Man in Klan robe prompts L.A. council to walk out, weigh limitation on public comments

Los Angeles City Council chambers went dark early today after an African American man wearing the distinctive white robe and hood of the Ku Klux Klan tested the limits of his 1st Amendment rights — and council members' patience — by refusing to remove his hood while addressing the council.

It was at least the second day that Michael Hunt, who recently challenged the city’s vending ordinance in federal court as a violation of his rights, had worn the outfit to the meeting, leading council members to seek advice from the city attorney about their legal options.

Hunt submitted a card to speak during the standard public comment period and was called to the microphone by Councilman Dennis Zine, who was presiding officer.

“Mr. Hunt, you’re going to have to remove your hood,” Zine told Hunt twice. “Are you refusing to remove your hood? ... Mr. Hunt, we can’t hear you. Remove your hood.”

“No, this is part of my 1st Amendment privileges,” Hunt replied. Zine turned to the lawyer who sits on the dais to advise members during meetings.

“His getup that he’s wearing arguably has some 1st Amendment protection as symbolic speech, as distasteful and misguided as it is,” Deputy City Atty. Dion O'Connell said.  “However, it’s not an issue of anonymous speech because he’s taken his hood on and off throughout the meeting. If his wearing that causes a disruption, then he could be told to remove it.”

By that point, a number of council members had forced the adjournment of the meeting by leaving the chamber in protest. They included Councilman Greig Smith and the chamber’s three African American members: Bernard C. Parks, Jan Perry and Herb Wesson.

Council President Eric Garcetti rose to state for the record that Hunt could keep the hood on. “I want to say as a human being, I wish you wouldn’t have it on, but that is your right to keep it on. We did lose quorum because council members left, so we do not have public comment, we do not have a meeting right now.”

Later Garcetti said the council had a “very narrowly tailored policy that is one of widest ones, I would say in the country — we definitely err toward the side of free speech.”

Perry said she couldn’t bear to look at Hunt. Parks called the display offensive. “This person has used the N-word in the past, and that has led to the council changing its rules,” Parks said. “No one who is in attendance, at home watching on Channel 35 or online should be subjected to his indiscretion.”

Wesson said he and Smith are working on a policy to tighten the rules on decorum in the council chambers, possibly by adopting a more rigid policy like that of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

The interchange with Hunt, Wesson said, may have accelerated that process. “Whenever I see that, it send chills down my spine and then to have it worn by him is triply offensive. How could an African American in his right mind use that just to attract attention,” Wesson said. “Over the next 24 hours, I will be having discussions with whoever I can to find out legally just how much flexibility we have, because I would prefer to never see that again in my life.”

In April, a federal jury awarded Hunt $264,000 after he sued the city challenging its vending ordinance. The city has filed an appeal. Hunt could not immediately be reached for comment.

-- Maeve Reston

Comments

[marcia]

It certainly is offensive but what I don't get is, this is not the first time Hunt has done this. He's done it at least several times before and those times didn't prompt the same response.

Those times Garcetti reacted as he does now. There was a flap about this a year or two ago when a councilman I think it was Weiss the attorney said that wearing masks was not a protected right when it was meant to be offensive or because it could mask the identity of the person including a terrorist. In that case I believe it was also Hunt involved, and also Zuma Dogg who wore a mask -- but everyone knew who they were like here. But no one made a stand on it then so they kept doing it -- Hunt and another regular commenter have worn T-shirts with the "N" word on them to which Garcetti just said the same thing he does here.

So is it just that this time the KKK outfit went too far? What's different this time?

[Obtuse]

Seems like he's just doing what some politicians and AM radio commentators like to do: Being a professional idiot by deliberately taking a position that will rile up people.

[Johan]

As disturbing and offensive as this citizen's display is, we venture into very dark waters when we censure freedom of expression rights in any way.

Oddly enough, I am proud both of Council President Garcetti for his mature remarks and of the Councilmembers who left chambers in protest to deny the meeting quorum. They did exactly the right thing to prevent an expression of free speech from derailing the meeting. Their right to react that way was the perfect counter to the grossly insulting wardrobe choice of this man.

[B. Roughan]

This might have been an interesting article if it actually elaborated on what this man's intentions were for wearing the robe, or what his history with the council or vending laws originally were... Instead, readers get 12 paragraphs of how outraged the council was and nothing about the man in the robe. Where's the substance L.A. Times?

[Sean]

This has to be the most biased story ever written. It tells absolutely nothing about why he's doing it, leaving the readers to judge him totally upon this one facet; really irresponsible journalism. I think it's great what he's doing because he obviously has a valid reason for it, given that he's already been awarded a quarter million in a prior lawsuit. Don't believe the hype!! Undoubtedly the council had it coming!

[808townie]

I've said it a thousand times before and it'll be said a thousand times later - you can't have it both ways.

Either Free Speech is upheld or (and in the case of most liberal organizations) a whitewashed form of fascism is adopted - a.k.a. You're free to believe or say anything you wish, as long as you totally agree with us.

