Amanda Fritz has indeed brought forward her amendment—dropping a "free speech exception" to the sit-lie law, because...well...I'm going to let her explain it:

"Anybody can stand in the pedestrian zone," said Fritz. "The key thing is, if anybody wants to sit to do a freedom of expression, they do so in the other area."

I'm not an expert in constitutional law, but I understood that sitting down, you know, is considered a quintessential act of free expression in this country.

Arwen Bird from Fritz's own Human Rights Commission even came to council, presenting a letter from the commission saying it's against the law.

"We believe the ordinance infringes on human rights and we cannot support it," she said. "We believe that the title and focus of the ordinance does not accurately represent the intent of the ordinance. It unintentionally pits communities against each other."

"Appreciate your testimony," said Mayor Sam Adams.

"We find many places in the Universal Declaration of human rights that we felt were violated by this ordinance," Bird continued.

"Did you look at the budget?" Adams responded—saying the City of Portland spends more on homeless services than any other jurisdiction, once again. He didn't respond to the part about human rights.

"Can you tell me what you think those human rights violations are?" said Fritz.

"Well, coming from the Native American community we experience the highest rates of homelessness and bias," said another HRC member, Donita Fry. "And all of those things that lead us to be in the streets. Overall the ordinance doesn't get at the root of what causes people to be present on the sidewalks."

"You're kicking people to the curb," said Joe Walsh. "So when you go home tonight don't look in the mirror and say you did the best you could. Because you didn't. This is wrong."

"If you're going to use the ADA act as a smokescreen for this ordinance," said Dale Hardway. "Our plan will be: Under the ADA act, there are no exceptions for any stationary objects. That means sidewalk cafes, newspaper boxes. So every time we see a sidewalk cafe set up, or a hotel kiosk, we're filing a Federal ADA camplaint. It's going to cost the city a lot of money. Don't use this as a smokescreen. It's wrong."

"Thanks for your testimony," said Adams. "Appreciate it."

"Jesus had a brother and his name was James and he's made some remarks in regard to this issue," said Pastor Ken Lloyd. "My brothers, don't show favoritism. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes, then you are showing favoritism. This is unfair, you are showing favoritism. And my God says you are sinning."

"So there's no way we could try to manage the many competing uses of the sidewalk without sinning?" said Adams.

"I would as long as it were fairly applied to all classes of society. But right now the laws will be applied against homeless people," Lloyd responded.

"Let's cut through the doublespeak and get to the point," said Trillium Shannon, a community radio producer at KBOO. "This is about targeting poor people. I don't have faith in the police being trained to enforce this ordinance without bias. I'm hearing that this is a tool for the annual sweeps to get homeless folks out of sight for the annual Rose Festival."

"I'm Jacob and I'm currently homeless in the state of Portland," said Jacob. "And I've noticed that the police have recently been coming by at 5:30 in the morning playing obnoxious music and waking us up."

"So this hearing is on the specific sidewalk ordinance," said Adams.

GEIGLE-TELLER

"Getting cited under this ordinance could mean getting wiped off public housing lists," said Chani Geigle-Teller with Sisters of the Road. She asked for a sunset clause on the ordinance.

"Speaking of exemption you raise the issue that sidewalk cafes are given more right to be in public spaces than people," she continued. "People get one warning, sidewalk cafes get three. Like Mayor Adams, we want to wok on solutions."

"Recently you asked me in an email, mayor, what I would do, and my response included using existing laws, and your response to me was much about the good work you have done on affordable housing. To me, it doesn't equate," said Monica Beemer, Excecutive Director of Sisters of The Road. "The good works we do does not justify doing something that goes against human rights. We must stop targeting homeless people, and I am proud of our community for always saying no to the violence of these laws."

"It seems wrong to use the ADA to target these people, and the inconsistency of targeting people and not businesses," said Beemer. "We have to stop saying this is about the sidewalks being safe. The Oregonian doesn't seem confused about what this is about. They say it's about stopping people from panhandling, and that's wrong."

"I think of Sisters as like the ACLU, like a lot of groups that put a firm marker at the outer edges of the discussion to force a discussion of the issue," said Fish. "But I think that in the end we share the battles."

