MULLICA TOWNSHIP - A proposed ordinance that raised First Amendment concerns has been temporarily scrapped, but likely will resurface in a few weeks.
In a split vote, an ordinance that would require the public to pay for permission and insurance before gathering on public property was rejected Tuesday night by the Township Committee.
But at least two committee members plan to reintroduce the ordinance as soon as possible so it can be voted on by the entire committee. Mayor Janet Forman, who supports the ordinance, was absent for Tuesday night's 2-2 vote.
Forman said the township was asked to pass the ordinance by the joint insurance fund to protect it from possible lawsuits, but critics argued doing so would violate the First Amendment.
Under the ordinance, any people or group wanting to gather on public property within the township would be forced to apply for a permit 30 days prior to gathering and then provide proof of liability insurance coverage 10 days prior to the gathering. Any request for a permit could be denied "at the discretion of the township," which also would have the authority to revoke any permit.
This means the popular local practice of politicking at the township's waste transfer station would require permits and insurance, as would any public protest, vigil or rally.
But Ed Barocas, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said imposing the 30-day and insurance requirements would be "clearly unconstitutional" if applied to such gatherings.
The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech … or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
"The ACLU has sued on behalf of groups wishing to speak in a number of New Jersey municipalities with overly broad and restrictive permitting requirements for (public gatherings)," Barocas said. "And we have resolved these situations in the past… because the First Amendment acts to prevent such onerous restrictions on free speech."
Barocas said the Supreme Court - conservative and liberal justices alike - have consistently found common ground in protecting the right to practice free speech in public places, such as parks and sidewalks.
It was only after concerns about the ordinance's legality were expressed that the township's solicitors recommended the township request permission from its insurance provider to amend the ordinance so the "definition of 'special event' shall specifically exclude any public assembly or other gathering for the purpose of political discourse, debate or other similar expressive activity."
Barocas said adding such language to the ordinance would be beneficial.
On Tuesday night, however, the township's chief financial officer, Dawn Stollenwerk, said the municipality's insurance representatives felt the ordinance did not need the amendment.
Fully expecting a split vote, Committeeman Michael St. Amour recommended the committee vote on the ordinance as is, even though it was not scheduled to be voted on at the meeting. When a split vote occurs, the ordinance must be reintroduced for first and second readings, as well as a public hearing, before it can be passed.
"In that time, we'll get information back from the JIF on what might make the ordinance pass on its own," St. Amour said. "And I think the best step toward that is adopting language similar to what our attorney already recommended."
Committeeman Bernard Graebener said he is against the ordinance even with the amendment because he doesn't feel taxpayers should be forced to pay for a permit to use public property they are already paying to maintain. And after initially expressing concerns about the ordinance, Deputy Mayor William Kennedy voted twice in favor of it.
Committeewoman Kathy Chasey said after the meeting that she plans to introduce the same ordinance again as soon as possible.
"Definitely," she said. "I think it's a good ordinance."
Forman agreed. "Anything to reduce our liability," she said Wednesday. "Our insurance company is recommending we do this, and I'll rely on their professionalism."
As far as the restrictions it would place on spontaneous gatherings such as vigils, protests and rallies, Forman said those events should be forced to comply with the guidelines.
"I don't want to step on anyone's civil liberties," she said. "But if a thousand people want to stand in front of the dump for a vigil, we need something in place to make sure the township is protected if someone gets hurt."
But St. Amour said he feels the Republicans only want to pass the ordinance in order to restrict campaigning at the dump, which he said would be a huge blow to opposing political campaigns.
"The township would be putting itself in harm's way by passing the ordinance in this way and would end up really subjecting itself to more expenses by not protecting free speech," he said. "It's not right. It's not fair. It's not in following with the First Amendment of the Constitution. And it will be challenged."
E-mail Rob Spahr:
RSpahr@pressofac.com
40 comments:
Why do Chasey and Forman want to keep information from the public so much? Are they so frightened that if people are allowed to speak others will hear them?
What can you say about Kennedy? He's so indebted to them that he's going along with this farce even if he's against it.
Watch for it to repealed when the new committee members takes office in January.
When was the last time 1,000 people gathered at the dump? I don't think 1,000 vehicles go through the dump on any of the given days it's open to throw away their trash,
Has there been a problem with people holding vigils at the dump?
This is ridiculous, SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT at its finest.
So Forman is ignoring the Solicitors advice (the ones she voted for in January) and the Township is paying good money for and instead relying solely on the insurance company's recommendations.
Is she insinuating that the solicitors aren't professionals?
Who are our town people working for, us or the insurance company?
Another "huh" moment for Mullica.
Does this mean if I want to have a scrimmage ball game at the Rec field, which is PUBLIC PROPERTY, with some friends, I would need to pay for a permit (at what cost would this permit be?), apply 30 days in advance for a "spontaneous" game, hope the weather is good that day and show proof of insurance to play on a public ball field that I, as a taxpayer helped pay for?
