City of Asheville Staff Emails: Occupy Asheville

From: Natalie Bailey

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville

Date: 2011-10-14 12:27:07

To:

I have the questions; running to eat/let the dog out. I'll be back by
1:30. nnb

________________________________

From: Jeff Richardson
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:01 PM
To: Natalie Bailey
Subject: Fwd: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Thanks

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:



From: "Bob Oast"
Date: October 14, 2011 11:05:09 AM EDT
To: "Jeff Richardson"
Subject: FW: Following up on Occupy Asheville



Fyi

________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 9:53 AM
To: Bob Oast
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Hey Bob,

Didn't get this email until after our meeting. As you got a
sense of, this direct democracy is quite challenging. Today it will be
the same group minus Coleman. Sorry if you were upset at Milton being
there, don't know that history, but I can say that I've known him about
a year and he has really impressed me lately with his input and how he
has grown. In any event, he'll be there. I hope that's a not a
problem.

Can you forward me the correct email for the Assistant City
Manager again for our follow up questions, just a few?

Group consensus last night was to accept the Lexington Ave. base
camp (!!!!), but we had a strenuous debate about fees for free speech
activities, but otherwise, everyone really excited! and grateful!!! Can
you go ahead and confirm with DOT? We would like to go ahead and apply
for the permit and make this happen today.

Thank you so much again! You will be great in the movie!

Jennifer


________________________________

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:04:59 -0400
From: boast@ashevillenc.gov
To: fosterthejen@hotmail.com


Jennifer:

We have received several inquiries about the time and place of
the meeting,

Just so there is no misunderstanding, we consider this to be a
meeting between your delegation and key City personnel. While it is not
closed door, we cannot accommodate a crowd. Please advise if more are
coming.

Thanks.

Bob Oast

________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:42 PM
To: Bob Oast
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Perfect! Get to meet everybody! See you then


________________________________

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:26:22 -0400
From: boast@ashevillenc.gov
To: fosterthejen@hotmail.com


We can accommodate that number, which will facilitate an
efficient meeting. There will be 3-5 City people there, too.

See you then.

________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:24 PM
To: Bob Oast
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville


have to decide that tonight, but 3-5, our nonviolence crew.
thanks again!


________________________________

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:02:32 -0400
From: boast@ashevillenc.gov
To: fosterthejen@hotmail.com


How many do you anticipate being in your delegation?

________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:56 PM
To: Bob Oast
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Yes, that sounds good. However, the point is there is no
camping ordinance, only a curfew. we could be sleeping on the sidewalk
right adjacent to it so long as we did not block pedestrian traffic, and
it's our public park. yes, reasonable time, place, manner, but this is
reasonable. I really like the idea of creating a permanent free speech
24 zone that is only used for speech and it perfectly contained and
maintained, perhaps by a donation into some sort of trust to create such
free speech zone. ? I like to think outside of the box, which is
crumbling.

thank you. we will bring an awesome delegation to your office
at 3pm tomorrow.

Jennifer


________________________________

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:44:11 -0400
From: boast@ashevillenc.gov
To: fosterthejen@hotmail.com


Jennifer:

Thanks for this response.

In answer to the question in your earlier e-mail, we have
researched the issue, and that research is ongoing. We are finding that
some degree of content-neutral regulation, including regulations that
prohibit camping, is constitutionally permissible. See, e.g., Clark v.
Community for Creative Non-Violence, 104 S. Ct. 3065 (1984). The
purpose of my e-mail this morning was to ask if you knew of cases
reaching a different conclusion. Sorry if I was not clear.

As Council directed last night, we have been reviewing possible
ways to address your request. Can you be available for a meeting
tomorrow at 3 PM?

Bob Oast



________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:47 PM
To: Bob Oast
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Hi again Bob. Sorry to be short earlier, but I've just been
under a lot of stress and trying to hold this together from many angles
to ensure peace. It has not been easy. I hope you can appreciate my
proactive role to make the Asheville Occupation different than the rest
of the country.

I guess where we stand after the meeting last night was working
with staff to create a temporary spot?
• directed city staff to find a temporary location for the
Occupy Asheville protesters to camp overnight.
The move followed lengthy public comment, when representatives
and members of the demonstrations asked Council to allow them to use
part of Pack Square Park. The speakers asserted that the move would
respect their constitutional right to assemble and give the protests a
peaceful outlet. Council members generally expressed sympathy for Occupy
Asheville and praised the protesters' conduct, but noted that they were
considering the needs of other groups who had already reserved the area,
and that they had concerns changing park rules without publishing notice
on the printed agenda or having more time to deliberate. In the end,
Council agreed to find a temporary space and consider the matter again
at its next meeting Oct. 25 in hopes of finding a more lasting location.