At this point, Fish left, leaving only two members of council, which is not a quorum, to listen to the testimony:

"Commissioner Fritz's own Human Rights Commission does support this ordinance," said Dan Handelman from Portland Copwatch.

"It's an Independent Human Rights Commission it's not mine," said Fritz.

"It's under your jurisdiction," said Handelman.

"No it's not," Fritz shot back.

Er...

"I also think that if anybody wants to sit in the middle of the sidewalk and say they disapprove of this ordinance, they should be allowed to," said Handleman. "This will be declared unconstitutional, I guarantee it."

"Referencing your own commitments to housing, it does not allow you to buy off people's human rights," Handelman continued. "When a parent says you ungrateful child, look, I cook, I clean, I do all these things for you, now you're in trouble, that's how this feels."

"No it isn't," said Adams. "There is an absence of acknowledgement from folks who have advocated on these issues, about the bigger picture. It's the absence of looking at the totality of our efforts. That's what this is about."

"I wanted to pick up on the way that you guys have targeted the Arizona law," said Rebecca Lewis. "I think that this law is very similarly designed, I think it targets a marginalized community and it's going to be similarly targeted against that community, and I think that's a civil rights issue."

"I was hoping to hear that you are open to persuasion and that you haven't already made up your minds," said Patrick Nolen, with Soapbox Under the Bridge.

"You could change my mind with the quality of your argument, Patrick," said Adams. "Not with buzzwords, not with slogans, not with yelling."

"Well it worries me that Commissioner Saltzman is not here to hear my testimony, and he is probably going to vote on this," Nolen continued. "And this seems right here like an organization that has already made up its mind, and has already decided what's going to happen. As far as the six month wait is concerned, let's get rid of that. I want to go out, sit on the sidewalk, get a ticket, we can challenge it, and get it over with."

"I don't understand why the homeless have to hang around on the sidewalks of downtown Portland and to do drugs," said Lloyd Minton. "My complaints are with the kids and the dogs, and whether they're drug addicted or not, I don't feel like they're using the sidewalks as a place to rest. I feel like they have their own agenda."

"I really encourage you to have a sunset provision in this ordinance," said ACLU of Oregon legislative director Andrea Meyer. "It forces an uncomfortable conversation and public accountability."

"I'm distressed at removing the free speech and assembly provision removed," she continued, adding that cops in un-permitted protest situations could now come in and arrest people for sitting on sidewalks.

Appropriately enough, Dan Saltzman phoned in his vote. Well, he tried to, but it didn't quite work out the first time. He clicked the phone a few times, and then a blaring ringtone sounded throughout the chamber. He voted "aye" and then hung up.

"Thank you all for engaging in this," said Fritz. "I think this a reasonable ordinance. I appreciate the concerns. What this does is this legalizes the right to sit and lie on the sidewalk. If they're sitting in a place where they're allowed to sit, they can be there as long as they want."

Then, Fritz read out a positive letter on the ordinance from the Julia West House, which gets a load of money from the Portland Business Alliance.

"I want to thank everyone who has participated in this great debate," said Nick Fish. "And I want to assure you that I have considered carefully, all the points of view. I believe that this proposal is a common sense and balanced ordinance to regulate competing uses on the sidewalks."

"I would not be a party to any ordinance which targets any group including the homeless," Fish continued. "I spent 20 years as a civil rights lawyer and I'd never support anything like that."

"This is not sit-lie 2, 3, 4, or 5," he said. "To call it sit-lie is to draw the focus away from what this ordinance tries to do."

"How could I be dedicated to criminalizing homelessness?" asked Fish. "I do not believe this is about homelessness, one way or the other."

"I'm satisfied that this is constitutional," Fish said. "And if someone wants to challenge it in court, I'll live with whatever ruling the court makes."

"I really do appreciate the testimony," said Adams. "Our job is to fairly manage the public realm and that's what we're attempting to do here. Aye."

It passes four nothing.

Nick Fish took a $10 bet with me that the ordinance would be declared unconstitutional in six months. He even shook hands on it, after the hearing. "Can we do this? Is it legal?" he asked.

Probably about as legal as this ordinance, Commissioner...