In Cincinnati, the December 3 tragedy was quickly followed by laws and regulations to govern management of major events and rock concerts in particular. Emergency legislation, was introduced and passed by City Council concerning restrictions on certain types of seating, consistent policies for door openings prior to show time, and on-the-scene police authority. Later an ordinance prohibiting the overselling of tickets for events and the establishing of a set of guidelines for rock concerts proposed by the City Safety Department were endorsed by City Council.

The actions taken by City Council and the City Administration had immediate and positive effects on public safety at major events in Cincinnati. The Task Force has reviewed that legislation and guidelines and offers the following comments. The purpose of such laws is to help establish standards for public safety and to clarify the responsibility of the parties involved. In doing so, the City should not assume responsibility or liability in areas that should remain in the province of the facility management or event sponsor.

Also included for review in this chapter is the Safety Department's proposed policy for major events and special events and the Ohio State Legislature's proposed bill that recently passed the Senate to regulate the conduct of live entertainment.

Documents for Review:

1. Ordinance No. 582-1979 - "Festival Seating or General Admission Prohibited; Exemptions"
2. Ordinance No. 583-1979 - "Emergency On-the-Scene Authority of Police Officer in Charge"
3. Ordinance No. 66-1980 - "Selling of Tickets over capacity of Places of Assembly"
4. Ordinance No. 388-1976 - "Modifying the Provisions of the Cincinnati Municipal Code relating to Admission Taxes. . ."
5. Safety Department, February 20, 1980 - "Agreement relative to Future Concerts to be staged at the Riverfront Coliseum"
6. Safety Department, December 11, 1979 - "Major Events Policy and Special Events Policy"
7. Commerce and Labor Senate Committee Bill No. 320-1980 - "To enact Section 2917.40 of the Revised Code to promote the safety of crowds attending live entertainment performances"

---

The problems attributable or related to festival seating have received the most immediate and concentrated attention. City Ordinance No. 582, however, also banned general admission seating, attributing the same characteristics and faults to this type as it did to festival seating. (See Chapter II) General admission seating is significantly different. (See Chapter II) These two seating types should be treated as distinct methods of seating and should be addressed by different restrictions. The Task Force supports the view that festival seating should be prohibited in enclosed or restricted facilities. General admission seating should be judged on its own merits, as it relates to the character of an event.

2. City of Cincinnati Emergency ordinance No. 583-1979: Emergency on-the-Scene Authority of Police officer in Charge

Because of the confusion over the exact role of Cincinnati law enforcement officers who were working for the Coliseum the night of December 3, City Council passed an ordinance authorizing police to use emergency powers at major events, if necessary. The ordinance also required that a facility be prepared to open two hours before their scheduled door opening and that a 48 hour advance notice of the normal door opening be given. Modifications to this ordinance should include the following:

A. Specification that it is the responsibility of the facility management or event promoter to cooperate with City personnel in protecting the safety of patrons, whether on private property or on surrounding public grounds.

B. Specification that only when facilities/event promoters fail to protect their patrons should law enforcement officers act to ensure public safety. Even then, whenever possible, the officers should consult with the sponsors prior to their actions.

C. The two hour preparedness to open doors, etc, for an event should be deleted from the ordinance.

3. City of Cincinnati Emergency ordinance No. 66-1980; Prohibiting the Sale of Tickets for all Events in all Theaters, etc. Over Capacity

This ordinance was passed in an attempt to prevent the overselling of events which lead to audiences exceeding the legal capacity of a facility. An accurate and independent method of determining whether or not an event is actually oversold, however, is not available at present. Fire and police visual assessments of a facility are difficult and for official determinations would be considered inaccurate. A more accurate count of patrons in attendance is needed.

The best method to use would be the disclosure to City officials of the total amount of Admission Tax collected by a facility at a given event. (See No. 4 below)

4. City of Cincinnati ordinance No. 388-1976; Modifying the Provisions of the Cincinnati Municipal Code relating to the Admission Tax

This ordinance makes it unlawful for the City Treasurer to release information concerning admission tax revenues collected from each ticket at events held in Cincinnati. Yet without access to revenue data, there is no way of accurately assessing whether or not an event has been oversold. The City Manager or his/her designee should have access upon request to information concerning the amount of admissions tax collected by a facility for a specific event.

5. Safety Department Rock Concert Guidelines

Six guidelines were established by the Safety Department to regulate rock concerts after the eleven deaths on December 3. These guidelines are interim measures for future rock concerts and while their legal enforceability is suspect, they now must be followed if rock concerts are to have any police services at Riverfront Coliseum.

The guidelines are:

1. The doors would be opened 90 minutes prior to the scheduled concert.
2. Twenty-five (25) Cincinnati Police Officers and three (3) Police Supervisors would be hired (by the Coliseum) to provide security outside the Coliseum prior to and during the concert.
3. A Police Supervisor and Fire Supervisor will be assigned to observe both the interior and exterior of the Coliseum; before, during, and after the performance. (Paid for by the Coliseum)
4. At least three (3) entrance locations must be utilized for each concert. This was construed to mean in addition to the main lobby and entrance point on the west side of the Coliseum.
5. At a point of time to be determined by the Police Officer in charge of the detail, when the plaza area has been secured, and check points established, no ticket sales can be made from ticket windows on the plaza level surrounding the Coliseum.
6. No seat would be sold to any patron or given free of charge to any patron that had an obstructed view of the stage or platform area where the performers were to perform the concert.

In reviewing these guidelines, the Task Force believes that the guidelines should be amended in light of the following comments.

