Despite the fact the City Park Music Festival has been moved elsewhere, there is still a city-led discussion to create policies and requirements for use of Denver's public spaces. What do you think should be included in the discussion? Do you think parks should ever be closed to the public for use for admissions-only events--whether the event sponsor is a non- or for-profit organization?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
January 23, 2008
AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL PARTICIPANTS IN MEETINGS OF THE “ADMISSION
BASED SPECIAL EVENTS POLICY”(ABSEP) TASK FORCE
Keep the parks for people, not profit. All public open spaces and surrounding neighborhoods are at risk if the city attempts to turn the parks into sources of revenue.
Speaking for a group of profoundly concerned citizens, I am opposed to commercial use of public lands. It is improper to allow private commercial enterprises to usurp public property for the purpose of making a profit.
It is appropriate for the ABSEP Task Force to ask what permissible use is and to define that proper use. Furthermore, the policy must be specifically clear about who gets to use the park spaces, under what exact circumstances, and the basis for the decision(s).
Profit-making private business ventures must be excluded from proper use policy. Such activities pose the danger of massive disruption on many levels.
Denver parks are not designed for the type of activity suggested by the now cancelled music festival at City Park. Problem mitigation and restoration are costly. The surrounding neighborhoods face severe disruption. In addition, the city could encounter significant problems if a promoter did not uphold the responsibilities of an event contract.
The park lands cannot be for sale, lease, rent, or use under any circumstances simply because the lure of income potential is great enough.
If Denver needs an outdoor event venue, the city could develop a genuine permanent festival facility.
Government exists to maintain order and provide services. PUBLIC parks are part of these services. Nobody should have to pay to enter public parks or attend events at public parks. Private commercial enterprises have no claim to use public park property for profit-making endeavors.
David P. Felice
4035 East 18th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220-1016
gelato321@aol.com
savecitypark.org
A letter to public officials is an open record under the Colorado Open Records Act and must be made available to anyone requesting the letter unless the letter clearly states or implies a request for confidentiality. This electronic mail letter, along with all attachments and replies, is specifically designated as a document of public record, fully subject to disclosure and retention.
Angela.Casias@ci.denver.co.us, zimmaj@comcast.net, adrayer@glbtcolorado.org, Stu.Bader@ci.denver.co.us, Kim.Bailey@ci.denver.co.us, info@billbass.com, RJN@insurance-associates.com, Tad.Bowman@ci.denver.co.us, bmorris@crlassociates.com, civiltech@qwest.net, caroleyll@mindspring.com, chc@blondedesign.com, cframpton@ewpartners.com, Cmorris@aeglive.com, cindy.johnstone@comcast.net, Rita.contreras@ci.denver.co.us, Stephanie.Cross@denvergov.org, dmanchego@comcast.net, soulyjazz@aol.com, dj-jl-webster@att.net, dpollack@glbtcolorado.org, diane@hparch.com, drewoconnor@chundenver.org, Molly.Duplechian@ci.denver.co.us, Erik.Dyce@ci.denver.co.us, ericpirrett@livenation.com, forresthobbs@comcast.net, Rick.Garcia@denvergov.org, hloshbau@mines.edu, Ianderson@designstudioswest.com, tone@pbworld.com, rustkj@aol.com, wjs@greenwayfoundation.org, jmorreale@m-incorporated.com, info@ddro.org, karen.nakandakare@CH2M.com, Haydenpryor@msn.com, kburnett@stapletoncommunity.com, Helen.Kuykendall@ci.denver.co.us, lda@earthnet.net, Peggy.Lehmann@denvergov.org, Carla.Madison@denvergov.org, Margaret@LarimerSquare.com, margerie.hicks@comcast.net, m_grimsley@msn.com, mariahkennemer@livenation.com, Kelly.Marlin@ci.denver.co.us, Penny.May@denvergov.org, Judy.Montero@denvergov.org, braandn@earthlink.net, patrick@theparkpeople.org, Paul@pweiss.net, mpayers51@yahoo.com, peterore@livenation.com, Caitlin.Quander@ci.denver.co.us, David.Quinones@denvergov.org, rscharf@denver.org, Jeanne.Robb@ci.denver.co.us, natcltd@aol.com, rogerarmstrong@chundenver.org, rywheeler-bell@msn.com, Kevin.Scott@ci.denver.co.us, Sstokes@pepsicenter.com, skark@downtowndenver.com, tamarataz@msn.com, terryadams@cherryarts.org, tbarnhart@denverzoo.org, Erin.Trapp@ci.denver.co.us, vbarela@newsed.org, Fred.Weiss@ci.denver.co.us, Patrick.Wheeler@denvergov.org, Gretchen.Williams@denvergov.org, Douglas.Woods@ci.denver.co.us, gelato321@aol.com
The next open meeting of the ABSEP Task Force will be held Wednesday, February 13, from 8:30 to 10:00 at Rude Recreation Center, 2855 West Holden Place.
