Robert Otter • Photographer





	*1st Amendment Vending, NYC* The following is an email I received from Robert Lederman on November 11, 2008, Mr. Lederman is President of A.R.T.I.S.T. (Artists Response To Illegal State Tactics). These concern 4 of the 8 proposals that there will be a hearing on this Friday, November 11th, 2008. I (Ned Otter) am a dedicated member of the ARTIST group. THE ARTIST GROUP'S OBJECTIONS TO INTROS #828, 830, 832 and 846 by Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T. artistpres@gmail.com Dear Councilmember, Our objections are below the text of each law like this: ** OBJECTIONS TO Intro # [NOTE: In vending law the term, "vendors of written matter," always means street artists and book vendors] Int. No. 830 By Council Members Gerson, Mealy and Stewart ..Title A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to limitations on the number of vendors of written matter in congested areas. ..Body Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Legislative findings and declaration. Under current New York City law, vending is only permitted on sidewalks that are at least twelve feet wide. However, New York State law permits disabled veteran vendors with special licenses to vend on certain sidewalks in Lower Manhattan and the Midtown Core that are only ten feet wide. On these narrower sidewalks, due to congestion concerns, state law limits the number of vendors permitted on each block face to either one or two, depending on the block. While vendors of materials protected by the First Amendment must follow certain time, place and manner restrictions, they are currently able to vend on any block face that is open to any other vendor. The Council finds and declares that an abundance of vendors on sidewalks narrower than twelve feet creates dangerous congestion and causes a serious and immediate threat to the health and safety of the public, as is evidenced by the state law restricting the number of vendors on these blocks. For this reason, the Council finds it necessary to restrict the number of vendors of First Amendment protected materials on those block faces narrower than twelve feet to the same number as permitted to vend under New York State vending laws. 2. Title 20 of the Administrative Code of the city of New York is amended by adding a new section 20-473.1 to read as follows: 20- 471.3 Limitations in congested areas for general vendors who exclusively vend written matter. a. On block faces on which vending is restricted pursuant to Sections 35-a(3) and (7) of Article 4 of the New York State General Business law, the number of general vendors who exclusively vend written material shall be equal to the number of vendors permitted pursuant to the aforementioned sections. b. The commissioner may promulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this section. 3. This local law shall take effect ninety days after its enactment into law provided, however, that the commissioner of consumer affairs shall take any actions necessary prior to such effective date for the implementation of this local law including, but not limited to, the adoption of any necessary rules. --------------------------------------------------------------- OBJECTIONS TO Intro # 830 We have 3 main objections to Intro #830 1. Intro # 830 attempts to set an arbitrary limit of 1 or 2 on the number of street artists allowed on certain blocks based on an existing limit in State law on the number of disabled veteran vendors allowed on those blocks. However, such limits on First Amendment vendors can only be made where there is a "compelling government interest" such as public safety. No more restriction than necessary is allowed to achieve that governmental interest. The text of Intro # 830 makes it appear that the limit of either 1 or 2 disabled veteran vendors per block was based on rational public safety concerns about the width of those sidewalks being less than 12 feet. However, the way that this State law actually came about was that disabled veteran vendors under pressure from the Midtown BIDs (who were threatening to have the vets completely banned from all of Midtown) negotiated for this limit both to appease the BIDs, and in order to limit their own business competition from other veteran vendors. This arbitrary law had no relation to any legitimate concern for public safety. If it had, then not even 1 disabled veteran vendor would have been allowed on those streets. Such arbitrary limits applied to artists are the exact opposite of the full First Amendment freedom we have won in the Federal Courts. As proof of this being an arbitrary limitation with little or no relation to public safety, consider the following: On those same blocks there are no limits on the number of sidewalk planters or newspaper vending boxes. On some of these exact same "narrow streets" there are as many as 100 large concrete planters per block [You can view extensive photographic evidence of these planters at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvtFS2GCdDw On 5/13/04 Lieutenant Robert D'Onofrio, commanding officer of the Manhattan South Peddler Task force and Borough of Manhattan South, testified in Federal Court in a lawsuit by Yellow license disabled veteran vendors. This recognized expert on vending policy and vending enforcement, who was called to the stand by the city defendants not the vets, stated under oath that the vast majority of these Midtown planters were set up solely to obstruct legal vendors from setting up in legal vending spots. >From pg 31 of the Federal Court transcript (copies available by request): THE COURT: And what is the point of the planters, if you know? Lt. D'Onofrio: Well, my understanding is so the