at three weeks later why did we move. I have put a lot of thought it this. I also think that…I have never even thought of making it from a school or a church. I can see that and I never even thought of doing that. I would also suggest that maybe something about churches, because my thinking is now…I have enough meat in my freezer where I could feed my family, but I am still out hunting. I can legally harvest another four to stay…unless I get an exemption it would be another five. It looks like I may be able to do that. It looks like I would be able to harvest another eight or nine deer. All of that is going towards donations for people who need it, because my family is fine. There are churches that have already reached out to…you have a church like Saint Justin that sees the value of it, but you exclude hunting on that property when it could help feed people in that parish. I think that we are missing an opportunity to help out some of the people that live in the city. I understand it and I never even thought about posting property lines. That is a good idea too and I never even thought of that. I am just throwing it out there that maybe we’re missing an opportunity to help some of the people that live in the city. This is not happening at downtown Cleveland people are having a hard time feeding their families here. It is happening everywhere. If we have a natural resource and you have a hunter that wants to hunt on a churches land. The church says if you want the first deer for one of our families here I think that is something that you might want to think about. I am just throwing it out.
Mr. Hoefle: Mr. Lemay?
Mr. Lemay: Have you discussed the number of hunters on a piece of property at any given time or is it just one?
Chief Reik: What do you mean staying they are not…
Mr. Vogler: They are not floating around.
Mr. Lemay: One stand per property?
Mr. Vogler: It’s what’s suitable for hunting. If you have say fifteen acres you can comfortably fit more than half a dozen hunters there. It would be whatever is suitable for hunting and in agreement with the property owner.
There was no one who wished to speak.
Mr. Hoefle: Does the committee want to move this forward with….I will try and compile all of the data that we have to get something drafted and get it over to our Law Director. Do you want to move this forward?
Mr. Meyers: I am okay with moving it forward.
Mr. Spotton: I am okay with moving it forward.
Mr. Hoefle: I am agreeing with moving it forward as well. So what we will do is we will get all of the information to Mr. Klammer and we can get this drafted up and we will see what we can do from there.
Ms. DePledge: Do you want it on Tuesday’s agenda?
Mr. Hoefle: I don’t know if we will be able to get it that fast. Nothing else is under Miscellaneous.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:43 p.m.