Saratoga Black Lives Matter leader Lex Figuereo was ticketed in May for failing to file the declaration required by the city for groups holding demonstrations. This prompted a variety of responses from BLM supporters, including the New York State Attorney General’s office. The Capital District Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) organized a demonstration objecting to Figuereo’s ticketing. The AG’s office sent a menacing note to the city, bizarrely elevating the filing of a simple form to somehow violating Lex Figuereo’s freedom of speech.
All those who have objected to Figuereo’s ticketing share a fundamental misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the declaration (for a start, it’s not a permit) and how the city responded. In an attempt to set the record straight, Saratoga Springs Public Safety Commissioner Tim Coll wrote the following letter that appeared in Saratoga Today.
Letter to Editor Saratoga Today:
I am reaching out directly to all Saratogians to explain what has occurred with the recent issuance of Appearance Tickets related to Saratoga BLM. The Appearance Tickets were issued because the primary organizer of two BLM demonstrations failed to file demonstration declarations.
DEMONSTRATION DECLARATION
The City of Saratoga Springs requires by Code that any group planning to demonstrate must file a document called a “demonstration declaration.” There is no fee for the declaration and this requirement was established by the City in 2005.
The purpose of the declaration is to provide a way for the Department of Public Safety to work cooperatively with groups organizing demonstrations to ensure that the demonstrators and the public can be safe. As an example, two groups wanted to demonstrate in the same area during the Belmont Festival so alternative locations were provided and agreed upon.
This declaration process is administered by the Accounts Department, and each declaration, if completed properly, is approved. In 2024, the following organizations have filed demonstration declarations that were approved; Saratoga Peace Alliance, Jewish Federation, Horseracing Wrongs, and CSEA. Therefore, the only organization that has refused to comply with this ordinance, thus far in 2024, is Saratoga BLM.
APPEARANCE TICKETS
It should be noted that the issuance of an Appearance Ticket is not a custodial arrest. No person was placed into custody, handcuffed, or processed. The Appearance Tickets were served upon Mark Mischler who is representing the leader of Saratoga BLM.
It should also be noted that the pre-planned, non-violent, protests were not interrupted. In fact, the SSPD took appropriate actions to keep the demonstrators safe when they blocked traffic on the streets in Saratoga Springs.
I want to be clear that I strongly agree with the issuance of the tickets because not doing so would be a violation of the Constitutional Right to Equal Protection, in violation of the 14th Amendment. More specifically, we should not treat Saratoga BLM differently than the Jewish Federation or Horse Racing Wrongs or any other group. As noted, doing so would be a violation of the 14th Amendment and a violation of the basic tenet of unbiased policing.
Saratoga Springs Politics 
John,
I hope you can publish my response to this press release with the caveat that I sit in the middle on this issue for a variety of reasons.
First, the requirement in city code that one must file paperwork with the city to declare the act of demonstrating is a clear violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment. It is not unusual for legislative bodies to pass unconstitutional laws, and most are usually not enforced and not tested in court. I believe this law will be completely struck down if this goes to court. The intentional act of passing laws that are clearly unconstitutional with the intent of drawing sides into a court battle, and then trying to influence the courts is a serious national security issue and people who conspire to engage in this practice should be mindful of the possibility of sanction.
Other groups who file demonstration declarations are engaging in the act of setting an example of what they believe to be the lawful course of action. This does not have any bearing on the constitutionality of the city statute in question.
Tim Coll is known to me as a responsible person who, on the whole, is doing an excellent job in office. However, his test of this law I believe to be too antagonistic to our residents and a dubious strategic move.
Sincerely,
Sam Brewer
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sam, have you brought this up to the City Council? If it is an unconstitutional requirement, then there should be standing for it to be dismantled.
Also, you stated “the requirement in city code that one must file paperwork with the city to declare the act of demonstrating is a clear violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment.”
Out of curiosity, do you have the same feeling towards the requirement for Saratoga County residents to file paperwork in order to purchase a pistol?
LikeLike
I am familiar with firearms law. I have feelings toward firearms you may not quite understand, in that I think we over-emphasize the danger of firearms and understate the dangers of other risks.
I do not think that tracking, serial numbers, or permitting are Constitutional. The Federal Laws that ‘prohibit possession’ of firearms are generally okay, yet too broad. The Supreme Court has recently ruled that non-violent felons can possess.
The question is who can be prohibited and how can that prohibition be enforced? In general, one who has impulse control issues that have led to violent felony in the past should be prohibited from possession, or perhaps those going through an acrimonious divorce or domestic split can be temporarily prohibited (because of the astronomical risk during these events).
I think we have a serious problem in that the mental health apparatus has become a state espionage tool in that all health care providers are required by law to report the suspicion that people may be violent, which can lead to administrative action against the reported person who has committed no crime.
I support raising the age of possession of a firearm (without direct supervision) to 21 years of age.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For some reason, I can’t reply to your most recent comment…
I agree that there should be some reasonable regulations on the Second Amendment.
So I believe there should also be some reasonable regulations on the First Amendment, i.e. requiring groups to submit a demonstration declaration prior to demonstrating.
The City needs to be aware of large gatherings so they can properly protect the people involved and do things like close streets, etc.
If a group chooses not to follow this regulation (or if a person chooses not to register their firearm), there should be consequences.
LikeLike
If the Attorney General has a problem with the requirement that groups of demonstrators numbering more than 25 must register with the City or the requirement that parades or special events such as those that involve shutting down or blocking City streets must have a permit from the City, she should directly address those associated City ordinances. BLM activists should be subjected to the same standards as any other group. They should not expect to be treated differently. The Attorney General, of all people, should know better.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anyone can demonstrate at any time in Saratoga Springs without having to register with the City as long as they are individuals or small groups of 24 or less. In my opinion, it is entirely reasonable that larger groups (25 or more) would have to register.
Chris Mathiesen
LikeLike