street vendors, will not put their carts or their tables on the sidewalk because they have to be at curb side. Note that the testimony of this officer, who has specialized for years in vending enforcement and who deals with the Midtown BIDs on a daily basis, was made long after 9/11/01. In other words, unlike the concrete vehicle barriers or bollards set around certain strategic building locations, the vast majority of these thousands of Midtown planter obstructions were not set up for any security purposes. On these same "narrow" streets there are no limits on the number of protestors, public speakers or political activists with tables distributing campaign literature. Many of the stores, clubs, theatres and hotels on these blocks have merchandise stands, advertising kiosks, sale signs and other promotional materials set up on these same sidewalks. This year more than 4,000 advertising kiosks will be set up on these same sidewalks as part of the Street Furniture Initiative. Yet it is artists that must be limited to 2 per block. The local BIDs (Business Improvement Districts) sponsor huge commercial events throughout these exact same streets, such as the 34th Street Partnership's gigantic Macys Day Parade and hundreds of less well known street fairs and other "festivals" sponsored by the Midtown BIDS. Regardless of their theme, these "festivals" are run by the same vending company and all feature the exact same vendors. They are primarily an excuse for privatized vending. How can the Times Square BID use "public safety" to justify a limit on First Amendment protected artists to 2 per block when they operate the Times Square BID's immense New Year's Eve Party/corporate promotion with one million revelers on these exact same narrow streets? None of the BID sponsored activities or events are limited to one or two per block. None of the unlicensed general merchandise vendors paying to be in the enormous Midtown "festivals" run by vending corporations like Mardi Gras Productions http://www.nycstreetfairs.com/sched.html is limited to two per block. Therefore, we believe it is a clear violation of our rights to subject artists to such an arbitrary limit. The existing 60 pages of time, place and manner restrictions on the placement of artists' displays are more than adequate to address any legitimate issues of public safety. No new law is needed. 2. We artists have great respect for the contribution that disabled war veterans have made to this nation and to our own freedom as artists. We fully support their right to vend anywhere and everywhere, exactly as the NY State disabled veteran vendor law originally provided before the Midtown BIDs ruthlessly compromised it. However, we reject all attempts to tie our rights to either the arbitrary limits some veterans have negotiated for themselves or that legislators have unfairly imposed on them at the request of the BIDs. Disabled veterans were "allowed" a right to vend anywhere by the NY State legislature after the Civil War, in part because thousands of them were unemployed and homeless. [NY Times, 10/11/03 Vending Rules Put Sidewalks In a Muddle "As for why Mr. O'Conner [a disabled veteran vendor] is there at all, the answer dates to the post Civil War years, when New York State compensated veterans for their physical and psychological wounds by allowing them to peddle on city streets."] Unlike the veterans, artists have a vending right on public property whether government officials and BIDs want to "allow" it or not. What private corporations like the BIDs want to allow has no legitimate bearing on our rights. 3. We understand the real motivation behind this deceptive law. It has absolutely nothing to do with public safety. It is aimed at the privatization of vending. Intro #830 is simply another branch of Councilmember Gerson's varied attempts to limit artists to 2 per block and to subject us to a lottery, as a prelude to selling off all vending spots to the highest bidder. Unless First Amendment vendors are limited in this way, there will not be an exclusive vending right on NYC streets that can be sold off to the vending corporations connected to each BID. Exactly as in NYC parks, these corporations are only interested in paying millions if they can buy an exclusive right, and that is why artist freedom is the real target of all of these proposed vending laws. In 1995 these same Midtown BIDs joined with the SoHo Alliance and the Downtown Alliance BID to file joint legal papers against us in the first ARTIST lawsuit. The BIDs legal brief absurdly claimed that, "visual art is unworthy of First Amendment protection." Ironically, these same hypocritical BIDs claim to be the world's biggest art promoters and they are home to all of the city's major art museums. Alan Gerson is both a board member of the Downtown Alliance BID and a long time member of the SoHo Alliance. The SoHo Alliance are his political patrons and his main campaign contributors. BIDs are the motivating force behind all of Councilmember Gerson's Intros as well as being the authors of them. He has turned all of their worst ideas into a tsunami of vending Intros in the hope that you will let at least a few get past you. Gerson's own staff has called his vending Intros, "A fool's errand." Intro # 856, for example, creates a lottery anytime ANY vendor[s] get 2 summonses on a block. Those 2 summonses could theoretically be issued to 2 vendors on every NYC street the very first day Intro #830 went into effect. More than 100,000 vending summonses are issued each year in NYC. Most of the pressure to issue these summonses comes directly from the BIDs, many of whom hire high level former NYPD officials as their directors or place them