A. With the abolition of festival seating; ninety minutes prior to an event is sufficient time to open doors and admit patrons. This should become law.

B. Before a determination is made about the number of police present at an event, City Council must first determine what the role of the Police is to be, what services it will provide, and how it will be paid. (See Chapter III) Whatever that decision is, police details should not remain a static size, but should reflect the type of event and characteristics of the expected crowd as determined by the police administration.

C. The City should provide equitable and consistent enforcement of safety codes at all facilities and events. When police and/or fire personnel are assigned by the City to work in a facility, that facility should not be required to pay for their services unless it requested said services.

D. A seat with an obstructed view should be sold only with the knowledge and consent of the purchaser. "Obstructed View" or an equivalent comprehensible abbreviation should be printed on applicable tickets.

6. Major Events and Special Events Police Policy Proposals

These proposals were developed by the Safety Department. The Special Events proposal was developed six months prior to December 3. The Major Events proposal was in response to the December 3 tragedy. Both were attempts to establish new regulations concerning events held in the City. Among the policies recommended were banning festival and general admission seating, establishing licensing criteria, providing greater authority for police to control certain aspects of an event, and when appropriate charging facility management or event promoters for city services.

Many of the areas discussed in the Major Events policy proposal are in some cases unnecessarily restrictive. The Task Force believes, for example that:
1) General admission seating should be permitted as a seating option for a broad variety of events. 2) Since a balanced ratio between the number of operating door entrances and the anticipated crowd volume is essential to public safety, City Council should enact a law establishing the appropriate ratios. 3) Police authority over private concerns should be limited to emergency situations. 4) Obstructed view seating should be allowed to be sold if tickets are properly marked.

The Task Force believes that a Special Events Policy should be developed by the City and that some type of permit or licensing procedure may be beneficial to the City. This could be done in conjunction with the filing of a crowd management plan (see Chapter I) and would effectively inform the City of an upcoming event. Before such a policy is adopted, however, the critical issue -- whether or not city services at events should be billed -- should first be publicly debated and resolved by City Council. (See Chapter III) City Council should solicit the opinions of local facility operators, promoters, entertainers, the public and others before making a final decision.

7. Section 2917.40, Ohio Revised Code - To promote the safety of crowds attending live entertainment performances

This bill was introduced in the Ohio Legislature in response to the December 3 tragedy. The proposed legislation bans festival seating for live entertainment shows. Setting standards on a state-wide basis is a difficult task, but its benefits can be numerous. Most importantly, of course, is the fact that State legislation affects all facilities in the state equally. The objective is to require all facilities and promoters in Ohio to take the same precautions to assure patron safety.

Sections (E) and (H) of the State bill may profit from further discussion before its passage. These sections read in part: (E) Unless exempted, the local law enforcement agency "shall designate the minimum number of entrances to be opened, maintained, and staffed at each live entertainment performance . . ."

(H) No person owning or operating a restricted entertainment area or sponsoring a live entertainment performance shall use peace officers employed by a township police district . . . unless the owner, operator, or sponsor enters into a contract . . . such a contract shall include the following provisions:

"1. The county, township, municipal corporation, or educational institution shall retain all authority to issue orders to the peace officers while they are providing security for the live entertainment performance . . .

"2. The peace officers shall be paid by the county, township, municipal corporation, or educational institution for all security services performed at the live entertainment performance . . .

"3. The County, township, municipal corporation, or educational institution shall be reimbursed by the owner, operator, or sponsor, as the contract may provide, for the costs incurred in paying the peace officers for security services performed."

In Section (E), the responsibility for sufficient door openings and crowd management would become the responsibility of local law enforcement instead of the facility operator, promoter, or sponsor, There are occasions when an officer, untrained in crowd management, may actually be less qualified than a facility operator to make routine decisions. More importantly, the responsibility of patron safety should remain with the facility operator when the patron is within the interior confines of the facility, and a facility should be able to maintain control over the operation of its building. Minimal standards should be established by legislation regarding the ratio of door openings to anticipated patrons.

Sections (H) (1), (2) and (3) are regulations that specify that those parties requiring public law enforcement agencies to help in crowd management must enter into a contract with that agency in order to use their services. It is the belief of the Task Force that when crowd management is required on public property it should be supplied by the local government. When public servants provide services for the public, as they do in this example, that service should be paid for with public funds. In fact, the public and the facilities already pay taxes for just such services. (See Chapter III)

Ordinance No. 582-1979

1. City Council should expand the list of exemptions for general admission seating and should establish written criteria for exemptions.

Ordinance No. 583-1979

2. The responsibility of the facility or event promoter to cooperate with City personnel in protecting the safety of patrons, whether on private property or on surrounding public grounds should be specified.

3. In an emergency situation, City police should, whenever possible, consult with the facility manager or event sponsor etc. before acting.

4. The requirement necessitating two hour advanced preparedness for door openings prior to the publicized door opening should be deleted.

Ordinance No. 388-1976

5. City Council should amend the Amusement Tax ordinance to allow the City Manager access to admission tax data to permit verification of a facility's compliance to occupancy capacity standards.

Safety Department Rock Concert Guidelines

6. City Council should enact a law requiring a facility management to open their doors ninety minutes prior to showtime.

7. The number of police personnel assigned to an event should be determined by the Police Division and based on the individual requirements of each event.

8. The City should not charge facility management or event sponsors for police personnel assigned to public property.

9. The City should provide equitable and consistent enforcement of safety codes at all facilities and events.