Vandalize city parks? You could get banned from them in the future

The Columbia Falls City Council Monday night passed an ordinance that could temporarily ban repeat offenders who damage city parks from entering them again.

Over the summer, city parks have been vandalized numerous times. Most recently, graffiti was spray painted on the city skate park and nearby baseball dugouts.

The vote in favor of the ordinance was unanimous, as council members said they’d had enough.

“During some of the subsequent investigations the perpetrators were discovered to be juveniles. Those juveniles rarely receive a level of accountability that would keep them from reoffending nor does accountability come swiftly enough to be effective. Thus, to protect the parks for use by the rest of the community, the city needs a mechanism to keep vandals from repeating their actions immediately,” noted City Manager Eric Hanks in a report to council.

Vandalism this summer has been particularly acute across all the city’s parks. Vandals kept plugging the toilet and breaking fixtures at Fenholt Park’s new bathroom so many times the city eventually just closed it.

Youths have also spray-painted graffiti on walls, torn up lawns and damaged trees.

Under the new law, if a person is caught vandalizing or in other ways damaging the parks or “substantially interferes with the lawful use of the park by other members of the public,” they could be temporarily banned from the city’s parks by an exclusion order issued by the Chief of Police, the city manager, parks director, public works director, or a police officer or other city employee specifically designated in writing by the city manager or Chief of Police.

“An exclusion order may prohibit a person from entering or remaining upon the identified City park for a period not exceeding 90 consecutive days. (2) The duration shall be determined based upon the circumstances of the violation, including the nature and seriousness of the conduct; whether the conduct involved violence, threats, property damage, or substantial disruption; whether the person has previously committed qualifying violations; whether a shorter exclusion would reasonably accomplish the purposes of this section; and other circumstances reasonably related to protection of persons or property or lawful park use,” the law reads.

The exclusion order would be made in writing and a person has the right to an administrative review.

The law would be applied on a case-by-case basis and is designed to address chronic cases.

“Nothing in this section requires an exclusion order to be issued for every violation of City ordinance, park regulation, or state law,” the law reads.

“During other investigations, there was not a level of proof enough to charge a suspect criminally, but there was enough information to apply an ordinance such as this to that person. City staff does not take lightly the authority to keep a person from accessing a public place and for that reason have limited the exclusion time periods and provided a mechanism for appealing the exclusion. We believe it is the fair and correct thing to do when implementing an ordinance such as this,” Hanks said in his report to council.

The city can, however, immediately exclude a person from a park if it warrants such action.

“When an authorized official reasonably determines that a person’s continued presence on City park property presents an immediate threat to persons or property or constitutes an ongoing substantial interference with the lawful use of the park, the official may issue an exclusion order effective immediately,” the law states.

A person can appeal that decision as well.