In the last five years, college towns across Ohio have created laws that focus on cutting down large parties held off campus. The city of Bowling Green is no different, as it too has a law concerning this problem.

Bowling Green city officials used the ordinance of Oxford, Ohio, home of Miami University, as a base for Bowling Green’s ordinance. Currently, Oxford and Bowling Green’s nuisance party laws are the same, word-for-word.

In both towns, city officials and police officers have teamed together in hopes to hold residents who host parties accountable for illegal behavior occurring on their property or neighboring properties.

But many have asked: What does neighboring property mean?

After receiving criticism from students at the University, and an accusation that the ordinance is unconstitutional by the University’s Student Legal Services, Bowling Green’s City Council has recently created a revision to the ordinance. The first reading of the revision took place on March 7, with the second coming at tonight’s city council meeting, held at 304 N. Church St. at 8 p.m.

Councilman Mike Zickar said he feels the revision would help make the law less vague.

“We got a lot of feedback, criticism I guess, that the law was too vague and over expansive in itself that you could get cited for things that would be difficult for you to control,” Zickar said.

Since the ordinance was enacted on Aug. 1, 2004, over 50 citations have been issued in Bowling Green. One violation is a minor misdemeanor charge and the first individual charged received a $50 fine along with court fees.

If the ordinance is revised, it would remove the phrase “or on neighboring public or private property,” and possibly the condition of “standing or parking of vehicles that obstructs the free flow of traffic on the public streets and sidewalks or that impedes the ability to render emergency services,” as a reason for being issued a violation.

“It is reasonable to have the expectation that people can patrol their own property,” Zickar said. “But when someone leaves their own property, in a sense, [the students] ask, ‘Why should I be held responsible for that?'”

Zickar said it was not an intention of the council that students be held responsible for actions in which they can have no control, like what they do two blocks away from the party.

On the night of the final reading or beforehand, Zickar hopes to hold a public hearing so the community, residents and students alike, can come together and talk about the ordinance.

He feels the “wall” between residents and students can be lowered when people start talking about subjects like the nuisance party ordinance, which have become points of tension between students and other Bowling Green citizens.

“The wall has existed for a long time,” Zickar said. “It has been frustrating for students, but at least we are all talking about these subjects now.”

Others are happy that change may be coming soon to the nuisance party ordinance, including Rodney Fleming, managing attorney of Student Legal Services. He is representing the students who have been found in violation.

“I think the proposed amendments are definitely a step in the right direction,” Fleming said. “It shows a willingness to listen to student concerns.”

In December 2004 Fleming tried unsuccessfully to have the ordinance removed from the criminal code in Bowling Green because he feels it is too vague and hinders an individual’s First Amendment right to assembly.

Municipal Judge Mark Reddin did not find the ordinance unconstitutional. In his decision he said, “This court finds that a reasonably prudent person would understand that this ordinance is designed to control or prohibit illegal participant [guest] conduct at gatherings or parties where people have congregated for pleasure or entertainment by making the host(s) responsible.”

Fleming has filed an appeal to the Wood County Court of Appeals in Toledo.

In another part of Ohio, university legal services have gotten involved.

Athens, Ohio, home of Ohio University, has entered the discussion on such ordinances as well.

In Athens, the ordinance is a little different. In order to receive a citation the residence must acquire a minimum of four violations from one party.

Only four students have been cited under the ordinance, according to articles by The Athens News.

Ohio University’s student legal service — the Center for Student Advocacy — planned to challenge the constitutionality of Athens’ ordinance, but the citations were dismissed when the city prosecutor’s office realized that getting convictions would be difficult, according to an article printed Dec. 20, 2004.

Other college towns in states outside of Ohio have created such ordinances, including East Lansing, home to Michigan State, Ames, home of Iowa University, and Raleigh, home to North Carolina State University.

All these campuses have similar problems and have resorted to similar laws, Councilman Zickar said. He believes there is a compromise, but it will just take some negotiation from all sides.

“I always tell residents, ‘Remember when you were a student?'” Zickar said. “We don’t want to hold them at any higher standards … but then you also hear horror stories about thing that happen when there is a lot of alcohol in a concentrated area.”

There may not be an easy solution, Zickar said, but he hopes a public hearing will help the city sort out what works and what doesn’t work.

“We are fighting about these things and searching for answers, but if you look at any university town … we all deal with these issues,” Zickar said.

“How do you get neighborhoods with students and residents, with completely different lifestyles, living together?” he said. “I would like to use the public hearing like a referendum, or a way to revisit the nuisance party ordinance to find out, is it working?”