Petition-signing in Citrus libraries is exercising basic rights or distracting library users, depending on your view.
By JUSTIN GEORGE
Published March 23, 2004
Like freedom of speech, the right to petition is protected by the First Amendment, which is the basis of the American Civil Liberties Union's assertion that Citrus County is violating the Constitution by prohibiting petition-signing in libraries.
"People don't realize the right to petition is right up there with the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion," said Bruce Howie, chairman of the legal panel for the Pinellas County ACLU chapter.
The First Amendment states: Congress shall make no law . . prohibiting . . . or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Robert Battista, Citrus County attorney, defended the public library's practice. He said the county isn't taking away citizens' rights; it's just moving petitioners outside government walls, the appropriate place for such activity.
"I disagree with the ACLU on this particular issue," Battista said. "Most local governments, including the ones I've worked for, have always had it as a policy that there would be no politicking on public property."
Last week, the county's library system director told the political group Citizens for Home Rule Charter that members could no longer pass around a petition during public meetings the group holds in Citrus library conference rooms to raise awareness.
The group is trying to put a question on the Nov. 2 ballot that would ask voters to change the county government's structure to home rule or charter government, either by persuading county commissioners or by obtaining the required 15,000 registered voter signatures.
Supporters believe home rule would give residents more say in local matters and would free the county from some state legislative constraints.
But they will have to go outside the library, from now on, if they want people to sign up for their cause. According to a long-standing library policy, petitioning, posting of for-profit advertisements and the dissemination of campaign literature is banned in Citrus libraries.
It's seen as a distraction to library users, who expect to read books, research and study unbothered by intrusions, said Jim Ehlers, library system spokesman.
"The library system is very much in favor of openness and availability of information to everybody," Ehlers said, emphasizing that no political groups are prohibited from using the library.
But once the library has opened its conference rooms to the public, Howie of the ACLU said, it must allow people to petition there as well.
"If a library opens up its conference rooms to all groups on a first-come, first-served basis with equal opportunities for all organizations to come in, then the library has become a designated public forum for First Amendment purposes.
"That means that although the library can place reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on the groups that meet there, the library cannot regulate the content of speech. And if they can't regulate the content of speech that would also include the right to petition."
A few months ago, Tarpon Springs found itself in a similar predicament when it prohibited Americans United for Separation of Church and State from meeting in its library community room because the city said the group lacked "political neutrality."
Eventually, the city's attorney advised Tarpon Springs officials that their legal position was in question and open to lawsuits.
Tarpon Springs was eventually left with two choices: allow the group in or close down conference rooms to the public.
Tarpon Springs chose to eliminate the room.
Battista disagreed with that line of reasoning, saying Citrus County is only limiting place and manner - restrictions that have been legally tried and tested - and not citizens' right to petition.
If Citizens for Home Rule Charter wants to solicit signatures, it needs to just go outside, he said.
"We're constraining the place in which that can happen," he said. "It's not on every piece of government property would we allow someone to speak."
