‘Free Speech’ Proposal Opposed by Retailers

I represent Builders Emporium, which has been a member of the Pasadena retail community for years, and I have grave concern regarding the “Pasadena Civil Liberties Ordinance,” which is being considered by the City Council.

Though the ordinance claims to promote “free speech/petition/electoral activity,” it will take away important privacy rights of both our customers and retail establishments by expanding the rights of those who want to use our property for solicitation of money and for political activity.

The common areas and parking lots of retail commercial buildings and shopping center buildings are not publicly owned areas. They are privately owned areas which businesses pay to maintain so that they are safe, secure and unobstructed for their customers. The proposed ordinance puts the customers’ safety and security in jeopardy by restraining retail businesses from controlling their grounds.

Under the proposed ordinance, demonstrators can use the common areas and parking lots, and retail establishments can neither require proof of insurance or damage deposits from the demonstrators nor require ID’s from the demonstrators (except for the leaders). How can this be considered a safe and secure environment for customers? If an incident or accident occurs under this scenario, the financial liability implications are staggering. The solicitors and demonstrators have no financial responsibility according to the proposed ordinance.

The proposed ordinance also states that retail establishments would not be able to “prohibit or restrict free speech/electoral activity during holidays or holiday seasons to any greater extent than at other times.” As you are well aware, holidays and holiday seasons are high customer traffic times and there is more congestion in common areas and parking lots. The proposed ordinance would increase the opportunity and potential for incidents which would be detrimental to customers.

JEFFREY BLANCHARD

Store Manager

Pasadena Builders Emporium

Editor’s note: The same letter was received from 21 other company managers.