05/12/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . e Councilor Wooten asked how the amendments before the council would affect the current requirement of obtaining a permit in order to distribute handbills on the downtown mall. Mr. Swanson said that this issue was still under consideration and that the amendments before the council would not affect the current permit requirement. He said that staff would return in the future with recommendations on the permit process. Ms. Wooten referred to the US Supreme Court decision in the case of Talley v. California. She asked whether this decision had any effect on the rights of the public to speak or distribute materials on private property. Mr. Swanson responded that the case did not affect such rights on private property. Ms. Wooten asked whether non-profit organizations or religious groups could distribute materials on public property. Mr. Swanson said he believed that this issue had been resolved and that he would research the matter and report back to the council. Ms. Wooten asked whether distribution of sample merchandise, such as cigarette samples, would fall into the same category as distribution of commercial handbills under City Code. She felt that such distribution could in certain instances be viewed as a threat to public health, safety, and welfare. Mr. Swanson said that under existing codes, an individual would need a permit to distribute free samples on the downtown mall but not in other public areas within the City. Ms. wooten said that this issue was of concern to her and that she would like information on the City's ability to regulate distribution of free samples. Mr. Lindberg referred to Section 4.070, prohibiting distribution of anonymous material, which Mr. Swanson had recommended be repealed as unconstitutional. Mr. Lindberg felt it was important that a person receiving a handbill know the author, in order to place the information in its proper context. Mr. Swanson said that anonymity was probably not a problem with commercial free speech, since commercial advertisers are traditionally interested in making the identity of the author abundantly clear. He said that the right to anonymity was impor- tant in political free speech, to prevent a person who wished to speak cut on a sensitive issue from retaliation by those with an opposing point of view. CB 2465--An ordinance concerning handbills; amending Sections 4.045, 4.050, and 4.060 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 4.055 and 4.070 of that code; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wooten said that she would support the motion, but that she wanted to receive more information on the points raised above. She also requested a report back from staff in a few months on how the ordinance was working. Council Bill 2465 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18963. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 12, 1982 Page 8