Committee advances proposed loitering ordinance for county property to full board

A county committee voted to send a proposed ordinance to the full board that would prohibit loitering on county property between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m., closing the historic courthouse square during those hours with limited exceptions. The committee action was a motion to move the draft ordinance to the full board for consideration.

The proposal’s sponsor, a staff member, said the ordinance "is not to be punitive to the general public" but aims "to prevent late night mischief" and to discourage overnight camping and transient activity on county property. The staff member told the committee that the draft ordinance covers all county property between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. and "specifically closes the historic courthouse square here from 11 to 6 in and of itself, with exceptions, of course." He listed exceptions including walking to and from vehicles, conducting official county business, or participating in authorized events during prohibited hours.

The staff member said enforcement would begin with a verbal warning: "The ordinance does include a warning first. So law enforcement or other officials would do a, hey ... You're technically here after hours. . . . I'll have to ask you to leave." He added that if individuals do not vacate, law enforcement could issue an ordinance violation and could escalate to criminal trespassing or other charges if warranted. The staff member also noted existing rules against overnight camping and that both county and city restrictions remained in place, referencing prior court findings in support of such restrictions.

A committee member playing "devil’s advocate" asked whether someone using courthouse grounds to sleep would be protected by a claimed lawful purpose; the staff member responded that being on the property in violation of other ordinances or meeting the definition of loitering would remove any claimed lawful purpose. The presenter also said the ordinance could be enforced by city as well as county law enforcement.

Committee members asked no further substantive amendments during the discussion and a motion and second were recorded to move the draft ordinance to the full board; the committee chair called the question and the motion carried to send the ordinance to the full board.

The ordinance remains a draft until the full board considers it; the committee discussion focused on scope (all county property), hours (11 p.m.–6 a.m.), exceptions, and an enforcement policy that emphasizes warnings before citations.

The committee’s staff member noted the group had reviewed the proposal at length and incorporated attorney revisions prior to the meeting. The ordinance will next appear on the full board agenda for possible adoption or further amendment.