February 9, 2008
AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL PARTICIPANTS IN MEETINGS OF THE “ADMISSION
BASED SPECIAL EVENTS POLICY” (ABSEP) TASK FORCE
Keep the parks for people,
not profit.
Consideration of park use policy for exclusive commercial events needs to include answers to questions including, but not limited to the following:
What is the primary rationale or principle by which it considered appropriate for private commercial enterprises to use public land for profit-making ventures?
If it is acceptable to use public park land for commercial events charging admission, could other public property be used for similar activities?
Could an admission-based concert be staged in the main lobby of the Wellington Webb Building? Could streets be closed for admission-based special events?
What is the justification for allowing commercial profit-making events to prevent free and open public access to park property?
What is the justification for free and open access to public land at one time, and charging admission fees to preclude the opportunity for access at other times?
Do the deeds, land, grants, covenants, and/or other park ownership documents specifically permit private commercial use of park property? Can these documents be made public under Colorado Open Records Act (CORA)?
What specific organizations, by name, in addition to Live Nation and AEG Live, have requested use of park land or expressed interest in use of park land?
Have any organizations provided any material or financial incentive or promised any incentive supporting a policy of allowing commercial use of public park property?
If a commercial special events policy is adopted, who decides what organizations are allowed to conduct special events?
What organizations would be allowed to conduct special events? Would this just be concert and art show promoters?
Could an arguably objectionable group be eligible to stage a festival?
What qualifications does an organization have to possess to be allowed to conduct a special event? Is park land available to anyone with enough money?
What recourse does the city have if the special events organizer fails to meet the financial and/or restoration obligations of a contract?
Will the policy clearly define what constitutes a "special event" as distinct from any other type of activity?
Is "festival" a sub-category of special event?
How much land would a special event promoter be allowed to use?
What would be the maximum amount?
What would be the maximum length of time public land could be leased, rented, reserved, or otherwise excluded for a special event?
How is the price paid for use of the land determined?
Is the price the same for all areas and all organizations, or is the price to be negotiated for each event and different organizations?
Would all commercial special events in parks be subject to the "seat tax"?
How would attendance count and compliance be monitored and enforced? Would there be an independent audit?
Can Parks and Recreation authorize admission-based special events without voter approval?
Wouldn't a special event which results in exclusive closure of park property amount to a short-term lease which is currently prohibited?
Even though sales of alcoholic beverages are currently allowed in the seven "festival" parks, would there have to be a hearing or exemption to allow commercial sales?
What distinguishes an exclusive special event from a bar or tavern?
If there are "particularly substantial" financial benefits, would Parks and Recreation consider other profiteering opportunities?
Would billboards and/or cellular phone towers be considered or permitted on park property as sources of revenue?
Does this proposed policy represent a position by the city that additional revenue derived from parks, either commercial or non-commercial, is desirable?
Are park lands for sale, lease, rent, or exclusive use under any circumstances to the highest bidder, regardless of the source of the revenue potential?
I would expect to have answers in writing provided by Parks and Recreation management.
David P. Felice
4035 East 18th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220-1016
gelato321@aol.com
savecitypark.org
A letter to public officials is an open record under the Colorado Open Records Act and must be made available to anyone requesting the letter unless the letter clearly states or implies a request for confidentiality. This electronic mail letter, along with all attachments and replies, is specifically designated as a document of public record, fully subject to disclosure and retention.
Distributed by E-Mail to:
Angela.Casias@ci.denver.co.us, zimmaj@comcast.net, adrayer@glbtcolorado.org, Stu.Bader@ci.denver.co.us, Kim.Bailey@ci.denver.co.us, info@billbass.com, RJN@insurance-associates.com, Tad.Bowman@ci.denver.co.us, bmorris@crlassociates.com, civiltech@qwest.net, caroleyll@mindspring.com, chc@blondedesign.com, cframpton@ewpartners.com, Cmorris@aeglive.com, cindy.johnstone@comcast.net, Rita.contreras@ci.denver.co.us, Stephanie.Cross@denvergov.org, dmanchego@comcast.net, soulyjazz@aol.com, dj-jl-webster@att.net, dpollack@glbtcolorado.org, diane@hparch.com, drewoconnor@chundenver.org, Molly.Duplechian@ci.denver.co.us, Erik.Dyce@ci.denver.co.us, ericpirrett@livenation.com, forresthobbs@comcast.net, Rick.Garcia@denvergov.org, hloshbau@mines.edu, Ianderson@designstudioswest.com, tone@pbworld.com, rustkj@aol.com, wjs@greenwayfoundation.org, jmorreale@m-incorporated.com, info@ddro.org, karen.nakandakare@CH2M.com, Haydenpryor@msn.com, kburnett@stapletoncommunity.com, Helen.Kuykendall@ci.denver.co.us, lda@earthnet.net, Peggy.Lehmann@denvergov.org, Carla.Madison@denvergov.org, Margaret@LarimerSquare.com, margerie.hicks@comcast.net, m_grimsley@msn.com, mariahkennemer@livenation.com, Kelly.Marlin@ci.denver.co.us, Penny.May@denvergov.org, Judy.Montero@denvergov.org, braandn@earthlink.net, patrick@theparkpeople.org, mpayers51@yahoo.com, peterore@livenation.com, Caitlin.Quander@ci.denver.co.us, David.Quinones@denvergov.org, rscharf@denver.org, Jeanne.Robb@ci.denver.co.us, natcltd@aol.com, rogerarmstrong@chundenver.org, rywheeler-bell@msn.com, Kevin.Scott@ci.denver.co.us, Sstokes@pepsicenter.com, skark@downtowndenver.com, tamarataz@msn.com, terryadams@cherryarts.org, tbarnhart@denverzoo.org, Erin.Trapp@ci.denver.co.us, vbarela@newsed.org, Fred.Weiss@ci.denver.co.us, Patrick.Wheeler@denvergov.org, Gretchen.Williams@denvergov.org, Douglas.Woods@ci.denver.co.us, gelato321@aol.com
Parks Chief Says Festival Proposal Sparks Discussion
Acknowledging that she is “not comfortable” with the idea of exclusive commercial events in parks, Denver Parks and Recreation Manager Kim Bailey says the city needs a policy to deal with such proposals.
Bailey also says there appears to be little or no interest in development of a genuine permanent festival facility in Denver.
The Parks and Recreation Manager says developing a policy on commercial closure of park lands was not on her agenda and was generated by a proposal from last summer from the AEG Live concert promotion company. AEG wanted to close the western two-thirds of city for a two-day music and arts festival. Plans were cancelled when the adjacent Denver Zoo objected.
