O'Fallon Council Rejects Plain English Law, Embraces Policy

The rejected an ordinance that would have required plain English definitions by a 6-4 vote Thursday night, but accepted the same provision as a resolution by an 8-2 vote.

By accepting the "plain English” provision as a resolution rather than as an ordinance, it becomes a policy that council members direct staff to follow, not an enforceable law.

The plain English policy requires laws and regulations to be written so that a person of average intelligence can understand it.

Councilman Jim Pepper, Ward 2, who drafted the , said he was satisfied with the turn of events.

“This has some teeth to it because it becomes a policy directed by the council,” Pepper said. “Now that we have the policy, I will be observing how new ordinances come in and see how staff follows council policy.”

He said he did not understand why staff and some fellow council members opposed making provisions for laws to be easily understood.

“I believe that citizens deserve understandable laws and regulations.”

Mayor Bill Hennessy said, “I think we’re causing city staff too many problems."

If Hennessy said he agreed with city staff recommendations that the city would have set itself up for some liability had it adopted the plain English requirement as a law.

Staff members, including City Manager Keith Riesberg, said that requiring the plain English by law would open council actions to legal action from someone who wanted to block those actions. Riesberg said they could claim any action was not sufficiently explained in plain English.

The city manager said he wasn’t opposed to using plain English in ordinances, but preferred having it as a policy, not a requirement, so it would not impact the city in the legal arena.

Voting against the plain English bill as an ordinance were council members Bill Gardner and Rick Lucas, both Ward 1; Rose Mack, Ward 2; Rick Battelle, Ward 3; Mark Perkins and Mike Pheney, both Ward 5.

Council members John Haman Jr., Ward 3, Bob Howell and Jeff Schwentker, both Ward 4, and Pepper voted in favor.

Perkins and Gardner also voted against the plain English provision as a resolution.

The council tied on a vote on Pepper’s attempt to change the city’s definition of nuisances.  The individual council members’ votes were the same as the 6-4 vote against the plain English ordinance, except Battelle voted in favor of the nuisance ordinance.

Pepper said the ambiguous language meant that the code is enforced or not enforced in different ways by different code enforcement inspectors.

“We need to be fair to everyone and treat everyone the same way,” he said.

City Attorney Stephanie Karr said the way the ordinance was worded would have allowed some obstructions in the right-of-way without agreements with the city “if it did not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic.”

Pepper replied that it also would have prohibited items that presented a danger to residents. “A lot of things can fit under that terminology,” he said.

Karr also said the more specific language could increase the city’s liability because it would allow some items in the right-of-way without agreements with the city.

The city also unanimously approved an ordinance that prohibits commercial vehicles unrelated to a business from parking or idling for long periods of time in that area. Howell had proposed the ordinance after getting complaints about commercial vehicles parking and idling overnight on Bryan Road.