Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
MIGUEL LOPEZ,
Plaintiff
vs.
and files this Complaint against Defendant City and County of Denver
entity.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
April 20 in Civic Center Park for over ten years. It is known as the 420
The concept of 420, for many, embodies rights of life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness. The concept of 420 also can relate to cannabis and
marijuana, and has become a global code word for these concepts, and April
2
7. Denvers 420 Rally is the first and largest 420 event on Earth.
From humble beginnings, the event was founded by the late Ken Gorman in
the early 2000s well over a decade ago, with his bullhorn and attitude in
Civic Center Park every April 20, peaking at 4:20 p.m. Through the years,
Ken Gorman had gradually shared the leadership of the event with Miguel
Lopez.
Denver, a murder which was execution-style and not part of a robbery since
valuables were left in plain view inside the home, and still remains unsolved
by the City of Denver. Kens family wished to preserve the legacy of the
9. The spirit and voice of 420 would not be silenced despite Kens
murder. Instead, the Denver 420 Rally grew and evolved under Miguel
Lopezs leadership, and opted to pursue a permit from Denver and attempted
10. The Denver 420 Rally has been a substantial part of raising
awareness about Marijuana Prohibition. Over the years, Denvers 420 Rally
their friends as they exercise their right of free association. The Rally
3
prompts conversations and promotes education of the people, leading to
change.
approximately 5:00 p.m. The Denver Police stated that the shooting was
http://www.denverpost.com/2013/04/22/denver-police-420-shooting-
followed-argument-between-gang-rivals/
12. Despite all of these leads, like Ken Gormans murder, the City
of Denver also failed to solve this crime nor to charge anyone in connection
with this shooting. But this did not stop the City and County of Denver to
blame and penalize the organizers of the Rally for the shooting, as if the
tragic Boston Marathon bombing that happened five days earlier, on April
15, 2013, was somehow the fault of the organizers of the Boston Marathon.
insistence that Rally organizers pay for and put up fencing around the entire
perimeter of Denvers Civic Center Park, and pay for and set up security
afternoon, in contrast to most other weekend-long events that are also fenced
4
in Civic Center Park. In addition to numerous other demands of the City, all
event, to pay for all of the Citys shifting and expanding demands.
14. The Rally has risen to this challenge. The Rally has spent over
The Rally brings well over that amount each year to the City of Denver and
the State of Colorado in the form of tourism, jobs, revenue, and economic
activity.
level talent such as Lil Wayne, Wiz Khalifa, Rick Ross, 2 Chainz, and also
16. Every year including 2017, the Rally has cleaned up completely
during the time allotted to do so, and left Civic Center Park in a better state
The Citys Efforts to Prohibit and Revoke Permit from 2017 Event
17. On April 22, 2017, two days after the April 20 event, the Citys
agreed that it was left in pristine condition, and issued its formal finding of
alleged damages and permit violations following the event. The Citys
5
formal finding, conducted by actual long-time Denver civil servants and not
all permit conditions including trash removal, security, and clean-up with the
exception of a broken sprinkler head, for which Miguel Lopez was billed,
and paid, $190.00. The City confirmed that all issues had been satisfied,
closed the matter, and Mr. Lopez began planning for 2018s event having
received absolutely zero indication from the City that anything was
disagreed with the findings of the career civil servants who had fully
and the political positions taken by the 420 Rally, the City orchestrated and
disparage Mr. Lopez and his reputation, harm his ability to put on future
events, whip up public opinion against him, and to ultimately create a pre-
text for suppression of his speech and ability to obtain permits for future
events.
6
20. This campaign included highlighting misleading snapshots of
trash in Civic Center Park that was in the process of being cleaned up by the
Permittee, in advance of the Citys own deadline of 5:00pm April 21, 2017.
mass media or social media, showed trash on the ground before the time
culminated when on May 19, 2017, the City disseminated to the media a
regarding the 2017 event and attempted to penalize Permittee Miguel Lopez
through a warning, fines, prohibition on applying for three years, and a loss
of his priority status for future events. After the media had the advance copy
of the letter, the City then emailed a copy to the actual addressee, Miguel
Lopez, on a Saturday.
designed to disguise the Citys true motivation; to silence the free speech
participants.
