City Council did not have any questions or concerns about the application. Mayor Duncan commented that he is planning on voting in favor of this application.

It was moved by Mayor Duncan and seconded by Mr. Stephens that the preliminary staff findings be adopted, and Application #19-3 for a special use permit/amendment to the Sugar Camp Master Plan for the installation of a replacement monument sign in front of Building B at the corner of W. Schantz Avenue and Sugar Camp Circle be approved.

Upon call of the roll on the question of the motion, the following vote was recorded:

There being four (4) yea votes and no (0) nay votes thereon, said resolution was declared duly passed and it was so ordered.

A copy of the ordinance, having been placed on the desks of each member of Council prior to introduction, was read by title.

Mr. Stephens explained that this is the second reading of an ordinance to impose a moratorium on the use of “dockless electric scooters and bicycles” in City rights-of-way.

Dockless electric scooters and bicycles, which are available to be rented on demand from unstaffed locations, have arrived in many cities suddenly and unexpectedly, and have proliferated rapidly. Some of the most visible examples include “Bird” and “Lime” scooters, among others.

These shared mobility devices are largely unregulated. They exist in a kind of legal limbo where, despite some level of public demand, they cannot be used legally on sidewalks due to their status as “motor vehicles” under state law, nor can they be used legally on streets due to equipment limitations and the lack of adequate mechanisms for titling, registering, and insuring them. As a result, there are several lawsuits pending around the nation, and the Ohio General Assembly and a number of other state legislatures are considering possible frameworks for the regulation of shared mobility devices.

Until the Ohio General Assembly determines a path forward for the state, the problems inherent with shared mobility devices must be addressed by local government. In cities where shared mobility devices are available, they are frequently abandoned by users wherever they happen to stop: in streets, sidewalks, doorways, and other public places. This creates visual clutter and more importantly, safety concerns, especially for the most vulnerable pedestrians.

In addition, due to the spontaneous nature of these rentals and their appeal to young people, shared mobility devices are nearly always operated by users—often minors—without helmets.

While it is not anticipated that Oakwood will be a major market for these devices, it is important to have legislation in place before the first vendor chooses to locate in Oakwood. City Council has initiated this moratorium legislation as an immediate way to address the hazards posed by shared mobility devices placed in and operated on public property. City Council’s intent would be to revisit the issue in one year when the legal landscape may have become more firmly settled.

Thereupon, it was moved by Mr. Stephens and seconded by Mrs. Hilton that the ordinance be passed tonight.