2001-03-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

42 Mr. Winstead said these concerns cannot be addressed until the plaza is designed, but feels the design is appropriate for the current site. Mr. Winstead said he would be hesitant to say the monument would be in proximity to or visible from City Hall, but feels it would be satisfactory for the monument to be the focal point of the plaza in front of City Hall. Ms. Richards said that many people have expressed their concerns about content issues and the concern that the monument has the potential of creating a venue that could foster threats, hatred, and harmful language. Ms. Richards said she does not want to do that, and asked if the Center could be asked to take on an additional obligation of assisting any citizen who could reasonably demonstrate they have been hurt as a result of something on the wall, and help to seek redress under the law. Mr. O2qeil said that one of the appealing features of the monument is that it is out in the open and in the public eye. Mr. O~eil said no immunity is provided by writing on the chalkboard. Mr. O2qeil said that the Center gets a number of requests from citizens and government bodies trying to solve problems of free expression, and the Center is committed to help the troth become known. Mr. O2qeil said that he is reluctant to have anything made more formal than that. Mr. Lynch asked if the Center would help if something harmful is put on the monument, and Mr. O~eil said not if it is a criminal case, but said the Center has undertaken to get representation for people in the past. Ms. Richards said she had in mind the Center providing assistance, but Mr. OqXleil said he is uneasy about having such assistance formalized. Mr. Toscano said he thinks it would be a tremendous burden for the Center if they were bound to take up the cause of anyone who claims to be a victim. Mr. Wheeler said that this would also commit the Center to defending someone before details of the case are known, and added that the Center could be violating the code of professional responsibility by doing this. Mr. Wheeler said that the proposed language is too open to interpretation. Ms. Richards said that many who have opposed the monument have been targets of hateful language. Ms. Wheeler said there will be an educational component to the monument. Mr. Cox made a motion to approve the resolution with the addition of the paragraph proposed by Mr. Gouldman. Mr. Caravati seconded the motion. Mr. Lynch said he really likes the idea of the monument and finds the idea exciting, but feels the devil is in the details, and he is still not comfortable with the term sheet and the state it is in right now. Mr. Lynch said two things concern him. First, the physical layout, its push technology and the fact that there is no escaping it. He said he would prefer something within the green space that does not put it front and center. Second, people who have expressed concern are those traditionally most at risk of being hurt. He said he is not convinced enough attention has been placed on getting the community on board with this. Mr. Lynch said he would like to have more time with this and will probably abstain from voting. Mr. Toscano said that he has publicly supported a monument in the downtown area, but the struggle has been whether to support this monument. Mr. Toscano said his concern is whether it will be a First Amendment Monument or a graffiti board and a model of free expression or a symbol of urban design that does not fit in on that end of the mall. Mr. Toscano said that the chalkboard is no longer an issue for him as he thinks the Center has addressed those concerns. Mr. Toscano said he has to balance the risk versus the benefit and feels that the risk is magnified with the size of the monument, and the risk is diminished if the size of the monument is reduce& Mr. Toscano said it has also been suggested that in a few years the monument may not be used very much and if this happens, it would be better if it was smaller. Mr. Toscano said it would be better if