People think that all the anti-LGBTQ+ happens down south not here in blue Connecticut, but in the town that gave Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. the dream is now wrestling with the use of the town green after a Pride event last year.
Now how many events can meet those requirements, especially the insurance requirement? Then we have,
“Incite violence, crime or disorderly conduct” so in other words if anti-LGBTQ+ protesters show up that could be grounds for refusal of a permit.
There was discussion about the fact the proposed ordinance doesn’t say anything about the size of the event, if four or five people held up signs on the green would they need a permit… what about 10 or 12 people would they need a permit? Where do they draw the line?
The residents also questioned the ordinance, one calling it an “abuse of power” and another resident said…
The Left Giveth, The Right Taketh Away.
The only problem with that is what they are proposing is,A CT town wants to regulate events on its Green. Opponents say it’s a free speech attack.
Hartford Courant
By Alison Cross
January 21, 2024A new proposal to regulate events held on a Town Green is facing sharp criticism from residents who characterized the first selectman’s draft policy as a First Amendment attack.
A small but vocal group of residents pushed back on the proposal, introduced by Suffield First Selectman Colin Moll at a recent Board of Selectmen meeting, saying that the policy stifles free speech and assembly in a historically protected venue.
In a statement to the Courant Friday, Moll disputed these claims.
“At no point does this policy infringe on any First Amendment rights. It is designed to better protect the Town and its assets. Anybody can use the Town Green. A policy would simply give guidelines for use,” Mol said.
Under the draft policy, organizations and residents who wish to host an event, activity or display on the town green must apply for a permit with the first selectman’s office 30 days in advance and obtain $1 million in liability insurance for their event.
Applications may be refused for a number of reasons. The document states that permits will be granted as long as “The proposed activity, event, and/or display will not unreasonably interfere with or detract from the promotion of public health, welfare, safety and recreation … will not substantially interrupt the safe and orderly movement of traffic; and … is not reasonably likely to cause injury to persons or property, incite violence, crime or disorderly conduct,” among other factors.
The proposal sets more than a dozen rules and regulations for use, including restrictions on where signs can and cannot be displayed on the town green and library property.
The Democratic members of the Board of Selectmen have question about the proposed ordinance.
Democratic Selectman Peter Hill said he is not opposed to organizational oversight of large-scale events that require police or the Department of Public Works, but he said he is uncomfortable limiting the right to assemble.
Given that the policy includes no mention of event size or manner, Hill questioned whether the proposed policy would apply to groups taking photos on the town green during graduation night, or protesters that want to demonstrate in the center of town.
During the discussion Moll questioned if the policy should include language specifically addressing religious events.
“I got calls about the (Hanukkah) menorah lighting and I didn’t have an answer for some people (who) felt it was inappropriate,” Moll said.
Board members quickly pointed out that the town green hosts a Christmas tree lighting each year, in addition to other church events.
“Time, place and manner,” Donnelly said. “We have to avoid content restrictions.”
The selectmen later closed the discussion, emphasizing the need for more concrete definitions in future rewrites of the proposal.
“This policy seems designed to limit freedom of speech and freedom to assemble and that’s hugely problematic, but also it seems very directed,” Hornish said in public comment Wednesday before the board. “There’s quite a few people watching today, they know why you’re doing this. It’s directed at a certain group”
[…]
Watson described the proposal as a hypocritical overreach “coming from the Republican Party, which claims to be for small government (and) personal freedoms.”
“I don’t understand why we need this,” Watson said, as she closed her public comments. “What has been the big issue on the town green?”
Updated 5:15PM
The resolution didn't sit well with many Suffield residents...
Connecticut Public RadioBy Matt DwyerJanuary 22, 2024LGBTQ+ advocates are set to rally in Enfield Monday evening to protest what they say is a ban on flying the gay pride flag at town hall.Danielle Girard, vice president of Enfield PFLAG , said the rainbow flag used to fly at town hall during the month of June for two years, under a resolution passed by the previous Town Council.“It was a very big flag,” Girard said. “It was flown in town hall or right on the steps when you walked up.”Girard said she and her family posed for pictures under the flag to mark the event in June.But the new Enfield Town Council recently passed a resolution saying only certain flags could be flown at town buildings: flags representing the state and country, as well as the prisoner-of-war/missing-in-action flags.[…]The rainbow flag had not divided the town in the two years it was flown during June, she said.“We've never had any negative feedback from it,” Girard said. “Like no negative repercussions of this whatsoever. Having them take this away has caused a huge upset of people.”
This is a solution in search of a problem.
This resolution is the product of bias against us. There have never been any complains about flags being flown on town property so why did they feel that at their first meeting of the year they had to tackle this?
I think that the republicans on the town council are protecting themselves from some of themselves. You know the neo-Nazis with their swastika flag flying over town hall, or the Don't tread on me yellow snake flag. Is anyone who is in opposition really thinking about this? Or-are they just out there boo hooing because they think the no flag policy is directed at the LGBT community? For my own world I could care less about ANY FLAG and say burn them all. Discuss that? Why would anyone say such a thing? Our we missing the meaning of a new world? I would hope that if the Swastika flag flew from Town Hall, in new the "If all are free to fly their flag", then the LGBT folks would rise up and react in horror at what has been created. Of course, if anyone wanted to be real, they would write an ordinance that would forbid hate to fly. But then some would say LGBT folks hate straights and are trying to undermine the great white amerikkkan values. Since town halls represent everyone in town then I would say, no flags. Now if one wants to talk about private property then fly what you want. Fill the lawns, porches, businesses with the rainbow flag. But remember we are more than a flag. Other thoughts I can see this might be a part of the early steps to the final solution, called legal fascism. Of course, if we don't nip it now then it will grow. But there just may be more important issues to get our underwear in a twist over. I do hope all of those who are out protesting, and I do mean all will form study groups, put this issue on the burner, along with other issues that are being put in place against us and make a real concrete plan on how to fight back. Standing out in the cold is nice, chanting, and holding flags and candles pretty unless or is of course one gets laryngitis or a burn from hot wax, but that will not cut it when dealing with issues such as these.
ReplyDeleteCan we call for a real deal Saturday Town Hall meeting to discuss this. Call it When Fascism is in Connecticut, break into small groups come up with a plan. I wish this LGBT movement in Ct. would understand it's not all glitter, rainbows, Shark cops blowing kisses, cupcakes. A movement such as ours is serious business as our lives are at stake. ( what is that old story not preparing for the cold of winter.)
It might have been something along the lines of Its springtime for Hitler and Germany it's winter for Poland and France.
Delete