on their board. This gets them an extraordinary degree of police "cooperation." In fact, the Downtown Alliance BID paid for the police precinct, the police cars, police uniforms and even some of the guns used by the local NYPD officers. It's getting hard to tell where the BID ends and the NYPD begins. [NY Times, Mayor Defends Payment for a Police Base February 18, 1998 "Angrily brushing aside criticism that the city is placing its police services up for sale, Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani yesterday defended the city's decision to accept $5 million from a business group to put a police substation near Wall Street. The city agreed to the lower Manhattan plan after the Alliance for Downtown New York, a business improvement district representing the Wall Street area, said that it would pay between $600,000 and $700,000 a year for 10 years to set up and maintain the substation along with a new museum of police history."] The Fifth Avenue and Times Square BIDs have even set up their own "kangaroo" Criminal Court, the 54th Street "Community Court" that specializes in prosecuting vendors. Before being elected, Gerson spent years trying to bring a copy of this court to the Downtown area. In 7 years of newspaper interviews and in his own letters to fellow Consumer Affairs Committee members, Councilmember Gerson has made it explicitly clear that he wants to limit artists to 2 per block throughout NYC, REGARDLESS of the width of sidewalks. His attempt to use disabled veterans as a weapon for damaging artists' free speech rights is quite shameful. Intro # 830 is a transparent attempt by Councilmember Gerson and the BIDs to severely and arbitrarily limit the free speech rights of visual artists. We ask that you reject it. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Int. No. 828 By Council Members Brewer, Fidler, Gonzalez, James, Koppell, Mealy, Palma, Sears, Martinez and Gerson ..Title A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to prohibiting general vendors from leaving pushcarts, stands or goods unattended. ..Body Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Section 20-465 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended by adding a new subsection r to read as follows: r. No general vendor shall leave his or her pushcart, stand or goods unattended for more than thirty minutes at any time. No general vendor shall leave his or her pushcart, stand or goods on the sidewalk or in any public space when said vendor is not actively engaged in vending such goods or vending from such pushcart or stand for more than thirty minutes at any time. 2. Section 20-468 (e) of the administrative code is hereby amended to read as follows: e. Any police officer may seize any vehicle, pushcart, stand or goods of a vendor operating any general vending business in violation of the following subdivisions of section 20-465: subdivisions b, e, i, [or] the provisions of subdivision m relating to obstruction of ventilation grilles, or subdivision r. The owner or other person lawfully entitled to the possession of such vehicle, pushcart, stand, or goods may be charged with reasonable costs for removal and storage payable prior to the release of such vehicle, pushcart, stand or goods, unless the violation has been dismissed. 3. This local law shall take effect immediately. -------------------------------------------------------- OBJECTIONS TO Intro # 828 We have 3 main objections to Intro# 828 1. This Intro was initially proposed by Councilmember Brewer, in large part because of an exceptionally tenacious book vendor in her district who has occupied more than an entire city block with multiple stands of used books 24/7 for over a decade, as recently described by the NY Times. SEE: The "Books and the Boos," NY Times, 10/17/08 [EXCERPT: "On the sidewalk in front of him, and extending along the west side of Broadway between 72nd and 74th Streets, was Mr. Davidson's 22 year old enterprise: a sprawling array of used books piled on folding tables, their legs bowing under the weight. The books sit there around the clock, presided over by Mr. Davidson or one of the people who work with him on occasion, but sometimes they are left unattended. Later this month, Councilwoman Gale Brewer plans to meet with Lt. Daniel Albano of the New York Police Department's legal bureau and Deputy Inspector Keith Spadaro of the 20th Police Precinct to try to address the situation. Councilwoman Brewer said that Mr. Davidson's wares, slowly creeping up Broadway, were a topic of discussion at City Council meetings, and that complaints against Mr. Davidson included claims of cursing, spitting and otherwise annoying passers by."] We sympathize with local residents and stores who are exasperated by this one individual. However, we find the creation of a law designed to target one person that will as a side effect subject ALL of the artists and vendors in NYC to unnecessary hardship, to be excessive, poorly designed and overreaching. 2. Like the arbitrary limit of 1 or 2 artists per block in Intro # 830, Intro # 828 attempts to set limits on EVERY artists' First Amendment rights, limits that are not similarly set on ANY other First Amendment speaker. As just one of many possible examples, there are more than 10,000 newspaper vending boxes on NYC streets. They are in most instances illegally chained to light poles and other street furniture. They remain in place for decades, night and day, 24 hours a day 365 days a year. Will they all be seized by the police 30 minutes after this law is passed? If not, there is a clear issue of 14th Amendment equal protection being violated by Intro #828. Similarly, will the police seize everything that anyone places on a street for 31 minutes or more or will they only be seizing artist and vendor displays? Will the garbage bags and refuse left overnight on virtually every street in NYC be seized? Will unattended cars, baby carriages and the shopping carts left outside grocery stores all be seized after 30 minutes? 