University Heights council debates 60‑day notice, fees and safety rules for street events

The University Heights City Council on a virtual phone meeting discussed a draft ordinance that would overhaul how the city permits parades, races and other street assemblages, including a proposed 60‑day advance notice requirement, a tiered fee structure and new rules for staffing and preapproved routes.

Council members and city department heads said the changes aim to protect public safety and ensure departments can staff and plan events, but several council members pushed for shorter notice periods and for an explicit exception process for time‑sensitive demonstrations.

Why it matters: The draft changes would affect groups that want to use city streets for marches, runs and similar events by imposing minimum lead times, fees intended to cover city costs and requirements for traffic and safety plans. Council members said the rules must balance residents' First Amendment rights with the city's ability to coordinate police, fire and public works resources.

Council discussion focused on three main areas: how much lead time events should be required to provide, how the city should charge for the use of city services, and exceptions for short‑notice or spontaneous assemblies. The logistics committee recommended 60 days of advance notice; several council members proposed 30 or 45 days instead. Deandra Fisher, who identified herself as leading the internal logistics committee, said, "60 is what came from logistics committee. I don't want to speak as to how administratively the committee came up with 60." The police department and fire department stressed that developing incident action plans, coordinating medical response and obtaining vendors or volunteers can require substantial lead time. A fire department official summarized that producing safety plans and multiagency coordination "takes a lot of time."

City staff and chiefs described operational details the ordinance would standardize. Staff said the city receives roughly five to 10 street‑event permit requests per year and that most runs or parades use contained loops rather than routes that span the entire municipality. Police officials said a typical staffed response for a run is a three‑officer team with a four‑hour minimum commitment and that overtime and vendor costs can increase total expenses. The draft ordinance text discussed a maximum baseline permit fee of $1,500 and mentioned a $1,000 deposit in some provisions; council members asked for clearer tiering so small neighborhood events would not face the same costs as large citywide races.

Several council members and staff raised equity and consistency concerns: one council member asked whether requiring 60 days would effectively bar quick, street‑based demonstrations and urged a clear carve‑out so residents could lawfully assemble for time‑sensitive causes. Another asked whether the ordinance should treat university and local nonprofit events differently; staff noted many local universities and schools are nonprofit and that a flat exclusion for all nonprofits would need careful definition to avoid uneven treatment. The draft also proposes preapproved routes to reduce the need for bespoke traffic plans when events request crossings of major streets.

On fees and billing, staff said the ordinance should allow an estimate and then a final billing of actual city costs (police, fire, sanitation, street sweeping, restroom facilities, etc.). Examples from nearby cities were discussed as models for deposits, per‑officer hourly charges and post‑event reconciliation. Councilmembers asked staff and the law director to produce a clearer fee schedule and the mechanics for billing applicants so organizations understand potential costs in advance.

The meeting produced direction but no formal vote. City leaders instructed staff and the law director to draft a carve‑out or expedited review path for short‑notice, time‑sensitive assemblies, to clarify thresholds (by participants or impact) that trigger the 60‑day requirement, and to return a revised ordinance to the committee. The law director and public‑safety officials will also work on a clearer tiered fee schedule and permit process that distinguishes small neighborhood gatherings from large events.

Next steps: Staff will revise the draft based on committee feedback, including alternatives to a universal 60‑day rule and a proposed exception process, and will bring the revised ordinance back to committee for further review. No formal action or adoption occurred at this meeting.