To The Editor:

I respectfully disagree with Jim Gaston’s “Facts First” letter (July 31, 2025), which mischaracterizes calls to simply explore a unified event permitting ordinance appropriate for Newtown. The consummate litigator, his “facts first” trope obscures the merit of even considering a practical solution to address public safety and fairness.

His dismissal of Danbury’s ordinance as “unconstitutional” is unfounded and hyperbolic. The Supreme Court’s Ward v. Rock Against Racism is but one of many cases that supports content-neutral restrictions, as Danbury’s policy demonstrates. Too long for this letter, several other cases were listed in my comments to the Council which can be found in their minutes. The ACLU has rightly challenged overreaching permitting processes but also encourages event organizers to comply with lawful, content neutral permitting. Are the fragmented processes for Fairfield Hills and our Parks also unconstitutional?

If Mr Gaston believes Danbury’s ordinance to be unconstitutional, why not challenge it pro bono to protect free speech for those in Danbury? Where is the Danbury Area Justice Network and those “defending democracy”? Do they not believe Danbury residents deserve the same Free Speech access as Mr Gaston and his neighbors?

Laws should be consistently applied, therefore the DTC Chair’s observation that Danbury’s ordinance is infrequently enforced may be the real problem, suggesting potential viewpoint discrimination by their administration.

Mr Gaston downplays business owners’ concerns about parking and traffic disruptions, claiming they’ve been addressed. Not having an objective and consistent policy relies on the organizers to anticipate concerns or react after the fact. This is not fair to our residents and businesses. A permitting ordinance could lay out clear expectations and ensure organizers cover private-duty policing, balancing fiscal responsibility with free expression, regardless of what movement they are for.

Blaming the first selectman betrays a partisan agenda, as evident in the Newtown Democrat’s post celebrating Gaston’s letter. Critics fault the first selectman for asking the Council, Newtown’s legislative body, to look into a process, but if the roles were reversed and it were a right-wing protest, who believes they would not be the first to castigate him for inaction if he didn’t? The Legislative Council’s refusal to explore an ordinance sidestepped due diligence, ignoring solutions that could address overcrowding and enhance safety. Newtown’s fragmented permitting processes remain inefficient, pushing organizers to streets over safer venues. As another local attorney said to me, “I’m shocked we didn’t already have one.”

A transparent subcommittee review could craft a balanced ordinance, protecting constitutional rights while addressing safety and costs. Newtown deserves better than divisive rhetoric. Residents deserve a fair, unified process that serves our entire community, regardless of who is organizing an event.

Ryan Knapp

Sandy Hook