An ordinance regulating the Use of Compression Brakes became the next topic of discussion. At a September City Council meeting staff was directed to prepare an ordinance regulating the use of compression brake systems, commonly known as “Jake brakes.” The draft ordinance was prompted by citizen complaints regarding the loud engine noises caused by the drivers of large diesel trucks that use their compression brakes while driving through the city. Staff, as well as the Jackson Police Department, conducted research with Caltrans, the California Highway Patrol and other municipal agencies, that have enacted ordinances which regulate these noises in their jurisdictions. However, it was also discussed that an ordinance of this type must be approved by Caltrans prior to enforcement of the noise provisions when on a state highway, which is where most of the noise offenses occur in Jackson.

Chief of Police Scott Morrison has prepared a draft ordinance that is modeled after other various approved ordinances in other cities and would also provide law enforcement agencies with the language necessary to cite offenders. The City Council approved the first reading of compression brake ordinance, however that does not make the ordinance law as of yet, as the City must get Caltrans approval of the draft ordinance and also approval of placing signage that will appear along the state highways warning of the compression brake regulations. The item will be returning for final approval if and when Caltrans approves the ordinance language. The agenda item regarding “Pre-Hearing statements of Decision Makers” was a hot topic.

The agenda item appeared because some citizens felt that elected officials running in the upcoming race for a city council seat should be able to express their opinions regarding certain topics that may appear during their term if elected. In a memo City Manger Mike Daly made it very clear that this will impede their ability to vote on issues, by pointing out that significant legal decisions have been published by state courts ruling that a Councilperson (or Planning Commissioner) can be disqualified from voting on an issue if a certain level of bias toward a decision is indicated by a council person prior to the issue being afforded its procedural process, or public hearing. Despite hearing the legal ramifications that could impact an elected official whom makes such statements the general consensus of the public was they want to know how their elected officials feel about issues that will appear before them, such as the issue of Large retail establishments. The general discussion weighed the balance between representative government and fair administrative processes said Daly. Ultimately, the council felt that they would not want to put themselves in a position that may cause them not to be able to vote on a project. Basically, as long as council members keep an open mind on issues that comes before them they will not have a problem with bias and therefore being able to vote on an issue.