Committee approves council-chambers use policy; nonprofit access limited to city-cosponsored events

The Policy & Services Committee approved a draft Council Chambers use and reservation policy that prioritizes official city business and allows use by other government agencies; it also permits nonprofit (501(c)(3)) use only when the city cosponsors the activity.

Francesca Reyes, deputy city clerk, presented the draft policy, which establishes a three-tier priority framework: Priority 1 for city council, committee and official city functions; Priority 2 for other government agencies; and a conditional Priority 3 for nonprofit organizations. Reyes said the draft aims to ensure fairness and transparency, reduce liability and clarify fees, deposits and reservation procedures.

Under the proposed rules staff presented, reservations must be requested no earlier than six months and no later than 30 days before the event. Staff proposed a refundable $250 deposit to secure reservations and to cover potential damages, plus attendant fees when staff must be present outside normal operations and technology/AV assistance fees if streaming or A/V support is requested. Organizers of events with 100 or more attendees would be required to provide proof of liability insurance; security, if required, must be arranged and paid for by the event organizer. The draft policy allows the city to cancel reservations on short notice for emergencies or a special council meeting; cancellations by the organizer less than 7 days prior to the event would forfeit the deposit.

Committee members asked how often requests for chamber use arise and how nearby jurisdictions handle similar spaces. Staff said requests are relatively infrequent but increasing and that neighboring cities take different approaches. Members raised concerns about viewpoint discrimination and the workload for clerk staff if the city broadly opens the chambers to outside groups. The city attorney advised two main legal models: (1) set clear, viewpoint-neutral eligibility criteria for public use, or (2) permit private groups only when the city cosponsors the event, which shifts the decision into government-speech doctrine and allows more discretion. The committee elected the city-cosponsorship model for Priority 3 to reduce legal risk and to maintain a clear line between government speech and open public forums.

Council members also discussed practical rules, including attendant and after-hours fees, whether to allow events on evenings or weekends, and the need for staff to report back if administering the policy creates an unsustainable workload.

The committee voted 3–0 to recommend the policy to City Council, with the modification that Priority 3 use by nonprofit organizations be limited to events cosponsored by the City of Palo Alto. The recorded votes were Council member Stone: Yes; Vice mayor Vinkar: Yes; Council member Liu: Yes.