Item B: Ordinance on Unruly Gatherings

Home Browse Search

In November 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance 20217, known as the Special Response Ordinance, which established a fee for police responses to gatherings with more than 25 people. The ordinance is not effective in abating negative impacts from loud gatherings; only one first response fee has been assessed since the ordinance’s adoption, and no money was collected. The proposed social host ordinance would address several of the problems with this existing legislation, and is further addressed in the section entitled “Stakeholder Perspectives.” Social host ordinances are considered best practices in other communities with large higher education institutions to reduce the negative impacts of unruly alcohol-fueled parties and to reduce the serious public health problems associated with binge drinking by young adults. This is accomplished through increasing accountability and liability for repeated offenses, for both the person holding or hosting the parties, as well as for the property owner on whose property the parties are held. More detailed information about the proposed ordinance is contained in Attachment B. Metrics and Goals The goal of this legislation is to reduce the perceived negative impacts caused by alcohol-fueled parties. To assess the impact and effectiveness of the ordinance, staff will monitor the number of complaints received that are related to loud parties over time. Based on a manual count of police records, there have been approximately 550 complaints around the University from September 2011, through March 2012. For the same seven-month period last year, the number of complaints was 560, with a total of 863 for the year. To assess the effectiveness of this program, staff will continue to monitor complaints and evaluate any changes is the number of complaints. The EPD employs a data led policing model, using data to drive where and how the police are deployed to reduced criminal activity. This proposal is based on documented problems and focuses the response to where the problems are. In addition to complaint data, information can be provided about the number of first response warnings and citations issued. The problem with this data is that it is largely a measure of the Police Department’s capacity, rather than public demand; the number of citations or warnings is dependent upon the Police Department’s capacity to respond to this public nuisance. If the number of citations or warnings increases or decreases, it is not possible to determine how much of the change is caused by a change in the demand (complaints) or a change in the supply (police resources). In addition to analyzing complaints, staff will monitor the frequency the civil penalties are assessed, to determine if this is a tool that is effective at addressing the problem of properties that are chronically hosting unruly gatherings. For this proposal, during the 2010 – 2011, school year, there were six properties where four or more complaints for loud parties were received from Thursday through Saturday. This ordinance would have potentially affected no more than six property owners last year. Through April, there are 10 addresses that have received more than four complaints Thursday through Saturday. It is believed that this strategy will contribute to a reduction in the frequency of unruly gatherings by holding both organizers and property owners accountable. Social host ordinances are now a common tool used to address this issue and have been enacted in over 150 cities and counties in 27 states. While not a silver bullet to what is a complex community problem, other communities have found social host ordinances to be an effective deterrent. Research conducted at 14 public universities in California revealed the largest decrease in off-campus binge drinking at those institutions that had aggressive enforcement programs that included social host ordinances coupled with strong media campaigns. S:\CMO\2012 Council Agendas\M120423\S120423B.doc