Over the
past few weeks, I’ve been arguing for greater freedom to host block parties in
Petaluma. Having learned that block
parties are restricted to cul-de-sacs, I advocated for fewer restrictions, and then toured
Petaluma block parties (h), both legal and illegal, on the Fourth of July.
To repeat
myself, block parties aren’t urbanism, but are one-day samplings of urbanism. And sampling urbanism is a step in the right
direction.
I have a
scattering of final insights and data to share today in preparation for moving
onto other topics. But the block party
issue won’t be forgotten. I’ll continue
to raise the issue in conversations with city officials and will advise readers
whenever there’s a hint of progress.
Police
responses: I know of four people who approached the Petaluma Police
Department about block parties for the summer of 2014. The range of responses was wide and
instructive.
Party
request #1: The police contact denied the request because the Municipal Code
prohibits block parties except on cul-de-sacs.
The potential party organizer dropped the idea.
Party request
#2: An officer told the potential organizer that, while the Municipal Code
prohibits block parties on through streets, the officer thought that the
provision could be ignored if the organizer provided an emergency access plan
and proof of neighborhood concurrence.
But when the organizer provided both documents, the officer never called
back. The party proceeded without
approval.
Party
request #3: An officer told the organizer that, while the Municipal Code
prohibited her proposed party, he suggested she proceed without a permit,
although he cautioned her to leave an emergency access lane.
Party
request #4: The organizer left multiple messages at the police station, none of
which were returned, so she proceeded without approval.
The tally is
four identical requests with four disparate responses. And the list doesn’t include the numerous
block parties that have been conducted, some of them for many years, without
contacting the police department at all.
(Addendum:
After this post was readied for publishing, I heard from yet another block
party organizer. Her party will be on a
through street, but the Police Department issued her a permit regardless. For those scoring at home, that’s five
identical requests with five disparate responses.)
I don’t
provide this tabulation to make fun of the police. Instead, I consider that range of responses
as an indication that the officers were trying to reconcile a flawed Municipal
Code provision with their own common sense.
The lack of consistency is further proof that the Code should be modified.
Review of
other cities: I checked the municipal codes for other North Bay cities
regarding block parties. My check wasn’t
in depth. It consisted solely of
checking the on-line Municipal Codes for the phrases “block party” and “street
party”. If someone has further information,
please share. But I think my findings
are significant.
The
municipal codes of Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cotati, San Rafael, Sonoma, and
Napa are apparently silent on block parties.
It’s possible that local precedent has established block party rules,
but the standards don’t rise to the level of the Municipal Codes.
It was only
in Novato where I found a small hint of a block party standard. The special event application form includes a block
party as one of the possible events, which implies apparent approval of block
parties without restriction to cul-de-sacs.
The
consensus of North Bay cities seems clear.
The Santa
Rosa example is particularly striking because of a story I was recently
told. A former neighbor moved to Santa
Rosa within the past year. With his wife
and toddler, he moved into a neighborhood with a long block party
tradition. He tells me that this year’s
party attracted hundreds of people, perhaps including the Santa Rosa
mayor. My friend was unable to confirm
the mayor’s attendance because he was too busy emceeing for the bands that were
playing.
And the
entire event was conducted on streets where block parties aren’t legal in
Petaluma.
Defending
City Hall: I should address a misconception that has been mentioned to
me. The block party issue has apparently
led some to believe that the City of Petaluma is actively opposed to block
parties. I don’t believe that to be the
case. I think some City folks are
looking at the block party issue through spectacles with flawed prescriptions,
but that’s different from actual opposition.
To begin,
the offending phrase in the Municipal Code, the one that limits block parties
to cul-de-sacs, was probably written decades ago. The author was likely someone who has long
left City employment or a consultant who was never employed by the City. We can’t blame the current denizens of City
Hall for the restriction.
Also, when
City Hall looks at changing the provision, they’re doing a benefit-cost
assessment, which is reasonable. However,
they project few benefits from allowing more block parties. Not a complete absence of benefits, but few
benefits. At the same time, they fear significant
costs from the use of City staff to make the Municipal Code change and from the
commitment of the police to enforce a new standard. As a result, they calculate a benefit-cost
ratio of less than one.
I believe
they underestimate the benefits and overestimate the costs, so disagree with
their calculation. But I’ll defend them
from the accusation that they see no benefits.
Good enough?: Another response I hear is that the current
situation is good enough and that we needn’t spend time worrying when most
block parties are proceeding just fine.
If I squint,
I can see that logic. But when I fully
open my eyes, the reasoning disappears like a puff of smoke.
How can the
current situation are acceptable if newcomers to Petaluma, eager to bond with
their neighbors, are directed by the police department not to hold block
parties? How is it acceptable if other
organizers proceed with their plans, but are constantly looking over their
shoulders in trepidation, wondering if they’re about to be fined for not
getting a permit?
By any
measure that I find reasonable, the current status isn’t “good enough”.
I’ll admit
that block parties are a fairly small issue.
If someone gave me a magic lamp with the power to fix ten things in
Petaluma, I doubt block parties would make my list. But if we can’t fix the little solvable
problems, how do we think we can fix the big, more intractable problems?
Okay, I’ve
spent enough time on block parties.
Probably more than I should have.
Thanks for hanging around while I ranted.
It’s now time
to move along. In my next post, I’ll
take a look at neighborhood meeting places.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment