TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Lachelle H. Pulliam, City Attorney
FROM: Sonyé Randolph, Assistant City Attorney
DATE: August 4, 2025
RE:
Title
Proposed Loitering Ordinance
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
All
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Goal 1: Safe & secure community
Objective 1.2: To ensure traffic and pedestrian safety
Objective 1.3: To ensure low incidence of property and violent crime.
Executive Summary:
This memorandum recommends the adoption of a comprehensive city-wide loitering ordinance to address escalating public safety concerns and property damage in city-owned facilities, particularly parking structures. The proposed ordinance would replace the current limited drug-related loitering provision with broader regulations covering all city-owned or operated parking facilities and public spaces. The ordinance establishes clear guidelines for legitimate use, provides law enforcement with necessary tools to address problematic behavior, and includes appropriate constitutional protections for lawful assembly. Implementation requires no additional city funding while providing enhanced public safety measures and property protection.
Background:
The City currently maintains a limited loitering ordinance that only addresses loitering related to drug use and sales. City-owned or operated parking facilities are designed for the temporary parking of vehicles by employees, visitors, and businesses conducting legitimate city business. These facilities have experienced increased unauthorized use that compromises public safety and results in property damage.
Recent incidents in the downtown parking deck have demonstrated the inadequacy of
current regulations. The existing ordinance lacks the scope necessary to address non-drug-related loitering activities that nevertheless pose significant public safety risks and result in financial losses to the City.
Issues/Analysis:
The Franklin Street deck has experienced numerous serious loitering incidents that highlight the need for comprehensive regulation, such as:
• Individuals riding horses on elevators;
• Deliberate destruction of parking deck arms to avoid paying for parking;
• Individuals dropping fire extinguishers from the roof and discharging them in the deck;
• Unauthorized "parties" involving rifle shooting practice; and,
• Social media content creation (TikTok/Instagram live streams) from the roof.
Legal and Safety Concerns
These incidents create multiple concerns for the City. Unauthorized activities in parking
facilities increase crime risks, create public nuisances, and generate negative perceptions about safety in city facilities. The current ordinance's narrow focus on drug-related activities leaves law enforcement without adequate tools to address other forms of problematic loitering.
When individuals enter or remain in city parking facilities without legitimate purposes,
they interfere with the intended function of these facilities and create liability concerns for the City. The lack of clear regulations makes it difficult for law enforcement to respond effectively to these situations.
Regulatory Gap
The existing drug-focused loitering ordinance fails to address the broader spectrum of
unauthorized activities occurring in city facilities. A comprehensive ordinance would provide clear definitions of appropriate use, establish prohibited activities, and give law
enforcement the authority to address violations promptly and effectively.
Budget Impact:
The proposed ordinance implementation carries no direct costs to the City. No additional personnel, equipment, or administrative resources are required for implementation. The ordinance utilizes existing law enforcement resources and court systems. However, the ordinance provides significant cost-saving potential by reducing property damage and maintenance expenses. Recent incidents have required the City to pay for repairs to parking deck equipment, including replacement of damaged parking arms and cleanup of vandalism. By deterring unauthorized activities, the ordinance should reduce these recurring maintenance and repair costs. The penalty structure, including fines up to $500 for Class 3 misdemeanor violations, may generate modest revenue while serving the primary purpose of deterring inappropriate behavior.
Options:
Option 1: Maintain Status Quo
Continue with the current limited drug-related loitering ordinance. This option requires no action but fails to address ongoing public safety concerns and property damage in city facilities.
Advantages: No implementation effort required; avoids potential enforcement
controversies.
Disadvantages: Continued exposure to liability; ongoing property damage costs;
inadequate law enforcement tools; public safety risks remain unaddressed.
Option 2: Expand Current Ordinance
Modify the existing drug-related loitering ordinance to include broader prohibited
activities while maintaining the current structure.
Advantages: Builds on existing legal framework; moderate expansion of enforcement
authority.
Disadvantages: May create confusion by mixing drug-related and general loitering
provisions; does not provide comprehensive approach to facility management.
Option 3: Adopt Comprehensive City-Wide Loitering Ordinance (Recommended)
Replace the current limited ordinance with a comprehensive city-wide loitering regulation that addresses all forms of unauthorized presence in city facilities.
Advantages: Provides clear, comprehensive guidelines; gives law enforcement
appropriate tools; protects constitutional rights through specific exceptions; addresses
current and future loitering issues; creates uniform standards across all city facilities.
Disadvantages: Requires careful implementation and training; may face initial resistance from some members of the public.
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends Option 3 - adoption of a comprehensive city-wide loitering ordinance.
This approach provides the most effective solution to current public safety and property
protection challenges while establishing a clear legal framework for future issues.
Attachments:
Proposed Loitering Ordinance
Current Loitering Ordinance