The News Tribune asked the candidates in contested races for Jefferson City Council in the April 6 election to answer the following reader-submitted questions.
Candidates' responses may have been edited for length and clarity.
Ward 4 candidate Leonard Steinman did not respond to the News Tribune's request for answers for this article.
There is a huge litter problem throughout the city. How do we put teeth in an anti-litter ordinance?
Ward 2
Laura Ward: The issue of trash around our streets and neighborhoods is probably the number one complaint I receive from constituents in Ward 2, especially in the springtime. The City Council just passed an updated ordinance last year regarding litter to raise the maximum fine and allow a property inspector or police officer to issue a ticket, citation and summons to appear in court. We are all accountable for our actions. I move on these complaints quickly, making our inspectors aware of trash nuisances. I also try to be proactive by providing opportunities for the community to participate in beautifying our city.
Edith Vogel: Since most complaints are citizen-driven, I would assume there are ordinances to deal with these complaints. I, too, have noticed what seems like more litter around than usual; some say recent missing of dumpsters might have been the problem, high winds, lack of personal responsibility. The environmental commission would be the first step, then council, advice of city attorney in regard to legal bases, examples, fines through municipal courts, after due process, in my opinion.
Ward 3
Mary Schantz: Whether it is the owner who allows trash, vehicles, weeds, debris, etc., to accumulate or the person who tosses his personal trash on the sidewalk, both are offenses. There is city code as to how they are dealt with and a penalty. If a code is not working or being enforced, I would want to know why and then work with the city staff responsible for enforcement to see what could be done to make the codes easier to enforce so the problem can be eliminated.
Scott Spencer: Littering is a community problem that requires a multifaceted solution. We can start by educating the residents on the health and environmental impacts, including students in our schools. Second, encourage the community to protect their neighborhoods from litter through creative signage and local campaigns. Involve Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts and other community groups in the efforts. Third, make sure we have adequate and easy-to-locate litter bins throughout the city. Fourth, enforce littering laws whenever possible. It will be impossible to totally eliminate litter, but we can work together as a community to reduce the problem.
Ward 4
Derrick Spicer: More signs and more trash cans. City employees need to be more diligent. City ordinance, we need to be fining people. Also hopefully, the trash company can assist with that.
Ryan Estes: Realistically, the biggest deterrent for litter is the laws themselves and the fear of receiving a fine. But fines are a punitive measure and disproportionately impact those least able to afford them. It would be unethical and ineffective to increase the fine for littering. Instead, I would incentivize citizens taking an active role in keeping our city clean, both for themselves and others. I think positive reinforcement in this instance would be more effective than negative.
Ward 5
Mark Schreiber: Well, I think we need to do something. It's the responsibility of everybody, and if we're going to continue being one of America's most beautiful small cities, then we have to live up to that designation. I certainly am in favor. It's one of those if we have a litter ordinance it's how do we enforce that because so many times people are driving and they throw something out on the street. Unless you just happen to catch him in the act, and it's awfully hard to designate responsibility for that. But we certainly need to do something.
Alicia Edwards: I was raised with the mindset you reap what you sow. I believe that any anti-littering ordinance must come with both a fine and community service. If a "litter bug" has to clean up the trash problem they helped create, they will be less likely to litter in the future.
The Parks and Recreation Department receives a dedicated sales tax as well as $500,000 per year from the capital improvements sales tax. Meanwhile, our streets are in the worst shape in my lifetime (almost 70 years), and we cannot buy cameras for our police department. Would you vote to strip the $500,000 per year from parks and spend it on streets, the police and other priorities instead of passing more tax increases?
Ward 2
Laura Ward: The City Council has been very supportive of the Parks Comprehensive Plan to bring our parks up-to-date and invest in projects that will have both an economic and wellness impact in our community for years to come, for example, Community Park, the Wellness Center, the Greenway Trail and the Riverside Amphitheater. The additional $500,000 has raised concern, and with current discussions relating to our city's needs, I do think this should be included in our discussions relating to the next capital improvement tax.
Edith Vogel: Protecting citizens is top priority, and providing high-quality equipment for police to do their job we expect is extremely important, even it means making sacrifices and tightening expenses in areas like recreation.
Ward 3
Mary Schantz: Parks and public safety are important parts of what makes JC a wonderful place to live. Parks enrich our lives; they attract tourists; they generate sales tax revenue. They need to be kept up to date. Police and firefighters keep us safe and are vital to our health and safety. They need to be well paid and have the equipment they need. The $500,000 for capital improvements for parks is important for needed capital improvements. The public safety sales tax assures the police and fire have adequate funding to meet their needs today and in the future.
Scott Spencer: It was originally presented to voters that the Parks and Recreation half-cent sales tax was to be their sole funding source so that the capital improvement dollars would be used exclusively for infrastructure and public safety. It is unfortunate that the plan changed; more dollars were diverted to Parks and Recreation, and now we have street, stormwater and public safety issues. I've been advocating for this change since 2008, and if elected, I will continue to support for the removal of Parks and Recreation from the capital improvement sales tax proposal H.
Ward 4
Derrick Spicer: Parks and Rec already has a dedicated sales tax, and with failing infrastructure, also with public safety needing equipment, let's look and see where the parks money is being spent and then we will make our decision.
Ryan Estes: Proper maintenance for streets and equipment for law enforcement are issues that deserve appropriate funding. I also think that parks and recreation provide essential services for children, particularly during the summer when children are out of school, which provide low-cost options for child care. I would cut parks and rec funding to pay for more maintenance and equipment as long as the programs and services for children weren't impacted by the cuts.
Ward 5
Mark Schreiber: I would have to look at the entire thing, but quite honestly, yes. We need to take care of the infrastructure in our neighborhoods first, including the streets and the curbs and sidewalks and all of those types of things. The parks are in pretty good shape, and I'm certainly in favor of parks. I think that's been recognized and that's one of the things that's been labeled as important to help the community grow. Our parks have a lot of money; they're in good shape. I would be in favor of $500,000 being used for those other issues.
Alicia Edwards: I would not be in favor of removing any funding from the Parks and Recreation Department. I believe taking money from them will lead to much larger problems for young people who already struggle with finding positive outlets for their energies. As executive director of a nonprofit that specializes in providing positive outlets, I know how much those programs cost.
However, any tax increases must be instituted as a last resort because it targets individuals on fixed budgets and low-income populations. We can find money by helping increase small-business ownership in Jefferson City, providing jobs and stimulating the local economy.