I don't have time right now to write you a brief, and, it is
clear this is new territory..... Here are some case blurbs.....Feel
pretty strongly a curfew ordiance can't trump the right to peacefully
assemble in a public park, and there are no anti-camping ordinances
locally.


United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), the Supreme
Court said that the "right of the people peaceably to assemble for the
purpose of petitioning Congress for a redress of grievances, or for
anything else connected with the powers ...and duties of the national
government, is an attribute of national citizenship, and as such, under
the protection of, and guaranteed by, the United States." The high court
applied the liberty only to any federal government's encroachment.

De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S 353 (1937), the U.S. Supreme Court
unanimously ruled that the right to peaceably assemble "for lawful
discussion, however unpopular the sponsorship, cannot be made a crime."
The decision applied the First Amendment right of peaceful assembly to
the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Hague v. C.I.O., 307 U.S. 496 (1939), the high court ruled that
peaceful demonstrators may not be prosecuted for "disorderly conduct."
This case also secured streets and sidewalks as public forums.

Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88 (1940), the Supreme Court held
that orderly union picketing that informs the public of issues is
protected by the constitutional freedom of speech of the press and the
right of peaceable assembly and cannot be prosecuted under state
loitering and picketing laws.

Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963), in an 8-to-1
decision, the high court overturned the breach of peace convictions of
180 black students who had peacefully marched to the state capitol to
protest discrimination. The police stopped the demonstration and
arrested the students because they were afraid that the 200-300 who
gathered to watch the demonstration might cause a riot. The court held
the state law unconstitutionally over-broad because it penalized the
exercise of free speech, peaceable assembly, and the right of petition
for a redress of grievances. A disorderly crowd, or the fear of one,
cannot be used to stop a peaceful demonstration or cancel the right of
peaceable assembly.



________________________________

From: fosterthejen@hotmail.com
To: boast@ashevillenc.gov
Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:58:47 -0400



Shouldn't you have done that already?


________________________________

Subject: RE: Following up on Occupy Asheville
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:43:19 -0400
From: boast@ashevillenc.gov
To: fosterthejen@hotmail.com


Jennifer:

Please provide me with citations to case law that supports your
position, "[W]e strongly believe we have the right to do exactly what we
are doing under the First Amendment Assembly rights," and I will be glad
to review.

Thanks,

Bob Oast

________________________________

From: Jen Foster [mailto:fosterthejen@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 10:20 AM
To: Mayor Terry Bellamy; Wade Wood; Kelly Whitlock; Sandra Cole;
terrybellamy@avlcouncil.com
Cc: rosettastarshine@gmail.com; Gary Jackson; Bob Oast
Subject: Following up on Occupy Asheville


Good morning Asheville leaders! I just wanted to write this
morning on a few points. First, Bob, we just want to be clear, in
response to Esther's comments, that "beggars can't be choosers," that we
strongly believe we have the right to do exactly what we are doing under
the First Amendment Assembly rights, and we are seeking your cooperation
rather than mass arrests and court challenges to so prove, but that, as
always, is an option.

Second, ya'll really should come to our General Assembly
meeting. Council does in fact need a "direct response" mechanism, that
the occupier who was ejected last night has written you about madam
Mayor. "Direct response" is insertion of factual information to a point
that would clear something up immediately. For example, whether we were
asking for night camping, that was again misunderstood by Esther. This
is an occupation, and the only ordinance in the way is the curfew. The
point is not night camping, but an ongoing occupation. 24/7

Oh, and thank you for coming out last night Chief Wood. Very
good experience.

Our group is very serious about public park access space, not a
side city parking lot etc. I suggested the upper northwest corner of
the park, from the Arcade, McGuire little amphitheater up to the top
street, thinking that other permitted events would not be impacted as
seriously there. We also would likely agree to move between now and the
"month" break for any events that actually needed that space, and then
occupy that space thereafter. There may be other city park space you
may suggest. I still think this upper McGuire space is perfect,
especially after the date the park is vacant. When was that again?

Obama is coming to town as you know. We need to have our
peaceful assembly firmly established by Saturday. Obama, as well as you
guys, needs to come see what this people's movement is about. Perhaps
that is why he is coming?

We would like to create a working group to discuss by day's end.
We do have a lot of children involved in this movement and are very
excited about Mark Case and the AFL-CIO's offer to build our
infrastructure and keep everybody safe.

This IS what democracy looks like! We can all learn from each
other! Thanks again! Let's make history!

Jennifer

828-279-9538; office 828 255 7703

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement