Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates private fireworks in parks; opts to leave policy at status quo while staff seeks insurer, Layton follow-up
Summary
After extensive discussion about liability, permitting and state rules, the council left park fireworks policy at status quo for now and asked staff to consult the city insurer (the Trust) and get information from Layton about that city's decision to ban certain park fireworks.
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Ogden councilors spent the meeting’s longest discussion period weighing whether private groups should be allowed to stage fireworks shows on city park property.
Mr. Dixon (staff) opened the conversation with history: private groups have asked to host large displays at Friendship Park and similar venues and "we really don't have a good policy or a set of requirements related to liability," he said. Danielle (speaker 6), who spoke for risk management contacts, said she talked to the insurer: "The trust's recommendation was here's a list of things that should go into a legal document that you should have the city attorney put together," including certificate-of-insurance requirements and additional insured language.
Councilors and staff discussed enforcement limits, whether signage and Bowery rental disclosure could reduce problems, and how state fireworks law narrows the allowed days and device types. Chief Park and other staff noted safety concerns and described past complaints and debris cleanup obligations. One staff speaker summarized the volume of recent requests: "I've had multiples... 3 or 4 or 5."
Councilors debated two pathways: (1) allow the status-quo practice where lawful consumer-grade fireworks may be used during the state-authorized window and step in only when code is violated, or (2) adopt an ordinance/permit regime requiring insurance and formal approval for professional pyrotechnic shows and special events. Several councilors expressed concern about growing interest after neighboring Layton's ban, and one councilor urged talking to Layton to learn its reasons for restricting shows.
The council concluded with a direction to staff to consult the Trust (insurer) and to get more information from Layton and the state code; for immediate events falling within current state-authorized windows the council indicated it would allow status-quo use rather than ban events pending policy development. Council asked staff to return with recommended permit language, insurance thresholds and any ordinance options.

