Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Events Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Councilmembers debate standard policy, cap and memorandum of understanding for Christmas parade support

3784982 · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee members and event organizers discussed how the borough should standardize event fees and financial support for large events such as the Christmas parade; the chamber described unexpected invoices from changed fee rules and committee members agreed to place a policy discussion on the work session agenda.

Committee members reviewed a multi-year spreadsheet of invoices and fee decisions for the Christmas parade dating from 2018 through 2024 and discussed whether the borough should adopt a standardized policy for support of large events.

Barb Leonte summarized past fee changes and reductions, saying the chamber was granted a 50% reduction on a late 2024 bill because the borough had changed to standardized flat fees after parade planning was already underway. “We changed the fees in the middle of the year last year… We'll give you the 50% off rate for this year,” Leonte said, explaining why the chamber received a reduction.

A chamber representative told the committee the group had anticipated a bill of about $8,000 and was surprised by the invoice after the new fee structure took effect. “I anticipated a a bill around 8000 dollars, which is what we ended up paying,” the chamber representative said.

Members discussed possible approaches including a standard percentage reduction plus a cap, issuing a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the chamber, or adopting objective criteria in the event-permit process. One member suggested a starting approach of a 50% reduction with a $5,000 cap; another said she wanted a single, standardized process that would avoid ad‑hoc negotiations going forward. Committee leadership proposed drafting an MOU and running it by the solicitor, and agreed to place the item on the work session (and, if ready, the consent agenda) for the next meeting. “We'll put this on the work session,” one committee member said.

Staff said they are researching parade permit language used by other municipalities and will share sample templates with the chamber and council. No formal sponsorship policy or binding support amount was adopted at the meeting; the committee instead directed staff to return with draft language and recommended cost/benefit criteria for council consideration.