Understanding GF’s proposed law on public demonstrations

By Gordon Woodworth & Mark Frost, Chronicle Managing Editor & Editor

The Common Council has scheduled a public hearing at 7:20 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 11 on Glens Falls’s much-revised demonstrations law. The Council will likely vote on it that night.

City officials have revised the proposed law after meeting with attorneys from the New York Civil Liberties Union.

The proposed law acknowledges the constitutional right to peacefully assemble but asserts the city’s right and responsibility to apply limits for health and safety.

In its final draft, any pre-planned demonstrations of 25 or more people will need City approval beforehand. The City will have up to 14 days to approve or deny it.

The mayor, city clerk and police chief will combine to make the City’s decision, said Mayor Dan Hall.

People whose applications are rejected can file an appeal. The mayor would rule on the appeal.

There is no longer a requirement that the applications be submitted at least 10 days before the demonstration.

“We really don’t foresee any problems,” Mayor Hall told The Chronicle. “All of the groups that have been demonstrating have let us know far in advance that they would be having the demonstrations.”

Violators of the law could be fined up to $250, with other possible penalties.

Demonstrations would be allowed at Centennial Circle and the Civil War Monument, but demonstrators must remain at least five feet away from the street.

“The distance between demonstrators and counter demonstrators shall not be less than eight feet,” a change from the previous 30-foot buffer.

As for spontaneous demonstrations, Mayor Hall said, “There’s nothing we can do about that.”

Grounds for denial of an application include “if the applicant…has on prior occasions made material representations regarding the nature and scope of an event or activity previously permitted, or has violated the terms of prior permits,” or if “the use or activity intended by the applicant would present an unreasonable danger to the health and safety of the applicant, of employees of the City or of the public.”

The City’s DPW chief would have the authority “to require an agreement from the applicant stating that the applicant shall be responsible for the costs of cleanup.

Copyright © 2020 Lone Oak Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved.