People looking to put on a parade or serve juice to teens may need to open their wallets for extra police protection, thanks to new legislation passed by the Board of Aldermen Monday night.
Aldermen approved two new ordinance amendments at their meeting Monday night that deal with city expenses incurred by events in town.
One amendment allows the city to require parade organizers to pay up if their event requires significant traffic control or police protection. The legislation can also be applied to other entertainment events, like concerts or even road races.
The other amendment requires clubs, like Toad’s, to notify the chief of police before holding underage “juice bar” nights. The chief may then require club owners to hire extra-duty officers if he sees fit.
Both items passed nearly unanimously. The lone dissenting vote in each was cast by West Rock Alderman Darnell Goldson. He said the measures are not business-friendly.
Dowtown Alderwoman Bitsie Clark described each matter to the board prior to its vote. The parade ordinance amendment “authorizes the city to seek cost reimbursement” for police and traffic work at events including road races, parades and club events. “It does not interfere with free speech,” she said, speaking to a concern raised in previous discussions of the bill. Protests and demonstrations are exempt from the ordinance. The legislation includes provisions for organizations that can’t afford reimbursement, Clark said.
After Clark’s description of the juice bar bill, Goldson raised his hand to speak.
“I’m kind of confused by this,” he said. He said he understands violence and crime have been associated with teen nights at clubs. “But club owners already pay” licensing fees and have many other expenses, he said.
Clark said the legislation is simply a reiteration of a state law that is not being followed by New Haven club owners. “Club owners are expected to meet the cost of extra police for any event,” she said.
The parade ordinance passed 21 to 1, the juice bar 19 to 1. Two aldermen had left the room after the first vote.
After the meeting, Goldson said he voted against the measures because they aren’t “business-friendly.” Businesses are already seeing arbitrary tax increases from the assessor’s office, he argued; they don’t need more expenses.