Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Proclamations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grants Pass council keeps current proclamation and posting practices after workshop debate
Summary
After a detailed legal briefing on government speech, councilors debated whether to broaden proclamation language to allow mayoral recognition of events such as the Right to Life march; a proposal to amend the proclamation resolution failed and the council voted to retain current practices.
Grants Pass councilors spent a sizable portion of Wednesday’s workshop debating whether the city should change rules governing proclamations and the posting of non‑city notices.
Aaron (city manager) briefed the dais on the 2020 resolution that requires proclamation requests be submitted 30 days in advance, originate from Grants Pass residents or organizations, and be citywide in significance. He explained the legal distinction staff relied on: "Proclamations have been determined to have an exemption from the First Amendment freedom of speech requirements and are classified as government speech," which gives the city discretion over proclamation content. By contrast, staff said, posting outside organizations’ flyers on city platforms would be treated as public‑forum speech subject to free‑speech requirements.
Councilor Victoria argued the city should have more flexibility to recognize long‑standing local events and proposed striking language that bars proclamations on "political, ideological, or religious controversy." Several other councilors, including Rob and Rick, warned that loosening the language could invite controversy in council chambers and preferred retaining the current restraint.
Councilor Victoria moved to direct staff to revise the proclamation resolution to remove the prohibition and add explicit mayoral purview; after discussion that the workshop motion would only direct staff to prepare changes, the council voted and the motion failed in workshop consideration. Councilor Joel then moved to continue the current proclamation and posting process; that motion passed on a subsequent quick vote (reported as 8–3).
Staff will therefore keep the existing proclamation guidelines in place and return any proposed changes only if directed by a future council action. The city attorney noted that because proclamations are government speech, courts have generally treated them differently than postings on public platforms.