3. There is also an enforcement problem with this law. Exactly how will police officers determine, let alone prove in court with credible evidence, that a stand was unattended for a FULL 30 minutes? Will NYPD officers stake out art displays with a stopwatch or perform video camera surveillance with time code, as if they were doing a drug sting? Most New Yorkers would be shocked to find that our police resources were being wasted in such an absurd manner. Far more likely is that the police will just guesstimate the time. "Seems like it might be unattended. OK, we waited 5 minutes, let's take it." Will the local BID act as informers, phoning in anonymous "over 31 minute" reports every time there's a vendor they want eliminated? Suppose an artist went to get a cup of coffee. Five minutes after they leave a police officer passes and sees their stand unattended. The officer walks on. The artist returns just five minutes later. Another hour passes and the same officer passes by the same location again. The artist is now gone for another five minutes to go to the bathroom (coffee will do that). If the officer confiscates the artists' entire stand and all of their art, who is in violation and who is legally liable, the artist or the NYPD? Since the artist is not there to receive a summons or a voucher how can they know who took their stand, their art or where all of it was taken to? How will the artist get it back without an NYPD summons or voucher number to identify it? This law is an invitation to many, many lawsuits. It is excessive and unenforceable, certainly unenforceable in any fair manner. No vendor can possibly stay at their display without ever leaving for even a few moments, nor should they have to fear doing so. Let Councilmember Brewer find other ways out of the 60 pages of vending law restrictions to deal with this particular book vendor. There are many possible options, not least of which being that a book vendor can legally only have 1 eight foot long stand. Obviously, no vendor can legally occupy an entire city block. As a final note, it is important to recognize that if passed, this law would do absolutely nothing to prevent the same book vendor from continuing his same activity. All he will have to do is pay a few homeless people to sit, stand or sleep behind his tables so they will not be, "unattended." ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- Int. No. 832 By Council Members Gerson, Palma and Stewart ..Title A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the definition of obstruction. ..Body Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Subsection a of section 20-465 of the administrative code of the city of New York is hereby amended to read as follows: a. No general vendor shall engage in any vending business on any sidewalk unless such sidewalk has at least a twelve-foot wide clear pedestrian path to be measured from the boundary of any private property to any obstructions in or on the sidewalk, or if there are no obstructions, to the curb. For the purposes of this subsection, the term obstruction shall include, but not be limited to, raised or uneven metal plating, basement or cellar doors, tree roots, metal tree surrounds and inlaid bubble glass surfaces, which may affect ease of pedestrian movement. In no event shall any pushcart or stand be placed on any part of a sidewalk other than that which abuts the curb. 2. Subsection a of section 17-315 of the code is hereby amended to read as follows: No pushcart shall be placed upon any sidewalk unless said sidewalk has at least a twelve foot clear pedestrian path to be measured from the boundary of any private property to any obstruction in or on the sidewalk, or if there are no obstructions, to the curb. For the purposes of this subsection, the term obstruction shall include, but not be limited to, raised or uneven metal plating, basement or cellar doors, tree roots, metal tree surrounds and inlaid bubble glass surfaces, which may affect ease of pedestrian movement. In no event shall any pushcart be placed on any part of a sidewalk other than that which abuts the curb. 3. This local law shall take effect immediately. --------------------------------------------------------------- OBJECTIONS TO Intro # 828 We have 1 main objection to Intro # 828 1. The NYC Administrative code on vending already has numerous restrictions on the placement of vending stands that apply to ALL vendors, including artists [See section 20-465]. These restrictions include distances (in many cases excessive distances) from doors, corners, bus stops, subways, projecting staircases and other sidewalk obstructions. There are also more than 1000 completely restricted streets. Those restrictions have already made more than 75% of all sidewalks in NYC legally unusable by street artists and vendors. Apparently, that's still 25% too few street restrictions for Councilmember Gerson. Like every other Intro he has proposed, this is simply another excuse to prevent artists from selling in SoHo. Note the very specific list of new "obstructions" he wants added to these restrictions: "uneven metal plating, basement or cellar doors, tree roots, metal tree surrounds and inlaid bubble glass surfaces." These exist on every block in SoHo. Some of them, such as, "bubble glass surfaces," ONLY exist in SoHo. Is there ANY sidewalk in NYC that does not have a crack, a bump, a tree root pushing the