Correspondence - ACLU - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Santa Ana City Council Page 4 October 17. 2014 offensive or irritating speech." Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 629 F.3d 966, 979 (9th Cir. 2010) (Kozinski, J., concurring) (citing Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 26 (197 1) (reversing the conviction of a man who wore a jacket that said "Fuck the Draft" to a courthouse, stating that one of the "prerogatives of American citizenship is the right to criticize public men and measures — and that means not only informed and responsible criticism but the freedom to speak foolishly and without moderation "); see also New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254,270 (1964) (recognizing that political speech "may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials "). In other words, the City "cannot define actual disturbance in any way it chooses." Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800, 829(9th Cir. Cal.2013). Indeed, the Mayor and the Council do not have the ability to define disruption to mean, simply, the presence of speech they find "offensive." "Actual disruption means actual disruption. It does not mean constructive disruption, technical disruption, virtual disruption, nunc pro tune disruption, or imaginary disruption." Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 629 F.3d at 976. In fact, it was the Mayor's conduct that caused an actual disruption to the orderly conduct of the meeting by first, delaying the meeting by having police clear the room, and then by ultimately cancelling the meeting. Therefore, City officials, including the Mayor, violated Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 2 -104 ( "No person shall violate the order and decorum of a council meeting, speak without permission, or do anything which may interfere with the effective deliberation of the council. Any violation of this provision is declared to be a misdemeanor and any person violating the same may be prosecuted ..... "). For the foregoing reasons we strongly urge you to: (1) Issue a public statement affirming the right of the public to openly criticize or express views contrary to those of the council or others at city council meetings, including speech, whether spoken or printed that could be deemed offensive or disrespectful; (2) Provide training to the Council, its staff, and its police department to ensure that the public's right to participate in Santa Ana City Council meetings is not restricted or otherwise chilled and provide additional instruction on California Government Code §54954.3(c) ("the legislative body of a local agency shall not prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body ") and other relevant provisions of the Brown Act; and (3) Carefully review any proposed revisions or amendments to the current ordinances to ensure that Santa Ana's rules of decorum are facially constitutional and do not lead to or further chill the free speech rights of members of the public. We understand that the City's next council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 21, 2014. Therefore, the City should take immediate steps to resolve the issues discussed in this M CLUa LIBERTIES UNION LIFORNIA u