Brighton delays update to peddlers and solicitors ordinance after council raises canvassing and enforcement concerns

The Brighton City Council on July 8, 2025 conducted a public hearing on proposed amendments to Chapter 22 (peddlers, solicitors and canvassers) under Ordinance No. 609 but took no final vote, instead asking staff to refine the draft and return at a future meeting (targeted before September).

Clerk Brown summarized revisions and said the ordinance is intended to tighten permitting for solicitors and peddlers. Council members raised concerns over whether political canvassers — including candidates and petition circulators — should be required to register with the city. Mayor Pro Tem Bone and several council members said they were uneasy about requiring door‑to‑door political activity to carry the same registration requirements as commercial solicitors. City Attorney Gavis said treating political or religious speech differently could raise First Amendment issues; she also described why the draft exempts young children and the downtown business district and explained the city’s stated purpose: to protect resident privacy and safety.

Police and clerk’s office staff described enforcement practice and fees for permits in the draft: a $50 business license and a $35 background‑check fee per canvasser (paid to the police department), plus an identification badge/lanyard process for permitted solicitors. The police chief said the department has fielded complaints about door‑to‑door sales — particularly when multiple solicitors arrive at once — and noted that trespass enforcement ordinarily requires property owners to give notice before police can effect an arrest; the ordinance would allow civil fines for soliciting without a permit.

Council members also questioned the proposed hours (currently 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.) and asked staff to consider earlier winter cutoffs. Several members asked whether the ordinance should include an appeals process if the police chief denies an applicant; Attorney Gavis said staff pared back fingerprinting and narrowed reference requirements in the current draft and noted an appeal mechanism could be considered.

Rather than adopt the ordinance, council agreed to send the draft back to staff for revisions on canvasser language, hours and enforcement details and to return it for additional council review before September. Clerk Brown said there had been prior spikes in canvassing activity (e.g., 2022 ballot campaigns) that motivated the city to revisit the ordinance. No formal vote to adopt was taken at the July 8 meeting.