pavement slightly up, a cellar door, a metal plate left there by Con Ed for years, or a little fence set up around a tree? You have to admire the attention to detail that Councilmember Gerson applies to his agenda of eliminating street artists, but at what point does it become ludicrous to the point of being self parody? If all of these "obstructions" are a genuine public safety hazard, why isn't he creating a law forcing landlords, the Building Department or the DOT to fix them? Why does he encourage these same landlords to install thousands of empty concrete planters along the curbside of public sidewalks throughout SoHo for the sole purpose of obstructing legal vending? Isn't he aware that hundreds of people are injured each year by bumping into these planters in the dark? Why is he actually adding "obstructions" to the sidewalks in his district, including oversized steel garbage cans displaying self serving, "Brought to you by Alan Gerson" ads? Note that in one of his related Intros, #769 "Restricting vendor proximity to stationary objects," Councilmember Gerson also wants artists and vendors kept a minimum of 2 feet from virtually everything three diminsional, "including, but not limited to lamp posts, parking meters, mail boxes, traffic signal stanchions, fire hydrants, tree boxes, benches, bus shelters, refuse baskets [or] , traffic barriers, scaffolds, gas cooling tank, Muni meter, plantings or trees." Perhaps he would like to limit vendors to selling while levitating above the street or place us all on a barge in the middle of the East River? With a little more technological progress, perhaps we can all be beamed off to another dimension. This law is simply a transparent excuse to give artists and vendors summonses wherever and whenever there is ANY complaint about them, however unjustified. Added to his law that sets up a lottery as soon as just 2 summonses are issued, this seemingly goofy little Intro is clearly a law with a hidden purpose. Like Intros #828 and 830, it proposes a limitation on First Amendment protected artists that is not similarly applied to newspaper vending boxes, street fairs, cafes or anything else. If a 20 block long street fair with 500 vendors can be sponsored by a BID right in the midst of Gerson's district regardless of there being thousands of these "obstructions" in that same area, how can you legally justify such a restriction on street artists? We ask that you vote NO. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Int. No. 846 By Council Members Gonzalez, Comrie, James and Palma ..Title A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to vending in Sunset Park, Brooklyn. ..Body Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Legislative declaration. Throughout New York City's history, vendors have been an integral part of the street life of the city. However, in recent years the complexity of the vending laws has led to confusion among vendors, store owners, police, and community residents in certain parts of the city. For this reason, the Council sees a need to create a new scheme for vending in certain areas of the city that takes into consideration the needs of all parts of the community. The proliferation of both licensed and unlicensed vendors in the community of Sunset Park, Brooklyn has been a source of neighborhood concern for at least a decade. As local demographics have changed so have the needs and tastes of the neighborhood. Many vendors in Sunset Park are actually Sunset Park residents and cater to their community. At present, the main thoroughfare of 5th Avenue is the preferred spot for the majority of vendors. However, the existence of vendors on 5th Avenue, a street with heavy pedestrian and vehicular congestion, creates a serious and immediate threat to the health and safety of the public. Based on this finding, it is necessary to completely restrict vending on 5th Avenue between 38th Street and 60th Street. 2. Subchapter 27 of Title 20 of the administrative code of the city of New York is hereby amended by adding a new section 20-474.4 to read as follows: a. Definitions. For the purposes of this section the following words and terms shall have the following meanings: (1) "Sunset Park Vending District." The area in the borough of Brooklyn bounded on the east by 9th avenue, on the south by 60th street, on the west by 4th avenue and on the north by 38th street. (2) "Fixed Vending Location." A defined area measuring approximately eight linear feet parallel to a curb by three linear feet measured from a curb to a property line in which a vendor can vend. No more than one vendor may vend within each fixed vending location. (3) "Sunset Park BID." A non-profit organization of property owners and commercial tenants focused on business development and quality of life issues in Sunset Park, Brooklyn. (4) "Vendor of Written or Original Material." A vendor who hawks, peddles, sells or offers to sell, at retail, items protected by the First Amendment, including, but not limited to, newspapers, periodicals, books, pamphlets, or original artwork. b. (1) On and after November 1, 2008, without increasing the number of full-term licenses in effect in pursuant to Section 20-459 or Section 17-307 of the Administrative Code of the city of New York, 40 additional full-term licenses, as defined in Section 20-453, and 40 additional full-term licenses, as defined in Section 17-307, shall be designated for use exclusively within the Sunset Park Vending District. (2) Preferences shall be given in the issuance of licenses pursuant to this section to the following categories of persons in the following order: (i) Disabled veterans. (ii) Disabled persons. (iii) Veterans. (iv) Those persons