When Riverton resident Annie Inkley set out in January to protest her city’s agreement to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, she hoped the rally would buck perceptions about the suburb.
Many people believe residents of the conservative city in the southwestern reaches of the Salt Lake Valley support ICE and its mission, she said, but she wanted to organize a demonstration that gave those who oppose the agency a voice.
“I want[ed] this to be more of an uplifting, ‘Immigrants, we see you, and we will rally with you,’ and a community-building experience,” Inkley said, “not one that is driven by anger.”
But when City Hall tried to charge her $2,000 for “police fees” related to the protest, Inkley pushed back. After First Amendment experts called the fee unconstitutional, city officials said they would back away from charging it.
On Jan. 24, after federal immigration agents in Minneapolis killed protester Alex Pretti, Inkley emailed a handful of city officials about her plan to hold a protest “to let Riverton City know that some of us are concerned,” she said. She also requested information on how to get a permit for the event.
When she hadn’t heard back by the evening of Jan. 26, she drove to City Hall and filled out an application in person. In a subsequent meeting with Riverton’s mayor, city manager and police chief, Inkley said, city officials “hinted” at a fee for her protest.
Riverton backpedals on fee
City administrators, Inkley said, were concerned people would not comply with Inkley’s plan to use sidewalks instead of walking down roads. Despite the mayor telling her over the phone that night that she wouldn’t need to pay for police services, Inkley said, City Manager Kevin Hicks sent her an email saying fees could reach as high as $2,040, depending on which officers staffed the event.
Inkley was shocked. When she responded to clarify that she would be personally responsible for paying for officers’ staff time, Hicks said that was correct.
“So,” Inkley said, “I started doing my research.”
She sent the city manager a 1992 Supreme Court ruling that said imposing police fees on a protest violates the First Amendment, and asked how the city would justify its charges.
Hicks replied that since Mayor Tish Buroker had eventually requested the city not collect the fees for Inkley’s protest, city staff would “follow her direction.” He added that Riverton hasn’t hosted many of “these types of protests in the past” and that officials would keep in mind what Inkley brought up to improve the permitting process in the future.
In a statement to The Salt Lake Tribune, Buroker said she waived the fee because Inkley had “complied with all city requests and should not be penalized.” She also planned to review all city fees in the future with the City Council to “ensure they are reasonable and appropriate.”
While Inkley ultimately held a small protest, Buroker’s justification for waiving the fee wasn’t enough for her.
“I don’t want them to not collect any fees from me because she asked them not to,” Inkley said. “I want them to not try to collect fees from me because it’s unconstitutional. ...I don’t ever want them to try and do this again to somebody else. “
Experts say fee is unconstitutional
Clifford Rosky, a constitutional law professor at the University of Utah, said it’s “quite clear” that police fees for protests are a violation of the First Amendment’s free speech clause. The 1992 Supreme Court ruling Inkley cited — Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement — struck down a lesser fee of $1,000, he said.
Rosky said it’s not surprising that Buroker waived the fee but added that case-by-case decisions on imposing charges aren’t a solution to the real problem.
“The question is, whether the city claims the authority to impose a fee in the first place,” Rosky said. “You can’t just have an unconstitutional law and say, ‘Oh, we’ll waive it if somebody complains about it.’”
The ordinance on Riverton’s books says organizers of free speech activities “could incur costs for any services provided beyond ‘basic city services,’” and that a city permit for events “will not be issued until the cost of the estimate has been paid or security is posted.”
It is constitutional for officials to charge a “nominal” fee for paperwork with the permit, Rosky said, but there shouldn’t be a fee for basic city services like policing.
“The only way in which that goes beyond basic city services is if you assume that no one ever protests in Riverton and no one has a right to,” Rosky said. “Because if you assume that people protest, what’s more basic than police protection?”
Laws that govern the issuance of permits for gatherings and protests aren’t inherently unconstitutional, but they must meet specific requirements, and they can’t prevent the ability to protest, said Maggie McLetchie, a Nevada attorney who previously served as the legal director for the Nevada chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
“Any law that gives government officials discretion about how much to charge and when to charge it is unconstitutional because that necessarily runs the risk of viewpoint discrimination,” McLetchie wrote in an email. “Here, the costs appear based on the possible reaction to the speech and policing the protest — that is not content neutral.”
For his part, Rosky said Riverton officials likely need to discuss the city’s ordinance with the city attorney.
“The United States Supreme Court has been very clear about the effect of these kinds of unconstitutional laws,” Rosky said. “They chill speech. They prevent the discussion of controversial topics and they prevent the expression of controversial viewpoints — and that makes our democracy weaker.”
Asked about the assertions from Rosky and McCletchie about the constitutionality of its fee ordinance, Riverton spokesperson Nate Slack said no fees will be charged for similar events moving forward. He added that city officials had planned to review all city fees before the protest came up.
Note to readers • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.