A Santa Monica nonprofit organization has filed a lawsuit against the city after being denied the opportunity to advertise on the Big Blue Bus. The decision by city leaders has sparked controversy, with the plaintiffs arguing that their First Amendment rights have been violated.
Key Takeaways
- The lawsuit was filed by AIDS Project Los Angeles and two local residents.
- The Santa Monica City Council voted to maintain a policy that allows only commercial advertising on city buses.
- Plaintiffs are seeking an injunction to change the advertising policy and allow nonprofit ads.
Background of the Case
The conflict began when the Santa Monica City Council voted on September 11 to review its advertising policy for the Big Blue Bus. Currently, the policy permits only commercial firms to advertise, excluding nonprofit organizations. This decision came after months of discussions between AIDS Project Los Angeles and city officials, which the nonprofit claims were ignored.
Craig Miller, the producer of AIDS Walk Los Angeles, decided to take legal action after the council’s vote, stating that the refusal to allow nonprofit advertising was the final straw. He expressed frustration over the lack of response from city staff during the six months leading up to the vote.
The Lawsuit
Miller, along with residents Lisa Brisse and Paloma Bennett, is seeking an injunction against the city’s advertising policy. They argue that the denial of advertising space infringes on their First Amendment rights. The plaintiffs are also requesting a temporary restraining order to allow them to promote the upcoming AIDS Walk scheduled for October 14.
The lawsuit claims that the city’s policy not only harms AIDS Walk Los Angeles but also negatively impacts fundraising efforts and community awareness about AIDS-related issues. The plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that the city’s refusal to allow nonprofit ads is arbitrary and lacks a legitimate governmental reason.
City’s Response
Santa Monica Deputy City Attorney Anthony Serritello indicated that the city anticipated legal action and defended the current advertising policy as compliant with constitutional standards. He stated that the guidelines were designed to avoid potential legal issues by not allowing the city to pick and choose between nonprofit and commercial ads.
City Attorney Marsha Moutrie also advised the council during discussions, emphasizing that while the city could allow nonprofit advertising, it could not selectively permit certain organizations over others.
Community Reaction
The decision has drawn criticism from local advocates. Craig E. Thompson, Executive Director of AIDS Project Los Angeles, condemned the policy as one that favors corporate interests over community advocacy. He called for public support to challenge what he described as a misguided set of priorities.
Brisse, who has personal ties to the cause, expressed disbelief at the city’s stance, stating that it contradicts the values of Santa Monica residents. She has actively participated in AIDS Walk events and is a co-leader of Santa Monicans for AIDS Walk Los Angeles.
Next Steps
The next court hearing is scheduled for October 4, where a ruling on the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction is expected. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the city may need to reevaluate its advertising policy. Miller remains optimistic about the outcome, asserting that the case highlights the need for a balanced approach to advertising on public transit.
As the legal battle unfolds, the implications of this case could set a precedent for how cities handle advertising from nonprofit organizations, particularly those focused on public health issues.
