portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting portland metro

police / legal

regarding police arrests

City Ordinance - see city's website, online city code & charter
POL Government Elected Officials Auditor Charter, Code & Policies City Code & Charter Online Code & Charter Title 14 Public Order Chapter 14A.50 Conduct Prohibited on Public Property Conduct Prohibited on Public Property
14A.50.070 Advertising on Streets. (Printable Version)

A. It is unlawful for any person to scatter notices or advertisements on any street right-of-way or to post a notice or advertisement anywhere on a street right-of-way or upon the exterior of a public building.

B. It is unlawful for any person whose name appears upon, or who is responsible for posting, any notice or advertisement posted in violation of this Section to permit the notice or advertisement to remain posted after having received a request to remove it.

C. Any notice or advertisement found in violation of this Section may be removed by a peace officer.
why not? 18.Apr.2004 15:23


Why don't we just take perez's name off? I mean it says and others murdered by cops plus it would make it one less thing to get arrested for and I know that there are not a bunch of people going out there who WANT to be arrested.. not if they've done it before at least.
just an idea,

a nice curse 19.Apr.2004 00:03


So, any old person could illegally post a bunch of flyers with, for example, George Bush's name on them and then, according to section B, Bush would be responsible for removing said signs if the city were to receive a complaint about their existence.

OK 19.Apr.2004 11:03

look here

Under the city code it's "unlawful" to put up posters and "unlawful" to fail to remove posters with your name on it - if told to do so.

There are no specified penalties in this ordinance. I do not for one second believe that when challenged in court that a judge will at the worst do anything but fine someone for putting these posters up. I very much doubt even that will happen.

The ordinance on its face provides the legal justification for removing flyers that would otherwise be protected as free speech under the 1st Amendment.
The ordinance goes so far as to provide a remedy - the police officer may tear them down. Once that has happened the so-called problem is removed and there is no legitimate reason and probably no authority within the statute to prosecute the people who hung up the flyer. The proper remedy is to remove the flyers when asked (even if your name is not on it) or to have the police remove them. It is not the proper remedy to try the people who hang the flyers and any reasonable judge will realize that.

The ordinance requires "any person whose name" is on the flyer to remove it if asked or "Any person" who is "responsible" for hanging this flyer can be asked to remove the flyer. The thing is the state has to know who to ask and if that is indeterminate, well, they have to prove that the "any person" is in fact "responsible". I suppose ARISSA could be "any person" and if there is a hierarchy in the organization then the "leader" could ultimate be the responsible person. Otherwise it would be hard to prove who is responsible since the post on indymedia is anonymous, there is a download on indymedia, and copies are readily available. What is "responsible" is vague here (paying someone, ordering someone, etc...)- that could also be difficult for the state to prove. It's well worth fighting if the state chooses to pursue this.

To bolster your defense. I suggest that people video tape know places where band flyers are routinely placed. The more people you can document violating this ordinance the better. It would be best if you can get video of a cop ignoring someone who is posting a flyer. That would be direct evidence that this ordinance is being selectively enforced for posting this ARISSA flyer.

You should also consider doing a stake out/sting and hang the flyer where there are other flyers. Record the police tearing down the flyer but not tearing down all of the flyers. That would show the police are removing them because of content not to enforce the law - a major no-no for the po-po.

Selective Enforcement 19.Apr.2004 13:13


So I was one of the other people arrested the other night. It was a ridiculous and harrasing infringement on first amendment rights. When the po-po passed me by earlier in the night, they told me to take the flyers off of the pole. I looked at the pole directly behind me which only had a few lost dog posters. I told the pigz that I didn't flyer that pole. They told me they weren't talking about those flyers but rather the last pole back which did have the police accountablity flyers on it. Selective goddamn enforcement.

Also, while we were in back of the squad car, we heard the dispatcher call for assistance nearby for an armed robbery or something similar but did the pigz care. No, catching the flyer rogues ranked higher on their list of priorities

Wag The Ordinance 19.Apr.2004 14:44


There are also laws against murder. When the police are held accountable for their actions, then maybe these lesser ordinances will be worth respecting.