Photo: Demonstrators celebrate Flag Day 2025 in Pagosa Springs.
Some Americans care deeply about freedom and justice, and are willing to gather to show their concern.
In 1963, Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth led a protest march of 52 people in Birmingham, Alabama, for which he was arrested, fined, and sentenced to more than three months hard labor.
The Birmingham City Commission had previously passed an ordinance requiring civil rights marches to obtain a permit. When Rev. Shuttlesworth applied for the necessary permit, he was denied by the City, but he led the march anyway, on Good Friday, 1963 — without disrupting traffic or violating traffic laws.
His conviction was reversed by an Alabama Court of Appeals, but was then reinstated by the Alabama Supreme Court.
Six years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, that the Birmingham ordinance was improper, in part because it imposed an unconstitutional prior restraint on freedom of speech.
The wheels of justice move slowly, but occasionally in the right direction.
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The fundamental right to peaceably assemble helped to generate a standing-room-only audience at last night’s Pagosa Springs Town Council meeting, when the Council took up the first reading of Ordinance 1017.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF PAGOSA SPRINGS TO ADOPT CHAPTER 17.6 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE – SPECIAL EVENTS
You can download the proposed ordinance here, as it appeared in the September 2 Council agenda packet.
The title was innocuous enough, and when Town Parks Director Darren Lewis was asked the purpose for making new rules regarding citizen gatherings on Town property, he described the effort mainly in terms of “public safety”.
If you read the proposed ordinance, you will notice that a “special event” is defined rather broadly.
(d) “Special event” means a parade or public meeting or assembly.
Under this definition, a large family reunion in Town Park could be classed as a “special event” and could be required to purchase $2 million worth of liability insurance.
More important to the packed audience, who came to protest Ordinance 1017, were the recent protest marches that have gathered in Town Park or Bell Tower Park over the past six months, that would not only be required to submit proof of insurance, but would also need to apply for a permit 30 days in advance, and meet somewhat onerous “noticing” requirements.
Rev. Shuttlesworth’s protest march, for example, would have faced some logistical difficulties if it had taken place in Pagosa following the adoption of Ordinance 1017.
The ordinance was not adopted, however, but was sent back to the drawing board by Mayor Shari Pierce.
A number of citizens spoke in opposition to the ordinance, noting that the recent protest marches in Pagosa often came together on short notice, and were not organized by a business or organization that would typically have access to $2 million worth of liability insurance.
But just as importantly, the recent protest marches proceeding peacefully and lawfully, and presented no obvious public health or safety issues.
The Town Council also express reservations about the proposed ordinance. Here’s Council member Gary Williams, commenting on some new software the Town plans to acquire, to better track the use of Town park facilities, and to notify public safety agencies of upcoming events.
“So, we’re living in a time of rapid technological change, and we’re adapting as a Town by acquiring a software system. And this is going to require 30 days notice of every event and $2 million worth of liability insurance? Can the software maybe solve this problem without us passing this ordinance? That is, we can automatically inform all the agencies?…
“When I first read this, I had concerns about First Amendment rights, and I thought, when I went to the Pride Day event in the park, there were several people standing on the corner, from a church, protesting the Pride event, and I wondered, is this the problem we’re trying to address? Would that little church group need to take out a liability insurance policy? And give 30 days notice, for a handful of people to stand on the corner, protesting?”
Parks Director Darren Lewis, who helped write the ordinance: “Personally, I would say, no… All the these events that I’ve seen have been peaceful. There have been no problems, and no complaints…”
Council member Williams: “I agree…
“I had coffee with [Town Manager David Harris] last week, and one of the things I said was, can we go through the rules and regulations we have in town, and streamline them? I mean, why put unnecessary burdens on the public, if we don’t need to? Get rid of some requirements that are kind of unnecessary and just clog up the machinery of government.
“So I feel like this ordinance is an ordinance in search of a problem…”
Following objections to the ordinance from two Council members, and after hearing the testimony from numerous members of the public — who were unanimously opposed to the new “special event” regulations — Mayor Pierce invited four of the local activists to meet with Council members Gary Williams and Matt DeGuise and some Town staff, to see if a modified ordinance could be crafted.
The general idea being, to protect our constitutional rights to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, while also acknowledging public safety concerns.
Perhaps our governments already have enough rules and regulations — “unnecessary” rules and regulations — restricting our freedoms?