Who filed the permit for the “No Kings” protest that ended in a deadly shooting on the streets of downtown Salt Lake City? Did officials vet the applicant? And what did the document say about plans for security?
In an attempt to answer those and other questions, The Salt Lake Tribune obtained the permit request organizers submitted to the city ahead of the June 14 demonstration.
Hosted by Utah 50501, the event drew thousands of attendees. At about 7 p.m., the throngs began to march peacefully east from Pioneer Park before turning north onto State Street.
Minutes before 8 p.m., three shots rang out near 151 S. State St. near the Wallace F. Bennett Federal Building.
Authorities initially arrested 24-year-old Arturo Gamboa, who was released from jail about a week later after investigators determined he had not fired his weapon.
Salt Lake City Police Chief Brian Redd said a member of the event’s “peacekeeping team” confronted Gamboa when they saw him carrying an assault-style rifle, and when Gamboa ran away, the “peacekeeper” shot at him. One bullet wounded Gamboa. Another struck 39-year-old Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, who later died
To date, no charges have been filed.
Here’s what we know about the permit application for the protest:
Who submitted the application?
The applicant’s name on the city permit request is listed as Michael Andaman. The application also stated that Andaman was not a first-time applicant for a city demonstration permit.
Andman has a LinkedIn page with limited information. It lists him as an investor for a business called “Andaman Holdings.” One such business is registered in Washington, and another is registered in Florida. It’s unclear if the Andaman who applied for the permit is affiliated with either. The applicant has no other apparent online presence and no ties to Utah listed on the internet.
What group organized the protest?
The name of the event was titled “Utah 50501 National Day of Protest” on the permit application, but Utah Protest and Rally LLC was listed as the organization on the protest permit. The business is not registered in Utah, but is a registered company located in Sheridan, Wyoming, according to the Wyoming Secretary of State’s Office.
The company filed with the state on April 10, documents show, and Andrew Pierce is listed as its organizer. Pierce is a Wyoming LLC attorney, according to his business website. When contacted, an individual said Pierce doesn’t answer his company’s phones and that they could not release client information involved with the LLC.
Five days after the shooting, the national 50501 Movement cut ties with its Salt Lake City chapter. The events in Utah did not meet the organization’s standards, according to an Instagram post from the national group, including its “strict no-weapons policy.”
What have police said about Andaman?
When asked about the applicant, Salt Lake City Police Department spokesperson Brent Weisberg said state law and department policy prohibit officers from searching Andaman’s name in their police databases “without a legitimate investigative purpose.”
He added that any prior police reports or contacts could be released through an open records request. A search of Utah court records did not yield any results for Andaman.
What have protest organizers said about Andaman?
Protest organizers have not publicly stated anything about Andaman. They also have not responded to requests for comment through emails or social media accounts associated with the local and national chapters of 50501.
Did Salt Lake City vet the applicant?
Salt Lake City Special Events Permit Manager Ryen Schlegel is named on the “No Kings” permit. He said that he’s heard reports that the permit applicant may have a fake name but didn’t know if they were true. Including an applicant’s name in the permit request is “mostly for context,” Schlegel added, so his team knows if they’ve worked with the applicant before.
Schlegel and his team were able to contact the organizer over the phone and through email to plan ahead of the protest but did not verify Andaman’s identity. Salt Lake City police also worked with the applicant ahead of the event, which is the normal procedure for events like the protest, Schlegel added. The Tribune’s copy of the permit request had the applicant’s contact information redacted.
What is the purpose of a protest permit?
The application is more of a “good faith” process, Schlegel explained, for the city to work with the organizer on the event to ensure the event is safe logistically — so the city can close roads if necessary or turn off city sprinklers.
“When it comes to vetting the person’s identity, we’ve never really had to do that,” Schlegel said. “Plus, it gets into a territory of how would we vet for that? Would they need to provide an ID? Well, if that’s the case, could that be preventing free speech by asking for validation … or producing an ID?”
In his 10 years with the city, Schlegel said this is the first time an applicant’s identity is an issue.
“We’re not going into the background of these people necessarily,” Schlegel added. “We’re going into what they want to do for free speech and making sure that activity is safe for everybody.”
Should the applicant have listed the protest’s “safety volunteers” on the permit application?
The permit application asks requesters if they plan to hire private security or off-duty Salt Lake City police officers for their event. The application for the “No Kings” protest stated that the event would not have either of those hired security options.
The march did, however, enlist security volunteers.
Schlegel said it “hasn’t been necessary in years past” to ask if an event would include armed safety volunteers. He added that his office will consider an option in its security question for armed safety volunteers, because it could be the “modern reality we need to be facing.”
The application does have an option for requesters to include additional details about the event, which applicants often use for information that doesn’t specifically fit into the city’s permit questionnaire.
“If they were to indicate that they were going to have armed volunteers there, that would be something I would bring up to the Police Department,” Schlegel said. “... I would rely on the police to have a conversation when it comes to security with the applicant, and, unfortunately, on the application, we had no indication that that would be the case.”