Committee pauses on camping ordinance for Pryor Creek, sends draft back to staff for redraft

The Ordinance Committee spent most of its meeting debating proposed changes to the city’s camping ordinance, including a provision to prohibit overnight camping within the limits of Pryor Creek while carving out an exception that would allow a private property owner who is the camper to have a backyard tent for family activities for up to three overnights.

Committee members raised multiple drafting and enforcement concerns that stalled the measure. Members objected to a clause declaring erection of a tent or trailer “one hour before sundown” to be presumptive evidence of camping, saying that language conflicted with the proposed three-night backyard exception and could create enforcement confusion. Members also debated whether the exemption should be limited to properties that are specifically ‘residentially zoned’ or to any private residential property, and discussed edge cases such as churches, commercial properties used for temporary events and campers parked for seasonal business activity.

Several speakers urged the committee to reconcile the draft with existing city rules that allow recreational vehicles and trailers to be used on private property for limited periods (a current ordinance referenced during discussion permits certain RV use for seven days within a 30‑day period, subject to conditions). A committee member also said, unverified, that a similar ordinance in another jurisdiction had prompted litigation; members asked staff and legal counsel to confirm any relevant case law before the city advances its draft.

After extended debate about combining the “consent required” and “presumptive evidence” sections for clearer enforcement, and discussion about whether to send the proposal to council or place it on a public ballot (members noted ballot timing greatly affects cost), the committee voted to take no action at the meeting and asked staff — including the city attorney — to redraft the ordinance language and return it for subsequent review.

The committee recorded an affirmative voice vote to take no action; members who spoke on the record included Troy Shropshire and Brown, who both registered “yes” when the motion was called. The committee requested Chase (legal counsel) and staff to resolve zoning, permit, and conflicting‑ordinance issues before the ordinance returns to the committee or is forwarded to full council.