What A Riot

There are many safety concerns connected to the use and control of City roadways particularly as they are affected by assemblies in the roadway.  The disturbances on Fourth Avenue in connection with the 2001 NCAA Basketball Final Four prompted analyses by both City Staff and a citizens committee convened for the purpose of critically reviewing this incident and making recommendations for future events of this nature.  (Tucson Mayor & Council Memorandum January 11, 2005.)

The aforementioned Memorandum is an executive summary of two new regulatory ordinances proposed by City Staff:  A Special Event Ordinance and a Safe Assembly Ordinance.

The Special Event Ordinance applies to large events like the Rodeo Parade, Fourth Avenue Street Fair, and so on. The language quoted from the Memorandum does not apply to them. The Safe Assembly Ordinance is the one that addresses “future events of this nature,” using the language of the memorandum, meaning the “disturbances” of April 2001.  How does the proposed ordinance prevent future “disturbances?”

The answer:  require a permit from the Chief of Police.  Seriously.  If the Arizona Wildcats miraculously make it as far as the National Championship game in 2005, the ordinance, if passed, would require a “permit” be requested at least 72 hours in advance.  That is the City Staff’s answer to the Fourth Avenue riot:  make Tucson the only place in the world that has a “rioting without a permit” law.

MEMO

TO:  Chief Miranda

FROM:  Scooter, Javier, Devil Dog and Tanya

Re:  National Championship “Safe Assembly” Request

Dear Chief, we heard that we need to get a permit from you before we engage in an assembly that takes place in whole or in part on, or causes spillover onto, a City roadway.  We anticipate spilling over onto Fourth Avenue as soon as the championship game is over.  Our activities will be limited to screaming, yelling, throwing things, throwing up, overturning vehicles, lighting fires, and running amok.  We do not expect the event to last more than six hours.  Thank you.

The Chief would probably turn them down.  That would stop ‘em!

The proposed Ordinance would not be limited to riots, because it defines assembly this way:

Any gathering or grouping of persons collected together at one location, or traveling as a collective body from one location to another location, for a common ceremonial, educational, political, religious, social, or other purpose.  The term includes, but is not limited to, a demonstration, parade, procession, protest, picket line, or rally.

The moment the assembly spills over onto the street the proposed ordinance goes into effect.

That doesn’t mean the assembly can totally escape the ordinance by remaining on the sidewalk.  The members still have to “play nice.”  The ordinance will only ignore an assembly that

Stands on or travels in orderly fashion on the sidewalk; crosses street intersections by means of the crosswalks; and obeys all traffic control devices and state and local traffic laws; and is otherwise carried out in such manner as to not interfere with or impede the flow or regulation of other traffic on streets and adjoining sidewalks.

One jaywalker can bring down the hammer.

Despite the memorandum from City Manager Michael (don't call me “interim”?) Letcher one wonders if the ordinance is likely to discourage future riots.  (“Call off the riot, Buck!  Dummy here forgot to get a permit.  Now we’ll have to return peaceably to our homes.   Damn!  It was such a nice evening for a riot, too!”)

While the proposed ordinance was inspired by a riot, its impact is to stop spontaneity.  That’s right, any spontaneous gathering, even joyful, will be unlawful if one participant sets foot in a street.  Before the citizens of Tucson may lawfully assemble for any purpose they must obtain a permit from the Chief of Police if a street is involved.

The Chief of Police is not supposed to consider “the assembly’s speech content or message,” or “the anticipated public reaction to the assembly’s speech content or message,” or “the applicant’s identity or associational relationships.”  Fair enough, but the Chief can deny a permit if “adequate preparations for traffic regulation, crowd control and public safety cannot be made prior to the assembly’s scheduled commencement….” I want to see what happens when the Hell’s Angels request a “Safe Assembly” permit.

Or Fred Phelps.  The “Reverend” Phelps apparently decided not to picket a local high school’s production of “The Laramie Project” and a few allegedly “gay friendly” churches as he recently threatened to do.  Assume that Reverend Phelps asks for and receives a “Safe Assembly” permit for one of his hateful demonstrations.  Assume further that his demonstration inspires a spontaneous counter-demonstration in which people peacefully show their objection to Reverend Fred and his hate-mongers.  Finally, assume that at least one individual from each assembly “spilled over” into the street, invoking the ordinance.  Tucson Police would be required to order the second group of demonstrators to disburse and to arrest those who refused.  Imagine that scenario:  itinerant hate-mongers would stand by and watch those who disagree with them get run off or carted off by the cops.  And the offense, under the ordinance?  Spontaneity.  That is the only distinguishing characteristic.

Welcome to Tucson, A Bicycle Friendly Community, as Long As You’re Not Spontaneous.  Please don’t litter unless you’ve given it a lot of thought.

© January 14, 2005 by Mike Tully