Private use of public property statement released

SUMMIT, NJ — The city of Summit is issuing the following statement to fully explain and clarify the regulations it follows for the private use of public property.

Certain individuals have incorrectly alleged that the city of Summit infringed on their First Amendment Right to hold a demonstration on the Village Green. While the First Amendment restricts government regulation of private speech in traditional or designated public forums such as public parks and sidewalks, the United States Supreme Court has articulated clearly that private speech in public forums may be subject to reasonable time, place, and manner regulations, which consider and serve a public purpose.

Examples include the control of traffic in the streets, the scheduling of two meetings or demonstrations at the same time and place, the prevention of blockages of building entrances, etc. See Heffron v. ISKCON, 452 U.S. 640, 647059 (1981); Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288 (1984).

The city of Summit has implemented reasonable time, place and manner regulations regarding the private use of public property, which require individuals and/or organizations to submit written requests to use public property, sign hold harmless agreements and provide proof of insurance. The city has a significant governmental interest in public safety and preservation of public property that is achieved by understanding the nature of the private use of public property. The city’s request process to use public property does not regulate the content of applicant’s speech. It is narrowly tailored to provide the city essential information regarding proposed events, including the names and addresses of organizers and responsible parties; the expected number of attendees; time of the proposed event; location and size of banners or signs, and method being used to hang; sound amplification; and the use of streets, sidewalks, and/or other equipment. Knowing the size and scope of an event allows the city and its risk manager to plan for a safe and orderly event.

Planners of the event in question did not complete a property use application or provide the city clerk’s office sufficient information to evaluate the planned event. While the city offered to accept a certificate of insurance and hold harmless agreement as a compromise, the event planners did not comply and decided to cancel the event; the city did not cancel the event. By way of contrast, the planners of an upcoming event confirmed the availability of the Village Green for their event, confirmed they expect approximately 30 participants and confirmed they do not require the use of any city resources, allowing the city clerk to conclude there is no need for a property use plan, associated fees, approval by the Property Use Committee, etc.

Again, any individual and/or organization is free to utilize the Village Green, so long as they comply with the city’s regulations.