First Amendment Face-off

This story about a small town public art controversy caught my attention for a few reasons. First there was the coincidence that the project involved a fellow Orange County Tourism grant recipient. Second was my curiosity about the controversy because I am currently involved in a project that will be displaying art publicly (YOUTH | ART). However the main reason it caught my attention was when I saw the photo of the art that was displayed on this privately owned building. It was quite tasteful and unoffensive. I found it hard to believe it was at the heart of a First Amendment battle.Melanie Gold, the recipient of the grant, did her due diligence before applying for the grant last April. She was told by local officials that there were no local ordinances saying she couldn't put art up on a privately owned building. She was met with resistance however when she invited the mayor to be on the jury deciding which artwork would be displayed. On November 1, 2010 the village board passed Local Law No. 2 of 2010, which ironically was scheduled to expire the same day that the grant would. The law stated “The creation and or display within the Village of Greenwood Lake of public art is prohibited."During the months that followed Ms. Gold challenged this law for several reasons. For starters, the art would be displayed on a private building. The art was hung and the building owner was fined and told to take it down. Ms. Gold filed a lawsuit accusing the village of violating her right to free speech and promulgating an unconstitutional and impossibly broad ban on artistic expression. Last week the lawsuit was settled out of court, and as a part of the stipulations, the VIllage agreed to rescind both violations served on the building's owner as a result of the art installation. They also agreed to rescind the art ban.Ironically, the latest story in the local paper had some inaccuracies. They misrepresented Ms. Gold as the artist of all the murals. The story also reported that Ms. Gold didn't have a formal plan in place when she approached the village board. The project did evolve over the past year, but it evolved from a plan that was presented and approved by the grants committee and had tremendous support from a large majority of local community members including business owners, and residents. Maybe the paper felt it was their right to free speech to report it that way.Sources:The New York TimesPR News WireTimes Herald Record