Can someone tell me why we have to insure the insurance company that we are paying to insure us?
So I guess I am not allowed to use the playground or the ball fields with a group of friends. Are we all supposed to live like hermits? Why do I pay property taxes for a facility that I will face severe restrictions to use? The class trips to the Pine Cone Zone will now have to be canceled. Let's all pay more property taxes to pay admission for the preschool classes to go elsewhere for a trip.
Maybe all who self-pay their property taxes should withhold the next quarterly payment. If half of our township residents withhold their property taxes, the township employees can't collect their salaries or pay for their health insurance. Then they could not afford to come after us all. What a "Declaration of Independence" that would be by the residents of Mullica Twp.
Will I still be able to bring friends out on our boat on the Mullica River? I guess we will have trailer our boat elsewhere. Am I allowed to have a yard sale without special insurance? Will I have to buy my special yard sale insurance from a Chasey and Forman Inc. company?
Maybe we should all hold some public demonstrations, while still permitted, before this ordinance is passed. I guess we should all go in front of the homes/"non-public property" of Forman and Chasey, or to Forman's workplace ("non-public" property, and also outside Mullica Twp.). Is this what Chasey and Forman want around their personal, "non-public" property? Wouldn't they rather have us all at the dump? I am going now to buy materials for my poster board now. Let's invite the press.
Sorry, I don't usually rant on Gadfly. This has put me in a foul mood. Chasey and Forman are supposed to be Republicans, for free enterprise and less regulation.
Mullica Twp. is going to be embarrassed again in the newspapers.
Putting the politics aside, Ms. Forman is actually a nice lady. I hope her views on this issue do change. Ms. Forman grew up on her family's hard-working blueberry farm in Hammonton. I hope she will eventually decide to be fair and humane to all of us who are still hard-working common folks.
Yep, its ridiculous. "The JIF is making us do it." What stupidity. How can anyone trust these people?
Ms Stollenwork seems to be doing all the work for the 3 Republicans here with this and the school budget. Have they made her Administrator yet since she seems to be put in charge of all these things dealing with township business anyway.
Anytime people in power try to restrict folks freedom of speech and power to demonstrate it opens up a can of whoop. This is going to backfire bigtime and Mullica doesnt need the ACLU nor folks from the outside coming in to fight this thing and give us more bad press and more chaos. KFC should stop running the town on their emotions and use common sense.
The only hope in November for Chasey and Crowe will be if they are able to stifle the distribution of information to residents. Chasey continues to be on the WRONG side of the issues and her record does not look good...
Why wasn't Kennedy included in this article? Where does he stand in this? Didn't he throw papers in people's driveways when he ran for committee and stand at the dump? Another hypocrite in Mullica's government.
Blame the ins. company all you want---they are making a suggestion, not requiring specific action. Otherwise council wouldn't even need to vote on it. Guess it leaves more $ in the coffers in case the Mayor decided to sue the town over her building in the wetlands. Guess she doesn't want to give up her rights to do that though, does she? Why doesn't the guy from the Press ask her about that????????????????
According to the minutes from 4/28, the application fee alone is $100, probably non-refundable if they deny you, plus you need insurance for the one day?
At first I thought this ordinance was about parades and large assemblies but if 1 or 2 people have to pay a $100 application fee 30 days in advance plus a permit fee plus have insurance to hand out literature at the dump then this applies to everybody who walks on public property.
I read the sentence that states "Any request for a permit could be denied 'at the DISCRETION of the Township,which also would have the authority to revoke any permits". This could definitely lead to more lawsuits in this town.
Chasey has sunk to new lows against the community with her quest for power and her insecurity!
WE pay our taxes for these properties and WE pay for the Twp. insurance to cover liability.
Chasey has decided to restrict all our children from free use of the parks because she can't think of any other way to block out her political competition.
30 days advance notice and all that money is CRAZY.
Why now? Are other communities required to buy insurance for similiar occurrences? How does this differ from people just hanging at the park-do they need insurance?
How would this work if I wanted to jog with a couple of friends at the park every night after work?
Would we need a new $100 application,a permit and insurance for every single day?
If we go on the street(which is town property) and jog, do we now need permits for that,too?
What about hiking through the public trails?
Will a 30 day advance $100 application and permit and insurance be required for hunters who go on public lands with weapons?
I have a feeling that this deception is going to backfire on Chasey bigtime. People only seem to get involved in this town when it affects them personally. This issue will touch every family in the town.
As long as the KFC ppl are around... you need insurance to breath!! If you dont have it..... STOP BREATHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How are you supposed to know 30days in advance if an emergency issue comes up that affects the town? This would not only block politicans but also citizen groups who want to educate the public on urgent matters.
If it were up to Chasey and Forman, nobody would have found out about the Garbage Rail Transfer Station or the secret plot to rezone the Elwood Village.
Now they want the power to determine WHO could even GET a permit for anything even if it was a one day notice.