currently on a waiting list for a license pursuant to Section 20-459 or Section 17-309 of this code. (3) Licenses issued pursuant to this section shall be distinctive and easily recognizable in accordance with rules to be established by the commissioner and shall be displayed visibly at all times. (4) Licenses issued pursuant to this section shall permit the licensee to vend only within the Sunset Park Vending District and shall not be considered a valid license for purposes of vending in any other district or area of the city. (5) Licenses issued pursuant to this section shall be non-transferable. c. It shall be unlawful for any individual to act as a food vendor or general vendor within the Sunset Park Vending District without having first obtained a license pursuant to this section, except that it shall be lawful for a vendor of written or original material to vend such within the Sunset Park Vending District without obtaining a license therefor. Vending licenses issued pursuant to any other section of the code shall not be considered valid for purposes of vending within the Sunset Park Vending District, except that it shall be lawful for a vendor licensed pursuant to Article 4 of the New York State General Business Law to vend within the Sunset Park Vending District. d. (1) Vendors issued licenses pursuant to this section shall be assigned a fixed vending location within the Sunset Park Vending District. There shall be no fewer than four fixed vending locations per block face within the Sunset Park Vending District. At least one fixed vending location on each block face within the Sunset Park Vending District shall be reserved for vendors of written or original materials. (2) The placement of fixed vending locations shall be determined by the Sunset Park BID, in compliance with Section 17-315 and Section 20-465 of this code. Fixed vending locations shall be subject to a bi-annual review, to be conducted by the Sunset Park BID. (3) Locations shall be assigned by lottery to be conducted annually by the Sunset Park BID. (4) Each vendor issued a license pursuant to this section shall vend from his or her assigned fixed vending location only and shall not vend from any other location within the Sunset Park Vending District. No more than one vendor shall vend from each assigned fixed vending location. Each vendor, or his or her employee, shall vend from his or her assigned fixed vending location at least twenty days per month or shall be deemed to have forfeited his or her assigned vending location. Any vendor issued a license pursuant to this section found to be vending in a location other than his or her assigned fixed vending location within the Sunset Park Vending District shall be deemed to be vending without a license. (5) Ten fixed vending locations within the Sunset Park Vending District shall available at all times for vendors licensed pursuant to Article 4 of the New York State General Business Law. Such fixed vending locations shall not be assigned to vendors licensed pursuant to this section. (6) Vendors of written or original material shall vend only from a fixed vending location within the Sunset Park Vending District. e. In addition to regulations and penalties imposed by this section, vendors issued general vending licenses pursuant to this section shall be subject to all regulations and penalties imposed by this subchapter. Vendors issued food vending licenses pursuant to this section shall be subject to all regulations and penalties imposed by subchapter 2 of chapter 3 of title 17. f. Vending shall be prohibited at all times on Fifth avenue, from 38th street to 60th street, in the Borough of Brooklyn. g. Penalties. Any person who violates the provisions of subsection c of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than three months or by such fine and imprisonment. 3. Subsections a and c of section 20-472 of the administrative code of the city of New York are amended to read as follows: a. Any person who violates the provisions of sections 20-453, [and] 20-474.1 and 20-474.4 (c) of this subchapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than three months or by both such fine and imprisonment. In addition, any police officer may seize any vehicle used to transport goods to a general vendor, along with the goods contained therein, where the driver is required to but cannot produce evidence of a distributor's license. Any vehicle and goods so seized may be subject to forfeiture upon notice and judicial determination. If a forfeiture proceeding is not commenced, the owner or other person lawfully entitled to possession of such vehicle and goods may be charged with the reasonable cost for removal and storage payable prior to the release of such vehicle and goods, unless the charge of unlicensed distributing has been dismissed. c. 1. In addition to the penalties prescribed by subdivision a of this section, any person who violates, or any person aiding another to violate, the provisions of sections 20-453 or 20-474.4(c) of this subchapter shall be liable for a civil penalty of not less than two hundred fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars together with a penalty of two hundred fifty dollars per day for every day during which the unlicensed business operated. 