How many 'shout downs' have Pro-Lifers had to suffer? Or traditional marriage proponents? Labeled and pigeon-holed as a "hater".

I don't agree with either positions - but either they have the right to voice their opinions or not. But don't sit around playing the freedom card when it's nothing more to the Liberals but a cardboard charade meant to quell genuine dissent.

No, Mr. Hunt - you don't live in America. You live in Amerika*.

*Liberals Only, Thank You.

[LAmanners]

Council Members failed the diversity test for sure.

The reality is, Concil members don't want diversity, they want people who think, act and dress just like them.

I reject that. if you live by diversity, then you should be prepared to die by it.

[luz]

Zine should have shut his mouth and left it to the Acting City Attorney and Council president Garcetti to determine based on precedent and the law. he shouldn't have shot his mouth off as usual without thinking. He's really filled with himself now that he's the BFF of the new City Attorney Trutanich and I hope he didn't cost the city another lawsuit.

The behavior is totally offensive but there are complicated issues that seem to have gone on unresolved for some time, where does he come off shooting his mouth off when both the city attorney and Garcetti have different opinions and they're educated in nuance and he's shown no ability or patience for it ever. Zine is a liability.

[ronald Orf]

At the next board meeting some white people should show up in KKK garb and use the "N word" at will. Wonder how THAT will play out? Does anyone know how this annoying ,self-centered, time-consuming jerk was awarded$264,000? I have a feeling I will not like it. You know what? We do have a right to DEMAND a certain amount of decorum in public meetings. Would we be infringing on his rights if we kicked him out of a library for this type of behavior?

[Billyist]

If he was asked to leave his free speech rights weren't violated.

His rights are only violated if he faces legal repercussions. Was he arrested? fined? attacked? No, he was told to leave because he was causing a disruption.

Look, I'm a liberal and I'm for free speech, but the fact of the matter is, free speech wasn't violated here. I think a lot of people misinterpret 'free speech' as 'I can say/wear/express anything at any time!' When it's really 'The government/law can't make any laws to stop me from saying/wearing/expressing anything at anytime."

[Jack Nothing]

Is this clown's name really Mike Hunt? Really? That's too funny. Somebody should call Louis Deutsch and ask for this guy. You people ought to lighten up a bit.

[The Answer]

Just because one can do something in this country does not mean that it should be done. I'm sure there was a point to Mr. Hunt's seemingly ridiculous actions, which the Times makes no effort to bring to light, but really, is it a constructive way to make a point? Instead, he just distanced himself further from the decision-makers, alienating himself and the issues he wishes to address. Too bad.

[RON]

GOOD FOR HIM

[Elbis]

That's got to be a pseudonym. I wonder what his REAL name is. C'mon - "Mike Hunt" Very funny!

[Mark from Torrance, CA]

How about you write a little more about what the city’s vending ordinance is? Wouldn't that make this a better article?

[Leroy]

He wore his outfit to get attention. Let us address his issue. The city was at fault. The City's action caused him to wear the outfit. The City department owes the Council an apology for causing Hunt to take such measures.

[Richard]

Darn that pesky First Amendment huh Liberals? All the times it allows you to bash conservatives and true American values to your hearts content and yet it still allows for people who don't think like you to have their say too. Maybe you need to rewrite it so you don't have to put up with us free thinking people.

[B. Roughan]

I really like how somebody can so easily politicize free speech into the Liberal Conservative status quo... Darn those Ancient Greeks with all their Rush Limbaugh's and Janeane Garofalo diatribes. I'm glad we are moving forward instead of back.

[Da Maverick]

Wow...well I have to admire Eric Garcetti for not letting a little white robe shake his foundation.

The three council members who were shaken up and ended up walking out I think tells a lot about the spineless leadership our fellow citizens have elected to office.

As for Mr. Hunt, congrats, you wanted your cheap stunt to garner you some attention, now you got it, hope you choke on it.

[slamscott]

And what does Mr. Hunt say? The article suggests the reporter didn't even try to find out. Given that Mr. Hunt is black, I'm goinig to assume his point is someting other than you would first expect of someone wearing Klan robes?

There was an article last week about a Wisconsin Marine vet who flew a U.S. flag upside down in protest of being denied a liqour license till the police forcibly took it down as an offense. And so it was, but certainly my opinion of his act, changed knowing he was Iraq war veteran who had done more in the name of that flag than most.

I am going to assume this reporter is saving that level of detail for a later story.

[Foxy LA Lady]

What a horrible man. This man was nothing but a government provocateur looking for one more payday. Who would do such a thing? He must be mentally ill or on drugs.

[Zuma Dogg]

This was a stunt on council's part. They could have turned backs, or even left room and gone in back area, out of chambers, but would have maintained the quorum. However, by leaving and breaking the quorum, NOW, city council will say it is causing a "disruption" to the meeting, since councilmembers are leaving. However, it is allowed under first amendment as City Attorney stated, except if it is considered a "disruption" (disruptive BEHAVIOR) they can claim to prevent it. However, just because they left does not mean it was disruptive behavior.

