Exemption sought for bluegrass festival

MAT-SU -- After last year's ruckus, which culminated in a last-minute attempt to come up with a $125,000 bond and threats of keeping borough or law enforcement officials out of the Talkeetna Bluegrass Festival, it appears event organizers have smooth sailing ahead for the 2004 festival.

The Mat-Su Borough Assembly, June 1, considered a proposal that would have exempted event operators from a bond aimed at covering costs if public safety issues, injuries or damages to property arises as a result of the event. The exemption, which passed unanimously, will only apply to groups with a three-year history of operation under the same event operators, and who can prove their ability to comply with all security measures and trash removal requirements set in borough code. The exemption would be issued by the borough planning director on a case-by-case basis, and must be renewed each year. So far, the Talkeetna Bluegrass Festival is the only event that has happened outside the city limits of Houston, Wasilla or Palmer that falls under the special events ordinance.

Christopher Canterbury, the lawyer who represents the Talkeetna Bluegrass Festival event operators, said he'd prefer to go farther and have the bonding requirements eliminated altogether, as obtaining a bond for damage done to "adjacent property," as the borough ordinance regulating special events states, has proven difficult.

"The requirements of the bond here, as worded in the provision, are virtually unattainable," Canterbury said. "No underwriters would be willing to write a bond for that."

Because the festival brings in about 4,000 people over the four-day event, and most purchase four-day tickets, the ordinance put in place last year requires festival organizers to post a $125,000 bond. Because they couldn't find underwriters for the bond who would allow them to post only a portion of the bond, as is done in the case of most bonds, festival organizers had to make the whole amount available. Canterbury said organizers offered up the deed of trust on the land on which the festival is held, and supplemented that with a $25,000 cashier's check.

Assembly Member Jim Colver asked if the festival would be able to attain a smaller bond, such as $5,000.

"That's what we've suggested in the past -- given the type of offense, it seems to be the best," Canterbury said. He added that the bond would likely only be used for trash cleanup along roadways near the festival, if at all, and he believed $5,000 was enough to cover that cost.

Knik River resident Marty Quaas told assembly members lowering the bond would be a reversal of the strong stance the assembly took against unsafe operators when the ordinance was enacted.

"You have a responsibility to protect nearby residents, the borough, in some cases attendees, the promoter and the owner of the property itself," Quaas said before asking how the borough would pay if a child were to be accidentally backed over in a festival parking lot, for example. "It might be a problem to underwrite the bond, but it is a risk."

Palmer resident Jean Woods suggested the assembly address the problem by keeping the requirement for a liability bond, but reducing the amount required for the second bond.

Woods' suggestion was ultimately what the assembly decided to put forward. Instead of a blanket exemption, as was originally proposed, Assembly Member Mary Kvalheim put forward a motion to reduce the bond to $25,000. Because the maximum required for events with 501-1,000 attendees is already $25,000, that amendment was later changed to reduce the bonding requirement to 75 percent of the normally required bond amount. Assembly Member Betty Vehrs said she's confident the lower amount would provide security and not hamper event organizers.

"I'm satisfied that, because the special event permit has to be applied for every year, it means not everybody's approved," Vehrs said. "I don't want them to be put out of business."

The amended motion passed unanimously and Canterbury said, after the meeting, he feels the new amount is workable, although he'd still like to see it eliminated altogether.

"It's more commiserate with our goals," Canterbury said. "We want public safety too. The festival has gone a long way to try to clean up its act."

He said he has concerns that, if the ordinance is made too difficult to comply with, event organizers will devise ways to get around it. Another concern, Canterbury said, is that the wording of the ordinance will still make it difficult to find an underwriter. The problem, he said, is with who would be indemnified. The borough ordinance states the bond "… shall indemnify the owners of surrounding property for costs attributable to cleaning up or removing debris, trash or other waste resultant from the mass gathering."

"I don't feel they fully understand what it is they passed and how it really affects us," Canterbury said. "We want it legally reliable -- it helps our business, too."

Ken Hudson, chief of the Mat-Su Borough's code compliance office, said event coordinators have not yet applied for an exemption under the amended ordinance, but he expects to see a filing soon.

Contact Rindi White at rindi.white@frontiersman.com.