Council set to adopt
car cell phone code
The Marlboro Township Council’s plan to adopt an ordinance at its regular meeting Thursday regulating motorists’ use of hand-held cellular telephones continues to attract local and regional attention.
But a situation has come to light that calls into question just how supportive the township’s police force is of the law its officers will be obligated to enforce.
According to Stephanie Luft-glass, Marlboro’s public information officer, numerous requests for copies of the ordinance introduced by the council at its June 22 meeting have been received from municipalities throughout New Jersey, as well as from some communities in New York and Connecticut.
"There is a genuine growing public interest on this matter which has placed Marlboro in the forefront of the news media covering the proposed ordinance," Luftglass said.
The council introduced an ordinance last month that would prohibit motorists from using a hand-held cellular phone while operating a vehicle on Marlboro’s roads. Emergency services personnel and law enforcement officials are exempt from the terms of the ordinance.
Council Vice President Barry Denkensohn, the moving force behind the proposed ordinance, said the governing body was taking action to "protect the well-being and safety of all residents and travelers on Marlboro’s roads."
He said he brought the issue to the council’s attention after learning of the crusade for legislation on cellular phone use being waged by a Pennsylvania resident, Patti Pena, whose daughter was killed in an automobile accident there by a motorist using a cellular phone.
"We’ve learned that Patti Pena is planning to attend our council meeting on Thursday and will speak in support of the ordinance," Denkensohn told the News Transcript earlier this week. "Congressman Rush Holt has also voiced support for our proposed ordinance and has indicated he will send a letter of support to be read into the record at Thursday’s meeting."
The proposed ordinance has not been without its critics, including Councilman Dr. Paul Kovalski Jr., who voted against the law’s introduction last month, citing concerns for its enforceability, the practicality of posting signs regarding the ordinance throughout town and the need to address the issue at the state government level.
Kovalski said he supports the council’s position to "take action to ensure the safety and well-being of all residents and visitors," but felt that end could be achieved by enforcing motor vehicle laws already on the books that are designed to do that.
And Kovalski is not alone in questioning just how the law will be enforced.
In a memorandum to Mayor Matthew Scannapieco and council members, Marlboro Police Chief Robert C. Holmes Sr. raises several issues regarding the proposed ordinance as reasons for the police department’s decision not to support the ordinance as written.
"There are numerous existing motor vehicle laws that apply in the event anyone is observed driving in an improper manner as a result of using a cell phone," Holmes wrote. "These laws are already being enforced every day by the police. Careless driving, failure to maintain proper lane, failure to stop at a stop sign, would all be examples of existing statutes that cover violation of improper driving."
Reached on Monday, Holmes did not back off his written comments to municipal officials and said he believes the ordinance as currently written would be difficult to enforce.
"I believe this issue would best be addressed on a state level," he said, "but if the council adopts it, we’ll do whatever is necessary to enforce it."
There have been some changes made to the proposed ordinance since it was introduced last month, in response to questions and concerns raised by residents regarding permitted uses, Denkensohn said.
Responding to critics of the proposed ordinance, Denkensohn said, "It is time for Marlboro to take a leadership role and for its elected officials to do what’s right to protect everyone in our township. If it saves one life, then it’s all been worthwhile. It’s the right thing to do."
According to Denkensohn, if the council adopts the ordinance as planned on Thursday (four of the five council members supported its introduction), there will be a standard 45-day waiting period before it takes effect, allowing enough time for council representatives and members of the police department to work out any details regarding the enforcement and notification of the law.
Denkensohn noted that legislation regarding the use of cellular phones by motorists has been pending in both houses of the state legislature for quite some time and is not likely to receive a favorable vote in the near future.
Scannapieco recently addressed the proposed ordinance, saying, "Marlboro has taken a proactive role of leadership within the state to raise public awareness to the dangers of driving while talking on a hand-held wireless phone. There is no question that public safety is of paramount importance. I strongly believe this issue must be addressed by the state in order to avoid individual ‘patchwork ordinances’ that may be impossible to enforce. The onus of responsibility rests with the state to address the issue and pass appropriate legislation."
The council will hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance on Thursday at 8 p.m. at Town Hall.