Our Opinion: Correct error in festival district during review process

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Trial and error is an accepted scientific method.

We commend the Jefferson City Council for adopting the festival district concept on a trial basis. The trial ended June 30; an examination of successes and errors is planned.

We believe the festival district enjoyed a number of successes. We also believe one error — and it is a significant one — must be corrected.

The error is a decision by festival district organizers to circumvent the First Amendment right of free speech. The breach occurred when pro-life and pro-choice petitioners were prohibited within the festival district.

By way of background, the festival district concept was established by an ordinance approved by the city’s governing body.

The ordinance allowed festival district permits to be sought during the trial period for two areas of the city — downtown and on Dunklin Street.

The permits essentially extend the legal consumption of alcoholic beverages to outdoor areas within the district.

The Downtown Business Association applied for and received permits to operate festival district during its Thursday Night Live events in June.

The ordinance addresses district boundaries, alcohol consumption and allows the permit holder to prohibit the sales of food or beverages by unauthorized vendors. It specifies no other prohibitions.

Organizers of the downtown district contend the across-the-board prohibition on solicitations was designed to prevent festival-goers from being pestered.

We don’t see where that authority is granted either by the First Amendment or city ordinance.

Freedom of speech includes pesky applications — as we repeatedly are reminded by Westboro Baptist Church protests at military funerals.

Thursday Night Live largely was a popular application of the festival district. Attendance increased steadily throughout the month, topping out at an estimated 5,000 people on June 30; police reported few problems; and festival-goers generally applauded the added community amenity.

But the First Amendment must be respected.

We don’t envision upholding the Constitution will decrease attendance or enjoyment at festival district events. And, even if it did, that is a consequence of freedom.

More like this story

muleman 1 year, 11 months ago

Organizers of the downtown district contend the across-the-board prohibition on solicitations was designed to prevent festival-goers from being pestered.

Alcohol served and being pestered leads to one thing.......TROUBLE

tonto 1 year, 11 months ago

I have to disagree with your comment because a couple of drinks makes most people calmer - but I will agree that some people are mean drunks. Organizers of the downtown district seem to think they own the streets and sidewalks, but that doesn't make it so.

melbrooks 1 year, 11 months ago

Downtown Festival District activities are events sponsored and paid by sponsors and the Downtown Association. In my opinion, just as the NT censors speech on these message boards, the Festival District organizers have the right to limit vendors and activities in the Festival District during the permitted period.

As long as the organizers treat everyone equally--just like the NT does--I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it.

tonto 1 year, 11 months ago

Mel, the NewsTribune owns this website. That gives them the right to censor the contents. You can't compare an event that's open to the public with a private company's property - or rather you can make that comparison but it is not valid.

Gotigers 1 year, 11 months ago

Tonto- very good point. However, is it any different when a private group rents the Memorial Park Pavillion or the Ice Arena for a birthday party? Do protestors have the right to barge in on your gathering or party?

I think if the protestors want to protest then they should follow the application guidelines to put on an event.

tonto 1 year, 11 months ago

It would be really nice if protesters could be somewhere else all the time, but that's not really practical. It's the public part of the event that means you have to let the public in - all of them. Even the ones you don't want. If you have a private event that's different.

tonto 1 year, 11 months ago

That's a load of hype you're putting out there. I had another word in mind, but not here. Another poster had a much more useful suggestion which the courts might actually approve - set aside a place adjoining the so-called festival district for protesters.

Invite the guy with the big sign on the sidewalk by the courthouse to hold down the fort while the rest of the protesters gather their pamphlets and placards. Alert the Tea Party, the Tree Huggers, the so-called Right-to-Lifers, the so-called Right-to-Choose people, and anyone else you can think of.

melbrooks 1 year, 11 months ago

Tonto, the downtown association--made up mostly of property owners is the applicant. And, the association "owns" the event. They put up the money for the bands, pay an event organizer, etc. In my opinion, they own it as much as the NT owns this website.

Tigers, I think you have it right. The association is "renting" designated streets for their event.

Again, if the organizers were allowing only certain political speech, it would be a big problem. But that's not the case.

muleman 1 year, 11 months ago

Freedom of speach does not give you the right to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater. The same rule should apply to "pestering" a drunk with your personal beliefs, which he (or she) probably doesnt care about anyway

JMO 1 year, 11 months ago

Like it or not, the festival is open to the public. Whether you want to listen to music or not, you can still walk down the street, shop at any open business, or just pass through. The Downtown Business Owners Association isn't limiting admission to the event to their friends and family members; anyone can walk in and enjoy it. It's different than renting a park pavilion or the ice arena for a birthday party. I assume, at least, that you have no intent for perfect strangers to come to Aunt Bessie's 90th and eat cake. The long and short of it is, so long as the public is invited that means ALL the public. So long as the petitioners don't disturb the peace- as defined by law - they have the right to walk up to you and ask you to sign a petition on a city street that is STILL open to the public...just like you have the right to tell them to go away.

ADS 1 year, 11 months ago

I don’t recall seeing anything about the Downtown Business Association renting the streets and sidewalks at fair market value for the Thursday Night Live events. It was a public event and while the businesses downtown pay taxes, so do the rest of us living in the city and county and the downtown streets belong to all. Unfortunately, there are those that are just fine with others rights being violated as long as it serves their own comfort. They’d be happy to continue to do so, until of course it is their rights being infringed upon, then I’ll bet the rest of us hear about it. Probably a fair chance some people complaining here had others sitting near them downtown wishing they didn’t have to hear what you were talking about. I wonder what your reaction would have been if they’d asked you to change the subject because they didn’t want to hear about it anymore because you were upsetting their tranquility.

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune