Articles
House concert battle continues
January 24, 2008
Delighting house concert supporters on January 16, the Boulder County Planning Commission voted 6-2 to delete Land Use staff recommended restrictions for the proposed "home events" regulations. The Planning Commission was split 4-4 to simply changing the definition of commercial activity to exclude home events (e.g. house concerts, Tupperware parties) which would have eliminated the justification for the initial Land Use Director interpretation. The recommendation made by the Planning Commission will be taken up by the County Commissioners in a February public meeting.
Living room house concert supporters argued that the proposed "home events" regulation was unnecessary, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.
Land Use Director Graham Billingsley admitted that he did not need this new regulation to shut down the one or two annual complaints he receives about loud outdoor concerts. House concert supporters noted the original inquiry (mistakenly filed as a complaint due to a software error) was about water usage which Boulder County does not regulate. Greg Ching, the homeowner who received a cease-and-desist letter in July 2006, said that an installed water meter verified that even with their occasional party their household used a small fraction of the national water consumption average. In fact, the only named living room concert complaint does not involve noise though it does involve a chronic neighborhood complainant documented for reporting in one year over 500 aviation noise complaints to Denver International Airport. The Planning Commission noted this was the first complaint against the Chings since beginning their Magnolia neighborhood musical potlucks in 1999.
The draft regulation limiting events to 12 annually applied only to groups 25 - 60 people creating an enforcement issue since the County does not log party attendance or frequency. The proposed rules also exempted political or charity fundraisers from these restrictions. The distinction between a legal unlimited size, unlimited frequency private party (musician paid by a wealthy host) versus a limited size, limited frequency home event (musician paid by voluntary contributions among the attendees) was lost to many in attendance as the neighborhood impact could be the same. Planning Commission members questioned the need to distinguish these two types of events as noise, parking, traffic, underage drinking, and sanitation regulations would equally apply to both situations.
Billingsley admitted that house concerts take place throughout the country yet Boulder County would be enacting the first regulation restricting them. It was pointed out there is a Federal case on appeal in Pennsylvania involving a township trying to restrict a living room concert. Constitutional issues of free speech and assembly, prior restraint, and unequal protection under the law are involved. House concert supporters questioned the 20 months of Boulder County staff time spent developing a regulation that may be easily challenged in court.
After the hearing, Greg Ching commented "Boulder County can take the wonderful precedence of allowing house concerts by simply exempting it from the definition of commercial activity. And do nothing more. This whole fight was not just about the right to party responsibly but about preventing erosion of our civil liberties."