THE MAIN PROBLEM, besides handing the power over to the guy in the hood, is that city business was left on the table; a lot of agenda items went without being voted on; and a lot of people who already waited over two and a half hours to speak, didn't get to speak at all.

Yes, it's insidious to do what he did, but council has to represent their constituents FIRST and always and they should have turned backs, not shut down the city.

HOW MUCH DID THE STUNT JUST COST, AND IT IS A STUNT BECAUSE IF THEY DIDN'T WANT TO SEE IT THEY COULD HAVE TURNED BACKS OR EVEN WALKED OUT OF ROOM. DID NOT HAVE TO CANCEL BUSINESS.

[Zealot]

Interesting that he should dress like this. The Klan was a creation of the Democratic Party. An absolute majority of blacks currently belong to the Democratic Party. So, he is being historically accurate even though some find it offensive.

[Timray]

too funny Mr. Hunt!!!!

[steve rodriguez]

I guess that Mr. Hunt feels like a "victim" and loves to play the "race card!"

[sailbyme]

Do these people represent themselves or the people of the districts of which they were elected? They have become why too taken with themselves. I say we get rid of them and try new ones.

[steve rodriguez]

What would have happened if Mr. Hunt were a white man?
There is such double standard when it comes to racism in America, any person of any race can be a racist!!!

[Peter]

A black man wearing a KLAN ROBE - THE ULTIMATE SYMBOL OF BLACK HATRED AND WHITE 'SUPREMACY' ?

Talk about insult upon injury. I don't his point here..........what was his point ?

[Marcos El Malo]

I am shocked and amazed at the insensitivity shown by the council towards the Southern Culture of Real America™. The real victims here are Ordinary Americans™ like you, me, and Sarah Palin.

He said tongue in cheek.

The fine line between tragedy and comedy for Mike Hunt is whether he adopted a pseudonym or if that is his real name.

[Matt Dowd [co Plaintiff with Hunt]]

Hunt is African American. He was selling African shea butter at Venice Beach, and refused to obtain or enter the 'permit' system, invented by CM Tom LeBonge of Parks and Rec.
LAPD arrested and jailed him numerous times, created legal consequences for Hunt, all based on a City ordinance found to be ILLEGAL by a federal judge.
Basically the police would kidnap him off the beach for the weekend and let him out on Monday. We sued, the City ignored, repudiated, even laughed off our lawsuit as a joke. The federal judge never ever once cut us loose or indicated that we were wrong. In fact, after three years of the City attorney dragging out this case omg, the judge gave Hunt a jury who awarded $268,000. Then the City balked at the attorney fees of 296,000 that we had accumulated over 2 years of them dragging the issue. The judge now just awarded us 207,000 in fees. Just last week. But thats not the real issue, the real issue is that after all this time, and all this money, Hunt sees the City settle an identical lawsuit in the same court, but settled with white plaintiffs. He firmly believes this is an African issue, over african shea butter, the City refuses to concede or even negotiate. it is blatant discrimination, one way or another, the guy even obtained a permit and has been back at the beach recently. Most people have no idea what kind of crazy rules that this City tries to impose on these 'expressive activities' at the beach. The problem is that there's no equal enforcement, and no officers when you really need them, but they're up in your face sometimes for no good reason over some petty no issue thing.
There was a 9th circuit appeal court ruling only very recently in a Seattle case, that indicated that these 'permit' systems for free speech are illegal. Now I can see permits issued for vending, but this City ties all the performers and vendors together in a lottery, and many performers lose to downtown 'vendors' who bring mothing expressive to the beach. City council has dug themself a very deep hole, and as you can see, theres KKK at the bottom of it. what do they expect down there?
and yes, his real name is Michael Hunt. look up 'not allowed to say Mike Hunt' on Youtube and you'll see me making fun of City Council with his name. until I was ordered not to say his name as Mike Hunt!!??? the ACLU is on this now, because we already went through all this nonsense a couple years back. but as I said, the hood is back because the case should have ended. oh, and yesterday they voted in even more insanity when they 'tweaked' the vending ordinance yet again.

[Matt Dowd [co Plaintiff with Hunt]]

here'
s another video of police interacting with HUnt.
this is reality, but it should be a Monty Python sketch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Gi-qHg_tgw&feature=related

the birdseed arrest.

"if any of those seeds hit anyone, it could be considered battery" : LAPD

[Adam Villani]

Ha ha, very funny about the Democrats, Mr. Zealot. Either you just woke up from a 45-year nap and are completely ignorant of the last few decades of history, or you're conveniently forgetting that it was the Democratic Party under LBJ that pushed the Civil Rights Act through and the GOP that adopted --- and has continued to run on --- the explicitly racist "Southern Strategy" to appeal to white resentment by opposing civil rights.