From The Press of Atlantic City — 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.”

For a full version of this article visit:
http://pressofatlanticcity.com/news/press/atlantic/article_873c48c3-9552-5fd4-b070-1784b05f88a8.html