7
23. The Notice Letter and attachments lacked many supporting
documentation that would be generated in any similar case, to the extent that
24. The Notice Letter and supporting package is 104 pages, with
over half of this package (57 pages; pages 22-78) consisting of a copy of the
City and County of Denver Public Event Policy which applies to all
events; generic City brochures (pages 79-83); and even five blank pages (12,
the case was assigned to a Hearing Officer selected and compensated by the
City of Denver.
issued a decision which does not address the arguments made by Miguel
Lopez, witnesses called on his behalf, and his counsel. That Decision was
issued November 17, 2017 and is incorporated herein, and is a basis for this
permitted to raise constitutional concerns, but expressly did not waive them,
8
and they are presented herein. See Denver Department of Parks and
Hearing for an Appeal, section G (An appellant may not base the
28. The 420 Rally and Miguel Lopez are singled out improperly
because of the City and Countys hostility and animus against the message;
who generate the legendary cloud of smoke every year, but who are
organization.
opposition to Mr. Lopezs message and the Mayors desire that the Rally be
http://www.westword.com/news/denver-4-20-rally-attempt-to-ban-it-would-
trigger-a-lawsuit-attorney-says-9005174
9
26. The Notice, and ensuing administrative hearing dealt with
violations, because the first three violations can only result in a warning and
fines. Then, on violations four and five, the penalty can constitute a
years of the same event on the same rough date. (For example, Cinco de
Mayo occurs on or around May 5, and has priority status, as does Earth Day,
28. After issuing its Notice letter and during the administrative
hearing process, the City abandoned its alleged violation for Noise,
patently duplicative, but which allowed the City to allege five different
separate violations to achieve its objective of shutting down the free speech
of Permittee.
10
29. Specific alleged violations were litigated extensively and
officer abused his discretion and upheld all of the alleged violations and
30. For example, with regard to noise, which the City first
identified as a violation, the City concedes in its letter that throughout the
event, all noise levels were within Denvers noise ordinance. (See Notice
staff in the Courthouse, which was located a few yards behind the main
stage of the event. The Notice Letter does not make clear when each of these
complaints was made, other than to say they were forwarded to the City on
April 21, 2017, the day after the event. Most importantly, the Notice Letter
concedes that the City did absolutely nothing to communicate with the Event
and its organizers or leadership about any alleged need to turn down the
volume, during the event or even days after. (See Notice Letter, page 4.)
11
31. The May 19, 2017 Notice Letter is the first time the City ever
claimed any alleged noise issue or complaint. Obviously, the Rally was
given no opportunity to cure on April 20, 2017, which is required before any
time and date, knew the size, placement, and volume of speakers and
amplified sound, knew exactly where the main stage and audience would be,
33. The City knew that the Rally would be hosting a professionally-
attendance throughout the day, and agreed with all of this. Event Production
staff Santino Walter and Mark Jordan repeatedly brought up with the City, in
preparation meetings, the issue of noise and the requirement that objective,
problems be provided.
which can only result in a fine, but not prohibition from applying nor loss of
12
priority status. This is a distinction that both Denver and its Hearing Officer
by Denver Parks and Recreation, Public Event Policy, adopted October 25,
follows:
the individual who holds the Permit, in this case Miguel Lopez, the
Denver Parks and Recreation, Public Event Policy, adopted October 25,
Event Permit from the Permitting Office, for the holding of an Event.)
37. Penalties under the Policy are very different for acts committed
13
penalties for the Permittee or any employees of the Permittee, up to a fifth
violation, which involves the three-year bar from the Event Permit.
Policy at 8.4.5, and even up to and including a sixth violation, can only
involve fines, not barring from the event, nor loss of Priority Status.
alleged violation incurred [sic] at the direction of the Permittee or with the
suspend the Rally, then attempts to concoct violations to fit this goal.
these facts or lack thereof, noise cannot constitute a violation. Thus, the City
cannot stack five Permittee violations, and cannot suspend the permit.
trash in Civic Center Park. The City does not allege that the Park was not
cleaned up, and does not allege that the City itself incurred any additional
expenses or other burdens, only that the alleged clean-up after an event
involving approximately 50,000 people, did not occur during the event.
