While members of the Eureka Springs City Council agree that it’s “dang near impossible” to enforce an ordinance banning confetti for events such as parades, the ordinance will remain in place.
Council member Harry Meyer, who sparked the conversation last year to establish a law forbidding confetti, supported getting rid of the ordinance if giving it teeth were not possible.
After discussion, however the council voted 3-2 to leave the ordinance in place at its meeting held Monday, April 28.
“Our confetti ordinance, as it sits right now, is dang near impossible to enforce, because we’d have to have a police officer along the whole street to find out who blew confetti out,” Meyer said.
Police chief Billy Floyd told council members that he agreed.
“As it sits, we just have to catch it just right,” Floyd said. “I mean, it would just, we’d have to be there present.”
Floyd later added, “It would be hard to stop a parade to write a citation during the offense.”
Meyer proposed adding a $200 deposit for parade organizers to pay when they apply with the city that would be kept for clean-up purposes if confetti was used during the parade.
“I propose that we add a $200 deposit to every parade permit to cover the cleanup of confetti that they would get back at the end of the parade if no one blew confetti out,” he said. “And therefore, the person who gets the parade permit can inform everyone that’s in the parade that: ‘Hey, there’s no confetti. No confetti. Please don’t use confetti.’ I think that would be the best way.”
What if the person shooting off confetti was an onlooker standing on the street and not a parade participant, council member Susane Gruning asked.
“What if it’s not from anybody on the floats, but it’s people lining the streets that bring those little containers that confetti can come out of?” she said. “Are you going to keep [parade organizers’] money for something they have no control over?”
“Well, most of the confetti comes from the big cannon …,” Meyer said.
Gruning replied: “But if it doesn’t?” “Well, that’s another issue, isn’t it?” Meyer said. Council member David Avanzino said that whatever the council decided, people are still going to throw confetti at times during events.
“I think this is a moot point,” Avanzino said. “People are going to throw confetti whether you like it or not. It’s going to be a bystander, an observer. It may happen on a float with a kid. I don’t see any way to monitor it.
“I mean, Harry, do you want to stand out there for the parade?”
That led to Meyer taking a quick stance on the issue.
“Well then, I make a motion that we repeal the confetti ordinance it’s if unenforceable,” he said.
“Second,” Avanzino added. Council member Steve Holifield, however, said he felt the ordinance should be kept.
“I think we’ve done all we can do, and I think the ordinance does deter people from having the confetti,” Holifield said. “Unless [public works director] Simon [Wiley] or someone came up to us and said: ‘Wow this is really costing us a lot of money and we need to come up with something better planned,’ I think what we have is fine, and I don’t support changing anything at this point.”
Gruning said she also agreed with keeping the ordinance.
“I think if you have [the ordinance] in place, you see less of it, and hopefully people respect the city enough not to do it,” she said. “You may have some that do it, but at least for Simon’s crew, maybe it’s just a lot less cleanup.”
In the end, council member Terry McClung agreed with Holifield and Gruning and voted to keep the ordinance in place. Meyer and Avanzino voted to abolish the ordinance. Council member Rachael Moyer was absent from the meeting.
SUNNYSIDE APPEAL
After first denying a request to grant another 90-day extension to an appeal on a planning commission decision to revoke the Legal Non-Conforming Status of Sunnyside Inn, a bed and breakfast at 5 Ridgeway, the council OK’d a 45-day extension.
Draxie Rogers, who owns the property, has been ill in Little Rock, and although work has been done to make the needed repairs to the property, it has not been completed within the first 90-day extension, Berry told commissioners.
“She has done quite a bit of work there and she gave a timeline … and talked to the building inspector and the building inspector went ahead and asked for a council approval that they allow her another 90 days for the reasons that Ms. Rogers outlined in her letters,” Berry said. “The 90 days that were approved were in the winter months and unfortunately she was also sick, in the hospital and down in Little Rock. …” McClung quickly made a motion to approve the requested extension.
“I would like to go ahead and make a motion that we approve the building inspector’s recommendation,” he said. “She’s not trying to operate, she’s trying to get the work done. It’s not hurting anything. It’s going to be a better property when she gets through. So I have no problem with the extension.”
Other council members, however, did have an issue with the request, questioning whether Rogers is just planning to sell the house, or if she has submitted required documents monthly to the City Advertising and Promotion Commission.
“Has she been making contributions to the CAPC?” Meyer asked. “She been filing her reports? Because if her reports have lapsed…” “That was one of the reasons (the situation) was called before the city council, and to be honest with you, I can’t answer that question,” Berry said. “I doubt knowing Draxie, that she’s done that because she probably thinks she hadn’t been open, so there’s no reason for her to file a report.”
Meyer reminded his fellow council members that even if a lodging or restaurant/bar is not open during a particular period of time it’s legally required to submit monthly documentation to the CAPC.
“… I understand she wants to sell it, and you know she can fix it up and sell it to somebody as a house, but to make it a B&B when she’s not even operated as a B& B for quite some time is not fair to the other people that have the same restrictions,” Meyer said.