I am so glad that the reporter asked the ACLU about this matter. It looks like they would step in and fight against Chasey and Forman and represent the rights people of this town.
Maybe some higher State Agency could look into a few other things going on in this town,too.
I was under the impression that the town is covered by insurance for all it's public property.
!0:29 am seems to be correct that our expensive insurance company seems to be putting the burden of liability on private citizens in order to avoid claims going to them. What are we paying them for?
It looks like this ordinance could apply to one person at the dump or 1000's at a vigil and gives total control to the committee about WHO gets the permit or not.
Under this new law,if I wanted to take a couple of kids to the park on August 1, I would have to give $100 application fee in on July 1,get my permit for more money,buy insurance and hope all the kids still want to go a month later when it might be pouring outside.
And if I had the wrong political sign up in my yard in the past,maybe my permit would be denied and I could lose my application fee. Have these people lost their minds?????
Chasey had been campaigning at the transfer station since the mid 90s and we probably almost certainly had the SAME insurance but there were never any concerns then since she had it her way. Now since Bernard and Mike got elected after cmapaigning there KFC is using the insurance as a
smokescreen rather than admit they are going to bully their way through this. If it backfires Chasey will throw Dawn Stollenwerk under the bus while Janice will be long gone from the scene.Of course they will assure that all recreational activities will be approved while the police will have to be the bad guys and block political activities at their "discretion". This is so blatant every citizen should be insulted at what is really going on here.
It was encouraging to see both Bernard and Mike stand up and challenge these bullies. BK should hang his head in shame since he had campaigned at the transfer station and used to stand up for freedom of speech.
IF KFC has any sense at all they'll let the issue go.
Plain and simple, this is just a way to keep the people ignorant and stop citizen groups from protesting. Chasey is hurting everybody and their kids and their wallets for her own selfish reasons and this could also be against the Constitution of the US but Chasey thinks this is a "good Ordinance".
It looks like we're going to have a lot of kids playing ball and skating in the streets this summer.
Maybe the organized sport groups know when they will be playing and can afford all these fees and insurance but the average family in Mullica will not be able to use our parks. Is the Rec Asso. going to have to take out extra insurance for the fans and parents that come to watch the games? Will all onlookers who don't have a 30 day advance permit for a social gathering and insurance be banned from the field?
It looks like Chasey, Forman and Kennedy will dictate who pays top fees and whose fee gets waived. They can give a permit or not at their "discretion".
This Ordinance seems to be so vague and leaves ultimate power of control of our public property to people that keep vendetta lists. Something is very wrong here.
4:19pm
You brought up a good question about the streets. They are public property. Are we only going to be allowed on them if we're in a car covered by our own insurance?
What happens to the skateboard park?
How would you apply this Ordinance to kids that just come out to have fun? Nothing about this is making sense to me.
I can see requiring an application fee,a permit and insurance if people from out of town want to come in and use our property but I think all Mullica residents should be allowed on our public land for free.
How are the police going to enforce this? Will they ask everyone they see in the park for their permits? Will they look the other way for families they know and chase out or ticket people they don't like? There is so much room for abuse of power in this Ordinance that it's frightening.
Taken to its literal meaning, just about everything will need a permit once you leave your home. But exceptions will surely be made. What's your name?
If 1000 people were going to stand in front of the "Dump" for a vigil, it would have happened last year. If Forman is worried about such a large group assembling then she should just require that this Ordinance be for groups 500,750 or 1000+people. Not for 1 or 2 people.
Do Forman and Chasey know something that they're keeping secret and they are expecting protests and rallies when it gets out. Under this Ordinance, we would have to wait 30 days to protest but I doubt that Chasey and Forman would approve the permit to speak out against them in the first place. So we would all be fined or put in jail.
Within the ordinance, what is the definition of "any people or group"?
The mayor's husband was convicted of careless driving for nearly running into her opponent across the street from the dump with his pick-up truck, while her opponent was setting up campaign signs. Now she wants to shut down campaigning at the dump so she can say how inherently unsafe it was to stand out there in the first place.
If your thinking is not in lockstep with Chasey and Forman, YOU WILL NEED A PERMIT.
9:31 PM poster
The reporter probably meant to say "any persons or group". The use of the word "people" is awkward.
This is SO unfair to the people of Mullica. We have very little here and the few things we can do in town for recreation are going to be out of reach for the majority of people.
The 30 day wait is ridiculous and the application fee of $100 is way too much money. And now I read there is also a permit fee!
I think that the ACLU should also look into discrimination issues and selective enforcement that are built right into this custom made Chasey legislation.
There have been many,many landmark Supreme Court decisions in which the ACLU played a major role, either as direct counsel or as a friend-of-the court, in defense of our fundamental freedoms.
They have won freedom of expression cases against Towns,States and even Congress. This Organization knows what's it's doing.
This will go to court. Free Speech will win. Chasey's effort to extinguish the light of American values will linger in our memories well after she thrown out of office in November.
Post a Comment