14
41. The Park was 100% cleaned up. Within the Citys allotted time.
inconsistency. See Notice Letter at page 5. In fact, the Run of Show (page 91
the City in advance of the event, clearly shows that Extensive Park Clean
up Power washing, etc. was approved to occur on Friday, April 21, 2017
from 8:00am 5:00pm. Complete clean-up was finished many hours before
43. The Notice letter only identifies the timing of the clean-up as
somehow ineffective, not the ultimate result, which was that the 420 Rally
left Civic Center Park--once again--cleaner than the Rally received it.
Recreation, Public Event Policy, adopted October 25, 2016 8.4.4, 8.4.5.
Trash clean-up and removal was a contracted function with S&B Porta-bowl
attachments confirm.
15
45. There is no evidence that the Permittee, himself, did not clean
defines.
Beyond Boundary Ltd., the Event Staffing contractor, and the security
contractor each confirm that they had the respective required number of
staff, sometimes more than the minimum, at each entrance throughout the
event.
47. Fences that were knocked down during this popular event were
replaced quickly by the security company and the event staffing company.
Once again, in every event since 2013, the City demanded that all 50,000
Security and event staff detected and confiscated a firearm, and Police were
Long lines itself cannot be a violation, although the City and hearing officer
16
found, cannot add up to a stacked violation by the Permittee. See Denver
Parks and Recreation, Public Event Policy, adopted October 25, 2016
8.4.4, 8.4.5.
allegedly unlicensed. The City identifies eight out of 170 vendors at the
event.
51. Initially, all vendors certified they had all appropriate licenses
as a condition of load-in. Those vendors who did not were promptly closed
down and required to leave by Permittee Workers as soon as the issue was
any person occurred, nor is alleged to have occurred. There were no actual
17
Parks and Recreation, Public Event Policy, adopted October 25, 2016
8.4.4, 8.4.5. Thus, these cannot count towards a violation by the Permittee.
And they cannot constitute a substantial violation since the condition was
repeating the same issues in the Safety and Security category, i.e. blocked
that you also permitted your fencing to be knocked down into the adjacent
sidewalk. The Permittee did not permit any fencing to be knocked down.
Instead, fences were knocked down by unknown third parties, then picked
back up again, promptly, like with hundreds of other crowded events that
assisting with directions in and out of the event, managing the flow of the
contracted-for role, and received no direct complaints nor concerns from the
dozens of Police Officers and other officials present throughout the event,
and no complaints the day after during the official walk-through by Denver
officials.
18
57. The City includes as evidence of this fifth allegation, and the
not contain the time taken. One photograph shows three pedestrians in a
signs laying in the sidewalk, again without a time or date, or any indication
of how long they remained down. (See Notice at page 97.) Anyone could
knock over these small signs, and anyone could pick them up. They could
have been on the sidewalk for a matter of seconds. This is petty and cannot
truck loading port-o-lets in the street. (See Notice at page 98.) There is no
time on the photo. No traffic is seen. The photo was probably taken during
the permitted time of the event, which lasted until midnight April 21, 2017.
and another vehicle, with the caption that pedestrians are forced into the bike
lane. No pedestrians are seen in the photo. Filled black trash bags awaiting
pickup are in the photo. This photo was taken on April 21, 2017, when
19
media was directed by Denver to take pictures of trash during the permitted
clean-up effort.
regulation, rule, or policy. Mr. Lopez the Permittee followed all conditions
of the permit issued by the City of Denver to the fullest possible extent given
the fluid and crowded nature of this massive event. None of the alleged
harm to any actual person. None of the alleged acts were committed by the
Fourteenth Amendments)
20
abused its discretion in ignoring the important distinction between
3. The City denied Mr. Lopez his constitutional rights of freedom of speech,
speech.
ongoing and irreparable harm due to the Defendants conduct, and will
continue to suffer harm until which point the Defendants actions are
1. To review the lower judicial or quasi-judicial body and find that it abused its
21
3. To enter a declaratory judgment that the City abused its discretion and
violated the Plaintiffs constitutional and other rights when it assessed and
4. Any such further legal and equitable relief as the Court may deem just
22