Story Published:
Jul 8, 2005 at 3:28 AM PST
Story Updated:
Aug 31, 2006 at 1:00 AM PST
YELM, WASH. - A "speak-no-Wal-Mart" policy in Town
Council meetings is getting a challenge from the American Civil
Liberties Union.
Aaron H. Caplan, an ACLU lawyer in Seattle, has written Yelm
Mayor Adam Rivas and council members that the group believes it is
unconstitutional to prohibit any mention of Wal-Mart or big-box
stores in general at council meetings.
The policy has been increasingly restrictive over the past five
months. No one who signs up to talk about big-box stores, much less
Wal-Mart, at a council meeting is allowed to talk, and anyone who
mentions big-box stores or Wal-Mart is told to sit down.
Municipal attorney Brent f. Dille said council members were fed
up with complaints about Wal-Mart's application to build a
superstore and demands for a moratorium on big-box stores. He also
said officials don't want to appear biased if the council is
presented with an appeal of Wal-Mart's application.
Caplan wrote that no law requires the council to forbid all
mention of the issue at its meetings.
"The ability of citizens to state their views about matters of
public concern is one of the cornerstones of a free and accountable
government," he wrote. "Yelm's practice of silencing public
comment violates that principle."
Federal court rulings cited by Caplan don't apply to Yelm, Rivas
argued.
"Everything they list in there comes from court cases in other
states that have nothing to do with Washington state and the
appearance of fairness act that we're trying to uphold," the mayor
said. "For the most part, we feel fairly confident in what we're
doing and the steps that we're taking."
ACLU spokesman Doug Honig disagreed: The First Amendment applies
to every citizen of the United States, he said.
Rivas does not expect any change in policy as the result of the
letter and doesn't plan to answer it, despite Caplan's request for
a response this month.
"We don't answer to the ACLU," Rivas said.
The ACLU is not planning a lawsuit over the issue, Honig said,
because despite Rivas' comment, municipal attorney Dille called the
ACLU soon after they received the letter and agreed to send a
written clarification of the policy and an explanation of how it
would be enforced in the future.
"Many times our role is to help education public officials
about the Constitution," Honig said. "Most of our work doesn't
result in lawsuits."
Dille said he had been in touch with Caplan and the ACLU seemed
willing to accept a ban on discussion of Wal-Mart but felt the
latest policy was excessive.
Dille would not comment to The Olympian about a parallel ban on
the use of the word moratorium.
"I wasn't at that (council) meeting," he said.
A call to national Wal-Mart headquarters seeking comment was
referred to local store officials, who didn't immediately return a
call.
The ACLU has also expressed concern about a new rule adopted by
the Pierce County Council and Honig said that discussion could be
heading toward litigation. The rule on public comment periods says
"speakers may not attack or make an allusion to the motives of any
council member."