Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Free Speech topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates response to courthouse protest; notes limits on regulating profanity and sidewalk activity
Summary
After a protest at the courthouse containing profanity and loud amplification, commissioners discussed time/place/manner restrictions, the absence of a county noise ordinance and the limits of county authority for sidewalk (city) activity; no ordinance or permit program was adopted.
Several commissioners raised concerns about a recent protest at the courthouse that included profanity on signs and loud amplification that reportedly disturbed nearby businesses. One commissioner said they support First Amendment rights but object to "the vulgarity, the obscenities and the loudness." Another commissioner noted the county does not currently have a noise ordinance (a prior county proposal was voted down) and said sidewalk activity typically falls under city jurisdiction.
County staff and commissioners discussed regulatory options that would be lawful and defensible, including narrowly tailored time, place and manner rules, limiting amplification or issuing permits for county property use. Speakers warned of unintended consequences: a broad permit or property-use rule might also cover concerts or other events on county property and could raise enforcement and constitutional questions. Commissioners asked staff to draft possible approaches (such as a narrowly-scoped noise ordinance or permit process) but made no motion to adopt new rules at the meeting.
The commission recorded that city police had been present at the protest and that some organizers had obtained permits; commissioners asked staff to report back with legal guidance and potential permit language if the county wanted to pursue a narrowly defined regulatory approach.