Bailey’s comments follow the latest monthly meeting of the “Admissions-Based Special Events Policy” (ABSEP) Task Force. About 35 people attended the meeting February 13, but representatives of city agencies and event organizers outnumbered neighborhood advocates by about three-to-one.
Neighborhood representatives continue to be skeptical, expressing concern about the adverse impact, such as noise and congestion. Others contend it is inappropriate to block free access to public property.
There are currently seven parks designated as “festival” locations because sales of alcoholic beverages are already permitted. Even so, Bailey says it’s “technically possible” to stage a festival at any other park location as long as alcoholic beverages would not be sold or served.
The seven festival locations are Civic Center, City, Sloan’s Lake, Creekfront, DCPA Sculpture Park, Skyline, and Confluence Parks.
Sloan’s Lake resident Larry Ambrose asks about getting his neighborhood park removed from the list. According to Ambrose, City Councilman Rick Garcia doesn’t want such events at Sloan’s Lake Park.
Saying much more work needs to be done, Bailey presented a draft of what a policy might contain. The policy would be designed to govern operation of special events in city parks which would result in closure of sections of the parks and organizers would charge admission.
According to Bailey, preparation of the draft showed that “quite a few pieces are already in place” and there just needs to be what she calls “appropriate tweaking” for admission-based special events.
Meeting participants had an extended discussion of what constituted capacity for special events at the proposed locations. Brad Emerick, Fire Protection Engineer for the Denver Fire Department, presented information on “occupant load factors” and requirements for entrances and exits. Task Force members seem close to agreement that capacity is different if event attendees are standing, moving, or sitting.
At one point, there was visible friction between Assistant City Attorney Patrick Wheeler and Ambrose. With a scowl, Wheeler declared “I object” in response to a contention by Ambrose that people should be able to vote on having commercial park events. Wheeler says a popular vote is “not legally required.”
Bailey says Portland, Oregon has a policy on special events which includes an “event coordinator appeal process.” She says her staff will be looking at the Portland practices and present information at the next ABSEP meeting. She suggests not meeting again until April, so smaller groups can investigate various aspects of the proposed policy.
Although there were initial reports that Parks and Recreation wanted a policy by June, Bailey emphatically says “there is no deadline.”
“There is absolutely an opportunity for continued conversation,” she notes. “My goal is to be comfortable with the (ABSEP) proposal before we take the final draft to the general public.”
Prior to the next formal meeting, Bailey says Parks and Recreation will be looking at the infrastructure installation and removal practices for concerts held in cities such as Austin, Chicago, and Atlanta.
Although Cheesman Park is not a location where alcoholic beverages can be served, some participants mentioned that people attending smaller events at Cheesman sometimes bring wine and beer. Parks representative Stu Bader admits, “It happens,” but such practice is technically illegal.
According to Bailey, Parks and Recreation has “internal guidelines” on what might be considered objectionable during a festival event. One requirement is that no permanent signage is allowed. Promotion of firearms, tobacco, or alcoholic beverages is not permitted. In response to a question, Bailey admitted, however, that if nudists presented a proposal for a park event, they would be considered.
Parks Marketing Manager Jill McGranahan acknowledges the policy is an effort to “look at alternative ways to offset the cost” of running the parks. She contends that current non-profit events effectively result in closure of sections of parks.
Bailey also emphasizes that Parks is not responsible for regulating alcoholic beverage sales. “(Organizers) have to follow (city) Excise and License rules,” she says. “It is the organizers’ hurdle to work with (beverage sales) regulators.”
While some neighborhood representatives continue to suggest the city develop a specific site for commercial events, Bailey says “I doubt Elitch’s is moving” and notes that a festival park has not been considered as new neighborhoods and city facilities were built in recent years.
“We are not pushing this (policy),” says Bailey. “When the (AEG) proposal was presented, it was a time to reconsider and rethink our policy.”
The Parks and Recreation Manager also admits there are no current commercial festival proposals.
Story by:
Dave Felice
gelato321@aol.com
www.savecitypark.org
Post a Comment