2. In addition to the penalties prescribed by subdivision b of this section, any person who violates any provision of this subchapter, other than sections 20-453 or 20-474.4(c), or any of the rules or regulations promulgated hereunder shall be liable for a civil penalty as follows: (a) For a first violation, a penalty of not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than fifty dollars. (b) For a second violation within a period of two years of the date of a first violation, a penalty of not less than fifty dollars nor more than one hundred dollars. (c) For a third violation within a period of two years of the date of a first violation, a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than two hundred fifty dollars. (d) For any subsequent violations within a period of two years of the date of a first violation, a penalty of not less than two hundred fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars. 4. Subdivision c of section 17-321 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended to read as follows: c. An officer or employee designated in subdivision a of this section may seize any vehicle or pushcart which (i) does not have a permit or (ii) is being used to vend on property owned by the city and under the jurisdiction of a city agency including, but not limited to, the department of parks and recreation or the department of small business services, without the written authorization of the commissioner of such department, or (iii) is being used by an unlicensed vendor, or (iv) is being used to vend in the area including and bounded on the east by the easterly side of Broadway, on the south by the southerly side of Liberty Street, on the west by the westerly side of West Street and on the north by the northerly side of Vesey Street, or (v) is selling food not authorized by the permit, or (vi) is being used by a vendor to vend within the Sunset Park Vending District from a location other than his or her assigned fixed vending location, and may seize any food sold or offered for sale from such vehicle or pushcart. Such vehicle, pushcart or food shall be subject to forfeiture as provided in section 17-322 of this subchapter. If a forfeiture proceeding is not commenced, the vendor may be charged with the reasonable costs for removal and storage payable prior to the release of such food, vehicle or pushcart unless the charge of vending without a permit or vending without a license or vending without the authorization of such commissioner is dismissed. 5. This local law shall take effect one hundred and twenty days after its enactment into law provided, however, that the commissioner of consumer affairs shall take any actions necessary prior to such effective date for the implementation of this local law including, but not limited to, the adoption of any necessary rules. ----------------------------------------------- OBJECTIONS TO Intro # 846** We have many objections to Intro # 846 1. Intro #846 is unique among all of the pending Intros on vending in that it does not pull any punches. Written by the Sunset Park BID, it places ALL vending directly under the jurisdiction of the BID, including First Amendment protected vending; "The placement of fixed vending locations shall be determined by the Sunset Park BID." It limits First Amendment vendors to 1 per block; "At least one fixed vending location on each block face within the Sunset Park Vending District shall be reserved for vendors of written or original materials." It creates a lottery for First Amendment vending spots, a lottery also run by the Sunset Park BID; "Locations shall be assigned by lottery to be conducted annually by the Sunset Park BID." All that's missing is for the BID to decide which subjects artists will be allowed to depict and then to sell off all the vending spots to the highest bidder. Clearly, this proposed law was conceived with no concept of what First Amendment freedom means other than it being somehow related to certain vendors that the BID wants banned from their geographic area. Note that in section 4 subsection c this restriction is directly tied to the restrictions at Ground Zero and to those in all NYC Parks, restrictions that have absolutely no public safety or public interest relation to the area within the Sunset Park Brooklyn BID. With Intro #846, the BIDs have decided to try a little legal experiment in trashing free speech on the outskirts of NYC, in the hopes that no one will notice or care. Unlike Councilmember Gerson's district, First Amendment vendors in Sunset Park are very few in number, if there are any at all. Apparently the BID hoped we would not notice this seemingly obscure bill or have any idea of the threat it represents to our rights citywide. If this law is passed, the BIDs will attempt to use Intro # 846 as a precedent and apply it all over NYC, with the BID in each district placed directly in charge of ALL vending, running lotteries, assigning vending spots and eventually, selling them to the highest bidder. Needless to say, this is exactly the Privatization of Vending by BIDs that I have been writing about and that certain Councilmembers keep pretending they are not trying to bring about. This law, exactly like Intros #828, 830 and 832, applies restrictions to street artists and written matter vendors that are not applied to newspaper vending boxes, public speakers, or any other First Amendment activity. It creates an unambiguous 14th Amendment issue of equal protection being violated. What justification does Intro # 846 offer for this unprecedented privatization of vending? "in recent years the complexity of the vending laws has led to confusion among vendors, store owners, police, and community residents in certain parts of the city." In other words, because a few "confused" storeowners resent ANY vendors being allowed to sell on a public street where they pay rent; because the BID director, landlords and a few local residents cannot understand the "complexity" of the vending laws when they make their repetitive calls of complaint to the overburdened local precinct; the BID is going to do everyone a big favor by rewriting the