December 17, 2009 - Wednesday, December 16th, Cincinnati City Council voted on third and final reading to enact new "Right of Way" sign ordinance legislation (sponsor, Chris Bortz), that on the surface addresses only vendors but will also be applied to social justice demonstrators.
Despite Mayor Mark Mallory's unanticipated late time change for the City Council meeting, nearly 20 pro-life citizens attended in opposition. During the half hour public comment period, at least 14 of these citizens presented intelligent and compelling testimony from personal, analytical, and legal perspectives.
They questioned the constitutionality of the absence of clear specific, written guidelines for social justice demonstrators, plus the covert suppression of free speech rights in a bill supposedly for vendors--originally initiated due to opposition to sidewalk counselors in front of Planned Parenthood on Auburn Avenue (see Background Information below).
City Council members Cecil Thomas, Leslie Ghiz, and Chris Monzel presented articulate arguments in support of free speech expression and against the confusion of including social justice demonstrators in this Right of Way ordinance.
These members, plus recently added new Council member Charles Winburn, voted against the ordinance, which passed 5-4.
Next step: Council member Chris Monzel pledged on the floor to work to amend this legislation with provisions to include exemptions for social justice demonstrators. Any amendment will face the same odds for votes for and against, as the original bill.
Background Information [P. Westwood]
The current discussions involving demonstrators and their signs date back at least to 2007 when Council member Cecil Thomas was chairman of the Law & Public Safety Committee. In this committee and subsequent hearings, those demonstrating against abortion of babies in front of Planned Parenthood on Auburn Avenue were specifically targeted.
The goal was clear to decrease these demonstrators' visibility and weaken their message.
When constitutional concerns were raised, the focus then transformed into one of beautification of the city. Thus the insertion of vague restrictions for demonstrators in this Right of Way ordinance for vendors--a cover for suppression of free speech rights.
Free speech expression is not the same as commercial vendor signage and is not always pretty. Any legal free speech limitations must be within constitutional boundaries.
Constitutionality is key, and is lacking in the few identifiable restrictions for demonstrators now in the document--inviting a constitutional challenge it could not withstand.
From the beginning of discussions, legal documentation was provided identifying constitutional concerns with this ordinance as applied to demonstrators plus the targeting of individuals. Letters sent in 2007 from attorney Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center, and in 2008 from local attorney Ruth Kelly were provided again to Council members at the Wednesday, December 16th meeting.
As stated before, the vendor aspects of the ordinance need not be done away with. But a constitutional section or separate ordinance for social justice demonstrators is necessary so that the law is clear and applicable to any and all.
Contact Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory
Contact City Council Members
