Speed limit change in Stardust Hills sparks debate

CLOVERDALE -- Cloverdale officials will have to decide whether a 30 mph speed limit in the Stardust Hills subdivision is too fast. They will also in turn have to determine if a new 20 mph limit will be fiscally responsible and have any real impact.

The only actionable item addressed in new business during the Cloverdale Town Council’s regular meeting Tuesday evening, the consideration sparked disagreement on the responsibility to enforce the speed limit, as well as whether Stardust Hills was being singled out as a residential area.

The move toward the change has been taken up by board member Greg Jay, who said that the move was being pursued after he had consulted with members of the Cloverdale Police Department on residents’ safety in the subdivision, especially children.

“I think that the 30 mph speed limit is way too fast in Stardust,” Jay began matter-of-factly. “I have talked with the marshal and police department, and we agree that it is not safe, and people have almost been hit.”

Jay further provided that Stardust Hills is unsafe because of the many turns in the area, and because the speed limit is consistent throughout. However, the issue of whether police were enforcing it effectively was taken up by Stardust Hills developer Don Gedert.

“I’ve been getting passed in Stardust with the 30 mph,” Gedert claimed. “I’m more concerned as to why that isn’t being addressed by the police department, rather than having the town change it just in Stardust.”

Deputy Marshal Logan Clark, who stepped in for Town Marshal Steve Hibler, asked Gedert if these incidences had been called into the police. Gedert said that they had not, but implied that this was not relevant to the overall issue.

CPD Crime Scene Investigator Rick Lambert said that he concurred that drivers indeed often speed through the subdivision, comparing this to Interstate 70 being an “open drag strip.” However, he set out a consistent theme of the consideration - that the goal wasn’t to enforce the speed limit in and of itself.

“We’re just trying to get people to slow down,” Lambert said. “We do what we can to enforce the speed limits in a place like Stardust and in school zones, which are also 20 mph. It would still be safer for everyone there.”

An audience member sitting next to Gedert pressed the council on why Stardust Hills was being “singled out” due to it being residential. Jay responded that the subdivision’s “not very straight” roads and its considerable population were the key factors.

“Putting it (the speed limit) down to 20 mph would give the police more authority to enforce it,” Jay opined. “Someone may go 25 if it is 20, but others will go 45 if it is 30. I’d rather have the 20, especially since Stardust doesn’t have any sidewalks.”

Gedert acquiesced that Stardust Hills does not have any sidewalks, but said that the subdivision was not designed to have them. On the other hand, he said that they would be “advantageous.”

Gedert questioned whether the town had the authority to change the speed limit. Council President Larry Fidler and Clerk-Treasurer Cheryl Galloway responded that the town owns the roads in Stardust Hills as public right-of-ways. However, Galloway also considered that replacing the existing speed signs could be costly.

Gedert and the audience member still seemed to imply that the subdivision was being targeted. Town Attorney Daniel Hofmann asked if Gedert’s disagreements were because of Stardust Hills being treated differently regardless of the impact, to which the longtime entrepreneur gave no direct answer.

The council ultimately agreed to table the consideration, given the controversy it engendered between Gedert and other community members who attended the meeting.

During what would’ve been Marshal Hibler’s monthly report, Clark spoke to the police department’s use of red tags to signify homes which stand abandoned and need to be fixed, as well as for loose dogs not taken care of by their owners.

Clark related that red tags are used to help ensure that homes are viable and habitable, and also encourages responsibility on residents’ part to keep their neighborhoods safe and clean. Even so, he emphasized that they are intended as warnings rather than citations.

“We’re not out to target anyone with red tags,” he said. “It’s based on our workload and when we get the opportunity to do so. We don’t put them out indiscriminately.”

As to how much time is allowed to address these issues, Clark said that 10 to 14 days was sufficient, adding that CPD doesn’t “watch the clock” and takes different circumstances under consideration. However, if the resident does not comply, fines (from which CPD would receive a marginal portion) may be imposed.

Clark said that at least 59 red tags have been handed out recently, of which the close majority are because of loose dogs. Approximately 22 of them have been tagged on homes throughout the town proper which are uninhabited.

In other business, Galloway said that a new boulder sign was recently installed near the Cloverdale Town Hall, and that it was purchased through a grant for $7,500. She also said that the Cloverdale Redevelopment Commission has $6,130.20 for a new community sign. Galloway said that there would be enough leftover money to purchase new street signs for the downtown through the grant.

Galloway also brought up that mowing at 335 Someday Way needed to be done. The council also considered whether the property, which the town owns, could be donated to Habitat for Humanity as a redevelopment project. Hofmann was unsure if this could be done, but said he would look into the town’s options. Council members tabled the issue.

Galloway also related that the Cloverdale Park Board had submitted an invoice in the amount of $3,000 for a new fence at the town park.

The next regular meeting of the Cloverdale Town Council is scheduled for Tuesday, June 11 at 7 p.m. in the Cloverdale Town Hall.