people have been asking what codes do we want to change...

Specific Codes we want amended: There is a long list of municipal codes that are being used against artists and buskers in San Diego. Balboa Park Problem: Balboa Park”s “lottery system” is unconstitutional, and has been proven in court several times in other places that have had similar lottery systems. A good example of this is Venice Beach, which at one time had the lottery system but Judge Dean Ferguson shut down the permitting system citing that, “It does no more for regulating buskers than the common rule of first come first serve.” Another rule that the permitting system seems to violate is that any permits for expressive activity must be easy to access. Balboa Park only has one day a month that the permit can be applied for, and it is good for that month. This is not easy access, as many people do not always have time to go on the allotted date and is not fair to everyone. This is one of the many codes that needs an amendment. The lottery system and enforcement of buskers at Balboa Park must end. Encroachment: if an artist likes to work in the shade in summer, if they happen to erect an umbrella they might get a ticket from code enforcement for “encroachment: (§ 54.0110 Unauthorized Encroachments Prohibited It is unlawful for any person to erect, place, allow to remain, construct, establish, plant, or maintain any vegetation or object on any public street, alley, sidewalk, highway, or other public property or public right-of-way, except as otherwise provided by this Code.) Sales: If an artist, or performer was to display items in the sidewalk or on a public park they might get cited for sidewalk sales and displays: (§54.0105 Sidewalk Sales and Displays Prohibited (a) Except as provided in Section 54.0105(b) and (c), it is unlawful for any Person to place, or allow to remain, any goods, wares, baggage, personal property or merchandise on any sidewalk or curb, between the outer edge of the sidewalk or curb and the property line. (b) Section 54.0105(a) does not: (1) prohibit any Person from loading or unloading goods, wares, or merchandise in front of the Person’s place of business; (2) prohibit any Person from leaving any goods, wares or merchandise on any sidewalk for the length of time necessary for loading or unloading them; (3) prohibit any Person from loading or unloading attended baggage or personal property into or from a means of transportation. (c) A sidewalk sale may be permitted in a Special Event Venue pursuant to a Special Event Permit issued under Chapter 2, Article 2, Division 40 of this Code. (Amended and retitled to “Sidewalk Sales and Displays Prohibited” 11–18–1997 by O–18439 N.S.)) If an artist or busker is selling their expressive content, such as art, cds of performer’s music, videos of performer’s acts, t shirts with political messages, sculptures, balloons and other expressive items, on public parks or beaches, the performer or artist might get cited for this code: ( b (14) 63.0102 §63.0102 Use of Public Parks and Beaches Regulated: (b) It is unlawful for any person within any public park or plaza or public beach or beach areas within the City of San Diego to do any of the acts enumerated in Section 63.0102(b). (14) Solicitation. It is unlawful to practice, carry on, conduct, or solicit for any trade, occupation, business or profession without the written consent of the City Manager. (interestingly enough) the line before (14) is (13) and it states, “ (13) Sale of Merchandise. (A) Except for those sales that are protected by the First Amendment, it is unlawful to sell or offer for sale any goods, wares, merchandise, article, or thing whatsoever without the written consent of the City Manager. (B) Those sales that are protected by the First Amendment must conform to the City Manager’s regulations.) If an artist, or performer is selling expressive content on the sidewalk, public parks, or public beaches, they might be cited for this code: (§33.1406 Soliciting, Peddling Prohibited in Certain Areas Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Division, it shall be unlawful for any person, either as principal or agent, to solicit, peddle, hawk or sell or vend any goods, wares or merchandise, services, magazines, periodicals, or other publications, or subscriptions for the same, regularly published newspapers excepted, or offer to, or distribute to any person, any coupon, certificate, ticket or card which is redeemable in goods, wares, merchandise or services upon any street, sidewalk, alley, plaza, or in any park or public place within the following limits of the City of San Diego, to–wit: (a) That territory lying between San Diego Bay and a line extending along Division Street on the south to Main Street; thence along Main Street to Sigsbee Street; thence along Sigsbee Street to National Avenue; thence along National Avenue to 14th Street; thence along 14th Street to Market Street; thence along Market Street to Park Boulevard; thence along Park Boulevard to “A” Street; thence along “A” Street to Sixth Avenue; thence along Sixth Avenue to Ash Street; thence along Ash Street to Pacific Highway; thence along Pacific Highway to Barnett Avenue; thence along Barnett Avenue to Lytton Street; thence along Lytton Street to Rosecrans Street; thence along Rosecrans Street to the boundary of Liberty Station and thence eastward to San Diego Bay. The line described above is to run along that line of the various streets which is farthest from San Diego Bay. (b) That territory lying westerly of the easterly line of Prospect Street, between the northerly line of Cave Street and the southerly line of Cuvier Street. (c) That territory beginning at the point where the west line of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railway right–of– way crosses the International Border westerly along the border to a point where a prolongation of Virginia Avenue intersects; thence northerly along the west line of Virginia Avenue to a point where prolongation of the west line of Virginia Avenue intersects the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railway right–of– way; thence southerly