Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Special Events topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Panama City staff seek clearer special event rules, end automatic fee waivers

Panama City Commission (workshop) · November 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

City staff presented draft changes to the special event ordinance that would end automatic fee waivers, reclassify events by municipal resources required and add late fees, and commissioners urged clearer rules for city‑sponsored events, more sponsorships and public outreach prior to readings.

City staff presented draft changes to Panama City’s special event ordinance, proposing to end automatic fee waivers, reclassify events based on the municipal resources required rather than organizer estimates, impose late fees for last‑minute filings and create a Special Event Review and Verification (SERV) committee to coordinate police, fire, public works and parks review.

The proposal builds on Ordinance No. 3075 and a companion special event handbook approved on Oct. 11, 2022; staff said a November 2024 internal memo directed an end to routinely waiving event fees and asked the commission for policy guidance before the ordinance moves to first reading on Nov. 18 and a second reading on Dec. 16.

Why it matters: Staff said inaccurate attendance estimates and frequent late applications have strained departmental resources and created safety and staffing risks. Reclassifying events by the city resources they require — for example police details, road closures, electrical service or amplified sound — would focus fees and review on operational impact rather than self‑reported head counts.

City staff outlined several operational changes under consideration: nonrefundable application fees and deposits modeled on nearby jurisdictions; late fees for filings inside required lead times; and a SERV committee to vet applications weekly and identify safety or logistical concerns early. Staff cited benchmarks in nearby jurisdictions — Panama City Beach, Bay County, Greenville, and Walton County — that use tiered size classes, lead times, deposits and multi‑agency review.

Commissioner reaction: Commissioners praised the staff review but pressed for clarifications and community input. Commissioner Street said city‑run events should be approved by the commission before staff spends resources planning them: "City events should be requested and approved by the commission prior to planning." He also urged named sponsors for city events to offset costs and recommended event recaps (for example, a Placer.io report) so repeat events can be judged on demonstrated attendance and operational burden.

Commissioner Hughes asked staff for apples‑to‑apples cost comparisons for large events and emphasized emergency‑service costs: "It's a lot of money to have an event in Panama City, and it's all predicated on the cops." He recommended broader public outreach to people who actually run events so staff can test whether proposed rules would create unintended barriers.

Other topics raised included off‑duty police rates (an off‑duty rate of $46.50/hour was discussed during the meeting), possible changes to the noise ordinance to reduce the number of events routed to commission review, and proposals for a small grant or matching program to help community groups cover event costs.

What happens next: Staff said the revised ordinance will be scheduled for first reading on Nov. 18 and second reading on Dec. 16, with an updated special event handbook to follow administratively that implements the new fee schedule and procedures. Staff also plans to circulate a questionnaire and follow up with operators and the broader public before the readings.

No formal motions or votes were taken during the workshop; commissioners offered direction and asked staff to return with comparative cost data, clarifying language on what counts as "programming" versus a permit‑required event, and stakeholder outreach results.