entire vending code so as to privatize all vending under their absolute control. Aren't BIDs what Mussolini meant when he wrote that, ""Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." Could one find any better definition of a BID? Perhaps the City Council is no longer a relevant body. With the BIDs actually writing the laws and then enforcing them with an increasingly privatized police force seamlessly integrated with the BIDs untrained minimum wage security guards, what remaining purpose do our elected legislators, city agencies like the DCA and the NYPD or other city officials serve? Like medieval city states, every pipsqueak BID can run it's own little white collar real estate gangster kingdom, make it's own arbitrary laws that have no relation to the US Constitution and try those it has arrested in it's own privatized courts. Then the convicted can be put to work doing, "community service" for the BID, as Councilmember Gerson has proposed. BIDs are private, corporate real estate interests that replace the traditional Constitutional functions of government; they are not subject to any oath to uphold the Constitution; that are not even elected in any real sense. They are undemocratic, they duplicate services the city already provides, and, unlike street artists, they are a genuine threat to every New Yorker. If you think I'm overly negative about the BIDs, read your own City Council study on them. It makes me sound like a BID booster. SEE: NYC COUNCIL REPORT ON THE BIDS: http://www.tenant.net/Oversight/BID/bidtitle.html Certainly the residents, businesses and voters in each BID district had little say in choosing who runs the BID or in deciding that a BID should even exist. According to an exhaustive City Council study, most businesses have no input in their own BID, played no part in choosing its officers, resent being taxed by the BID, and feel that the BID abuses it's power in numerous ways. Perhaps the BIDs should officially run these vending hearings up front instead of doing so behind the scenes. At least then artists would be able to directly confront those who are trying to eliminate us from all of the public areas of NYC. With all due respect to Councilmember Gonzalez, who we guess had little or no part in the writing of Intro #846, we ask that you reject this law. It is an insult to everything America and democracy stand for. ---------------------------------- --------------------------------- THIS INTRO BELOW IS NOT IN THIS HEARING but it is a key part of the anti street artist agenda. If passed, as soon as 2 summonses were issued, the city could make a lottery for any block and eventually for all vending spots in NY, which would then directly lead to them being sold to the highest bidder. This is exactly the privatization of vending by BIDs and vending corporations. Int. No. 856 By Council Members Gerson, James, Monserrate and Palma ..Title A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to assigning vending spots via lottery when so warranted. ..Body Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Subchapter 27 of Title 20 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended by adding a new section 20-467.1 to read as follows: 20- 467.1 Lottery upon finding of public safety need. a. After two or more incidents in which the police department issues a citation to one or more of the same parties, whether licensed or not, seeking to vend on a specific block face, the commissioner may create a lottery system for available spots on the block face at issue. For the purposes of this section, available spots shall mean those which comply with all other vending restrictions, as listed in this subchapter. b. The lottery shall be open to all licensed vendors and vendors of goods covered by the First Amendment, except that it shall not be open to any vendor who has been found guilty of a violation related to the incident upon which the lottery is predicated. c. The commissioner may promulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this section. 2. This local law shall take effect ninety days after its enactment into law provided, however, that the commissioner of consumer affairs shall take any actions necessary prior to such effective date for the implementation of this local law including, but not limited to, the adoption of any necessary rules. You can get detailed info on all of the proposed vending laws in these articles at the ARTIST website: Gersons 7 NEW vending laws target artists 8/26/08 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCStreetArtists/message/1429 Gerson Law strips artists of rights in parks and on streets http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCStreetArtists/message/1405 IMPORTANT: 5 Previous New Vending bills from Gerson http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCStreetArtists/message/1372 Gerson letter leaked to ARTIST group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCStreetArtists/message/1434 Also see: NY Times, SoHo Street Artists Triumph As High Court Rebuffs City 6/3/97 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE0DE123DF930A35755C0A961958260 NY Times 8/11/01 Judge Bars Permit Requirement for Art Vendors http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07EFD7133FF932A2575BC0A9679C8B63 Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T. Contact info: artistpres@gmail.com TO SUBSCRIBE to ARTIST send a blank email to: NYCStreetArtists-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Reply to that email and you will officially be a member of ARTIST. To visit the ARTIST website go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nycstreetartists/ (only subscribed members can access the materials)