Moments later, Mc-Clung and Holifield voted for the 90-day extension with Meyer, Avanzino and Gruning voting against.
“All right, motion fails,” Berry said. “So, in other words, what the council is saying, that they do not want her to operate as a bed and breakfast for any longer, after 17 years. Is that what I’m hearing the council saying?”
“Yeah, that’s what it sounds like to me,” Meyer said.
That led to the council addressing the issue for another eight minutes.
“So, I’m asking how the council wants to address this, if they want to address it,” Berry said a couple of minutes later.
“We just turned it down,” Meyer responded.
Council members were reminded that revoking the LNC status meant that location couldn’t be a B&B again with the moratorium that is in place.
“So, consequently what [the vote] means is that we’re not giving her any more time, so she loses everything she’s got as far as what she has as far as her permit to occupy as a business,” McClung said. “Now it doesn’t mean she can’t go back and finish the house out and get a Certificate Of Occupancy to live in it, but it takes all the business out of it.
“I don’t know if somebody can reapply, but, well, they can’t if there is a moratorium on them. That’s the end of it. That’s what it sounds like to me.”
Holifield said it was “sad” that Rogers would be losing her business.
“I think it’s sad that a member of our community that’s been in business for 17 years, if she sells this as a house, she won’t get as much money as she sells it as a business,” he said. “And we’re pretty much condemning her to sell it for a lot less money because of her age and her illnesses. If our building inspector says he thinks we should give her a break and extend it, I can’t believe we’re just going to tell her, ‘no, you’re done.’And ‘you’re out of it because you’ve been sick.’ ” After Berry brought up the idea of the council possibly being more comfortable with a shorter extension, Gruning said she’d be OK with 45 days.
That led to her making a motion for the 45-day extension, which passed unanimously.
SPRING FLING DISTRICT ISSUES?
Gruning said she observed possible issues with a temporary entertainment district over the weekend as part of Spring Fling, specifically mentioning the area that included the Cathouse Lounge and businesses across Main Street.
“I got to see firsthand this event, and Chief, did we have any big issues from Spring Fling?” Gruning said, directing her question to Floyd.
Floyd said issues his officers noticed included the use of glass bottles in an area that prohibits them and individuals drinking in the district without the required wristbands.
“The security in that small of an area was kind of hard to keep an eye on everybody,” Floyd said. “As someone pointed out, the parking lots and things like that, people milling around and doing things, was kind of hard to keep an eye on who was doing what. So not big issues. Nothing came of it as far as broken glass or anything like that. But … as someone else pointed out, some of the businesses didn’t know they were even in the entertainment district until the night of….”
Gruning echoed the comments from the police chief, saying wristbands typically used for temporary districts were inconsistent and businesses across the street from the Cathouse — which served as the host venue for the event — didn’t even know about the entertainment district.
“So, I was over at the Cathouse and a couple of times talking to [owner] Jeff [Gregory]. Everybody was very respectful, and for the most part, I think for the Cathouse it went well,” she said. “But, I did not see half the people with wristbands, I did see bottles …. and then I went to Saddle Up, they knew nothing about it, Amigos knew nothing about it. They had signs put up in the yard, and then they had the entertainment district map posted to their door, and they weren’t sure what it was. So, the reason that I am bringing this up is then I went back to Jeff and I said: ‘Saddle Up doesn’t know about this.’ [He said] ‘Well, do they need wristbands?’ And I said: ‘Yeah, maybe. Where did you get them?’ He said: ‘From the city.’ And I said: ‘I don’t think the city hands out wristbands.’ Do we? So … when I said that, then he said: ‘I don’t know, I just had them from somewhere.’ And they did say entertainment district …. that was Friday. Then on Saturday, I said: ‘They would like some wristbands.’ He says: ‘Well, I’m out,’ because he gave them away. He didn’t charge or anything, which is his prerogative. Then halfway through Saturday, there weren’t any left. And I did not see any cups.”
Gruning said the situation was much different than the structure at the permanent entertainment district at Pine Mountain Village off Van Buren Avenue.
“When I looked back at Pine Mountain, [wristbands at] Pine Mountain says Pine Mountain Entertainment District,” Gruning said. “And they have city-approved plastic cups. So, those are two things. And when I look through the ordinance, I don’t really see where it says what is a city-approved cup, number one. Number two, what type of wristband is a wristband? Should it say Spring Fling 2025? Should it just say Spring Fling? Does it matter? Could it just be a plain green? I don’t know. Because anybody then can come with a plain, green band and walk around the entertainment district.
“Whenever the person is hosting the event, like the Cathouse, I feel like whoever is hosting, Rotary, Cathouse, Basin, that they need to let the other properties know that they are included in their entertainment district and what is going on. And somebody needs to let them know what cups they need and what wristbands. Because, honestly, those other businesses lost revenue. Because they had no idea.”
“… I mean, what you’re saying is very valid,” Berry said.
