Town motorized scooter ordinance to be considered

A committee is scheduled to present a plan for how to deal with motorized scooters in Nashville at the June 17 town council meeting.

This topic has been discussed off and on since April 2019. In the April 2021 meeting, Administration Manager Phyllis Carr had reported receiving an inquiry from a motorized scooter rental company about operating in Nashville, and she said she didn’t know what to tell them, so she hadn’t answered yet.

The council had been leaning against allowing scooter rental companies like Lime and Bird to operate in town, citing safety and concerns that riders would abandon the motorized scooters on sidewalks when they were done riding, causing hazards and eyesores.

At the April meeting, the council voted to establish a committee to put together an ordinance by the June 17 meeting, and passed a resolution banning them until that time.

But at the May town council meeting, Town Attorney James T. Roberts introduced an ordinance that the other committee members said they hadn’t seen before, which was different than an ordinance they had been working on. Roberts was attending the meeting remotely from a vacation destination.

Town council member Nancy Crocker said she was confused because Roberts wasn’t asked to revise the ordinance he had tried to present before; the committee was actually going to propose a different ordinance at this May meeting.

Roberts’ version made a distinction between motorized scooters and “shared use motorized scooters,” with the “shared use” term referring to businesses that rent them out. Neither refer to a motorized wheelchair. No scooter would be able to operate on any sidewalk, pedestrian walkway (which include the Salt Creek Trail) or public park, and they’re also not allowed by state law on state highways, which would give riders few places to legally ride them in town. All riders would have to be at least 16 and wear a Department of Transportation-approved helmet. Any rentals would have to occur from a fixed business location on private property and returned to that location after use. Any scooters found elsewhere could be impounded after 12 hours. Also, each scooter used in the business would have to have a separate business license through the town.

The committee’s version was going to prohibit motorized scooters altogether, Crocker said.

Roberts had said at the April meeting that he didn’t think banning them outright would stand up in court. But Strategic Direction Adviser Dax Norton Googled some stories while he was sitting in the meeting and found that other Indiana communities have banned them and that’s seemed to work just fine.

Council member Dave Rudd said he wouldn’t vote for an ordinance that banned motorized scooters altogether because it should be his right to ride one if he owned one or borrowed one from a family member.

Council member Anna Hofstetter said she also wouldn’t want to see this ordinance apply to hoverboards, as some kids in her neighborhood have them and she thinks they should be able to ride them in town.

Roberts said he’d emailed the ordinance group members about a week and a half before the meeting asking questions and only heard back from Carr. Crocker said she’d responded by asking Roberts why he was working on an rewrite when the committee was already doing that. Roberts apologized for the confusion and said that he thinks his version is legally sound and could withstand a challenge if there ever was one. “I just remind you, my legal advice costs the same whether you take it or not,” he added.

The committee, including Crocker, Carr, Roberts, Norton and Chief of Police Ben Seastrom, was to have a proposed ordinance back before the council by the June 17 meeting.

Utility board, town council decide on duties

The Nashville Town Council created the Nashville Utility Service Board by passing an ordinance in October 2020, giving the board power to make many utilities-related administrative decisions regarding budget, personnel and operations. But the new board wasn’t up to speed immediately after being seated in January to be able to take on all those duties, so the town council was making some of those decisions instead.

At the May USB meeting, members wondered aloud for a good portion of the two-and-a-half hours about what their real duties were intended to be. For instance, the council had approved a purchase of a Bobcat that was to come out of the utilities budget, but the USB hadn’t OK’d it, so they were surprised to see the expenditure on their financial report.

The two boards sat down for a joint meeting on May 27 to get some clarity. Council members decided that they were ready and the USB was ready to function as the ordinance intended.

So, from now on, requests for leak adjustments from customers, requests for equipment purchase from staff, budget formation, and other utility-related business that would normally go before the town council will now go before the USB.

The town council will still be responsible for setting rates.

Strategic Direction Adviser Dax Norton described the USB’s relationship to town council like the relationship of the planning commission to council: The appointed board does the actual planning work, oversees the director and makes recommendations to the elected council, then the council finishes the process; but things start at the appointed board level.

If the USB is not comfortable with doing some things listed in the ordinance, the board can kick those back to the council if they wish, Norton said.