along the west line of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railway right–of–way to the point of beginning. Provided, however, that upon application, the City Manager may grant permits therefor upon such terms and conditions as he may find to be in the public interest. (Amended 2-9-2004 by O–19261 N.S.)) Special Events: If a performer busks on the sidewalk, at (or near) a special event, they might be cited for interfering with a special event or street fair: even though it has been defined that special events allow expressive activity so long as the event is not fenced off and a fee is charged to the public, (22.4037 Unlawful to Interfere with Special Event or Demonstration It is unlawful for any Person to obstruct, impede or interfere with any authorized assembly, Person, vehicle or animal participating in a Demonstration or an Event for which a Special Event Permit has been issued. (“Unlawful to Interfere with Special Event or Demonstration” added 11–18–199) The thing is that even in the municipal code it mentions expressive activity being protected, but this is quite often ignored by police, rangers, code enforcement and lifeguards who enforce these codes. Below are actual municipal code definitions that somewhat contradict the codes buskers are generally cited with: §22.4003 definitions “Expressive Activity” includes conduct, the sole or principal object of which is the expression, dissemination or communication by verbal, visual, literary or auditory means of opinion, views or ideas and for which no fee or donation is charged or required as a condition of participation in or attendance at such activity. It includes §22.4005 Exceptions to Special Event Permit Requirement (a) A Special Event Permit is not required for any activity listed in Section 22.4005(c). (b) Although not required to get a Special Event Permit, an Event Organizer of an activity exempted pursuant to Section 22.4005(c) is required to comply with general regulations governing public safety or health. (c) The following activities are exempt from the Special Event Permit requirement: (3) lawful picketing on Sidewalks; §52.4006 Free Speech This Division is not intended to restrict the exercise of protected free speech. city municipal code §63.0102 Use of Public Parks and Beaches Regulated (b) It is unlawful for any person within any public park or plaza or public beach or beach areas within the City of San Diego to do any of the acts enumerated in Section 63.0102 (13) Sale of Merchandise. (A) Except for those sales that are protected by the First Amendment, it is unlawful to sell or offer for sale any goods, wares, merchandise, article, or thing whatsoever without the written consent of the City Manager. (B) Those sales that are protected by the First Amendment must conform to the City Manager’s regulation (14) Solicitation. It is unlawful to practice, carry on, conduct, or solicit for any trade, occupation, business or profession without the written consent of the City Manager. ---------------------- Sparks vs White defines what is considered protected by the Supreme Court. You may review the whole case at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1300114.html “While not having spoken directly on the protections afforded visual art, the Supreme Court has been clear that the arts and entertainment constitute protected forms of expression under the First Amendment.” “self-expression through painting constitutes expression protected by the First Amendment. In painting, an artist conveys his sense of form, topic, and perspective. A painting may express a clear social position, as with Picasso's condemnation of the horrors of war in Guernica, or may express the artist's vision of movement and color, as with “the unquestionably shielded painting of Jackson Pollock. Any artist's original painting holds potential to “affect public attitudes,” Joseph Burstyn, Inc., 343 U.S. at 501, 72 S.Ct. 777, by spurring thoughtful reflection in and discussion among its viewers. So long as it is an artist's self-expression, a painting will be protected under the First Amendment, because it expresses the artist's perspective.“ “In holding that the First Amendment protects an artist's original paintings, we join two of our sister circuits. See ETW Corp. v. Jireh Pub., Inc., 332 F.3d 915, 924 (6th Cir.2003) (holding that “[t]he protection of the First Amendment ․ includes ․ music, pictures, films, photographs, paintings, drawings, engravings, prints, and sculptures”); Bery v. City of New York, 97 F.3d 689, 696 (2d Cir.1996) (“[P]aintings, photographs, prints and sculptures ․ always communicate some idea or concept to those who view it, and as such are entitled to full First Amendment protection.”); see also Piarowski v. Ill. Cmty. Coll. Dist. 515, 759 F.2d 625, 628-32 (7th Cir.1985) (holding that stained glass windows, as “art for art's sake,” were protected under the First Amendment). The city's argument that the message conveyed must be either explicit or implicit but obvious in order to merit protection must fail. As the Court has explained, “a narrow, succinctly articulable message is not a condition of constitutional protection, which if confined to expressions conveying a particularized message would never reach the unquestionably shielded painting of Jackson Pollock, music of Arnold Schöenberg, or Jabberwocky verse of Lewis Carroll.” ““[T]he degree of First Amendment protection is not diminished merely because the [protected expression] is sold rather than given away.” City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Pub. Co., 486 U.S. 750, 756 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2138, 100 L.Ed.2d 771 (1988); see also Riley v. Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind of N. C., 487 U.S. 781, 801, 108 S.Ct. 2667, 101 L.Ed.2d 669 (1988) (“It is well settled that a speaker's rights are not lost merely because compensation is received; a speaker is no less a speaker because he or she is paid to speak.” These excerpts speak for themselves, and this has been the general consensus with nearly every court case that has been heard concerning artists, and buskers