Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Politics / Clout City / News City Council concludes its approval of Emanuel's protest rules
Posted by Mick Dumke on 01.18.12 at 01:30 PM
In this particular case, you can fill in the blank with "parade and protest." In addition to new regulations for such events, the measures give his administration the authority to deputize police officers from outside Chicago and to enter into contracts without the normal bidding process in advance of the NATO and G-8 summits this spring. (You can read them, along with 49th Ward alderman Joe Moore's explanation for supporting them, here.)
The new protest rules inspired vehement opposition from activists and citizens' groups, ranging from unions and death penalty foes to Crain's Chicago Business and the Pro-Life Action League. But they still passed overwhelmingly, by a 45-4 count. The ordinance giving Emanuel widespread contracting authority for the summits also skated through, 41-5.
"This is not hindering anyone from protesting or demonstrating," said 27th Ward alderman Walter Burnett Jr., chairman of the special events committee, who shepherded one of the ordinances through the council. As activists shouted "Nay!" from the gallery, he praised Emanuel for backing off a proposal to raise the fines for resisting arrest from the current range of $25-to-$500 up to $200-to-$2,000. "Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for listening to us."
But not everyone was appeased.
"I do not think we've had enough time to see how far these measures go," said Fifth Ward alderman Leslie Hairston.
In fact, many aldermen didn't get a look at the latest round of rules changes until copies were handed out during the meeting called to approve them yesterday.
Hairston also noted that the new rules technically require march organizers to let the city know in advance if anyone plans to show up with a pet dog. Violators could face as much as ten days in jail and $2,000 fines. "I still think it inhibits spontaneous public assembly," she said.
Hairston was joined in opposing the parade and protest rules by Robert Fioretti (2nd), Will Burns (4th), and Nicholas Sposato (36th). The same four cast nays on the contracting and deputizing ordinance, along with Sandi Jackson (7th).
Comments (5)
Showing 1-5 of 5
Hats off to Smilin' Bob Fioretti and a pox on the House of Cappleman.
like
dislike
You know there's something "rotten in Denmark", that is, Chicago -- when it garners vehement opposition from "citizens' groups, ranging from unions and death penalty foes to Crain's Chicago Business and the Pro-Life Action League." Imagine: Crain's Business allying with Occupy Chicago? The Pro-Life Action League allying with the Gay/Lesbian Network? Mayor Emanuel's unctious assurances did not gain anyone's trust. We can see clearly now his backhanded behind closed-door room tactics, and his dissembling doublespeak.
So much for the other 'progressive' 'independent' Alderman. Meet the new boss...
Here's the hilarious part... no one can point to the element of the revised ordinances that "limits speech." You have to get a permit to have a parade, big deal that's always been the case. The park rules, despite what Mick Dumke's 10 seconds of research into this would tell you, apply to the handful of city-owned parks. The Chicago Park District already has rules prohibiting folks from being on their parks and beaches (most all in Chicago) between 11pm and 6am... now all the parks have the same rules. The contracts sunset with the end of the event, and deputizing law enforcement folks from other agencies is probably required so Secret Service can have their officers execute police actions relating to security in Chicago.
The notion that aldermen did not have the chance to read this ahead of the meeting is asinine. These were introduced a month ago and the changes were removing troubling elements of ordinances that total a whopping 10 pages of text. If you can't read and understand 10 pages in less than 24 hours you should not run for reelection. If you still "have a bad feeling" point to the element you're upset about which nobody did.
If you think this limits speech put a lawsuit forward because you are protected by the first amendment. If you haven't read the ordinances, shut up until you do. Your uninformed hyperbole is dull.
Related Stories
-
19 million promises, but still no money
The city of Chicago still hasn’t received any federal funds for the NATO summit
- Apr 11, 2012
-
Aldermen examine new protest rules before doing what they're told
Somehow Mayor Emanuel gets his way again
- Jan 17, 2012
