Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bay City commission refers proposed park‑rule changes after debate over Battery Park language
Summary
After extended debate over proposed park‑rule wording (including added disorderly‑conduct phrases) and whether to add Battery Park to a no‑alcohol list, the City Commission voted to refer the draft rules back to staff for more information.
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bay City commissioners on Dec. 1 debated proposed updates to city park rules that would add Battery Park to a list of parks with alcohol prohibitions and expand the rules’ disorderly‑conduct language to include phrases such as “loud” and “boisterous.” After extended questioning from commissioners about redundancy with existing disorderly‑conduct ordinances and public‑safety contacts at Battery Park, the commission voted to refer the proposal back to staff for additional information.
Why it matters: The change would alter the city’s two‑tier park rules (some parks currently allow alcohol during daytime hours while others do not) and add more specific language staff said would improve enforceability for parks staff and public safety.
Debate and concerns: Commissioner Tenney said she was “vehemently opposed to adding Battery Park” to the list because she worried the rules could target vulnerable people who use the park. Commissioner Cubitt questioned why the new language was needed when the city’s disorderly‑conduct ordinance already prohibits unreasonable noise and other disorderly acts, calling terms such as “loud” and “boisterous” vague.
Staff response: Parks and public‑safety staff said the proposed wording came from the city attorney to provide clearer enforcement language and that public‑safety personnel recorded “several calls every day” this past summer reporting fighting and drinking in Battery Park. Staff said the Battery Park changes aim to make the downtown park consistent with other parks where issues were reported.
Outcome: Commissioner Coakley moved, and Commissioner Doyle seconded, a motion to refer the draft rules back to staff for further research and recommended revisions (including collecting a 6–12‑month range of call data and clarifying language). The referral passed; no ordinance change was adopted at the meeting.

