NOTE TO ALL: I’ve just renewed my request to City Attorney John Barisone to clarify what I was told he clarified several years ago when he advised a street artist. That artist brought him a copy of the White v. City of Sparks decision protecting the right of artists to sell their art on the street without permits, and Barisone reportedly agreed, stopping a potential lawsuit.
However, as mentioned in the earlier e-mail below, police have ramped up their campaign against performers and artists (or those they choose to disfavor), and a clear quick response has become more important.
Please let me now if you’ve experienced or heard any problems with police/host/security guard harassment downtown for political, cultural, artistic, or musical activity in public spaces. Give as many specifics as possible (time, date, cops names, conversation involved, citation (if any), place, etc. etc.).
Thanks,
Robert Norse
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:09:29 -0800
John: I just received word from the street artist who got the bogus panhandling citation that he wasn’t going to fight it, but would do community service. However, he also intends to put price tags on his work, given the White v. City of Sparks decision.
Please let me know what your thoughts are before he gets another ticket.
Thanks,
Robert
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: jbarisone@abc-law.com
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:39:52 -0800
Thanks, John.
From: JBarisone@abc-law.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:01:01 -0800
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
I haven’t gotten to this yet.
From: Robert Norse [mailto:rnorse3@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:51 PM
To: John Barisone
Cc: Robin the rightsfinder; Jonathan (!) Gettleman; David Beauvais; lioness@got.net; Ed Frey; J.M. Brown; Alexis of Pier 5; Ricardo Lopez; Joe the strummer; Tom Noddy; Brent Adams; Coral (!!!) Brune; Free; John Malkin
Subject: RE: City of Sparks v. White
John: Did you receive this e-mail?
If so, can you advise me of whether the SCPD current acknowledges and follows the City of Sparks v. White exemption of artists from permits and their right to display price tags on their work.
It’s been nearly a week. I’m concerned you may have mislaid my e-mail.
Thanks,
R
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: jbarisone@abc-law.com
CC: circulation999now@yahoo.com; jonathangettleman@yahoo.com; davebeau@pacbell.net; lioness@got.net; edwinfrey@hotmail.com; jammbrow@gmail.com; alexis@pier5law.com; riclopez35@yahoo.com; talljar@gmail.com; tnoddy@aol.com; compassionman@hotmail.com; coralbrune@hotmail.com; overthrowproperty@yahoo.com; jsmalkin@hotmail.com
Subject: City of Sparks v. White
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:05:27 -0800
John:
You may remember Robin coming in to secure an agreement from you that he could resume displaying his artwork on the sidewalk without a permit and without harassment from the SCPD even though he attached price tags. This was several years ago in response to the City of Sparks v. White (http://
Several artists have told me that “Hosts” and SCPD officers have been telling them they’ll be cited if they do what you apparently oked for Robin. I know Robin also requested an explicit change in the law and to my knowledge and his you never recommended or created it.
I want to know if you’ve change your position here and now regard art work as not First Amendment-protected (as far as explicit pricing goes). What is the current policy and direction to the SCPD?
This clarification is particularly important because some police officers are not merely banning explicit pricing, but also claiming that showing artwork without a business license is “panhandling” even if it’s done for donation in accord with the explicit exemption of MC 9.10.010(a) which states “A person is not soliciting for purposes of this chapter when he or she passively displays a sign or places a collection container on the sidewalk pursuant to which he or she receives monetary offerings in appreciation for his or her original artwork or for entertainment or a street performance he or she provides.”
Please let me know what the status of the White decision is regarding city policy as well as assurance that MC 9.10.010(a) is still active law.
Hope you are well.
Robert
(831-423-4833)