By Christian Mignot

Los Altos

The Los Altos City Council announced last week that it will appeal a court order that temporarily bans the city from enforcing part of a city law prohibiting day laborers from soliciting work from along El Camino Real.

U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel issued a partial preliminary injunction Aug. 2 to stop Los Altos police from ticketing day laborers who stand on city sidewalks seeking employment until a lawsuit challenging the No Vehicle Solicitation ordinance is settled in court. Part of his decision kept intact the section of the ordinance, which forbids motorists from pulling over to pick up employees in designated no-solicitation zones.

Mayor Francis La Poll after a closed session last week instructed city attorneys to appeal the judge’s decision.

Local day workers and the Society of St. Vincent de Paul sued the city Feb. 20, hoping that the city would repeal its anti-solicitation law. Workers claim the law violates their free speech rights.

Fogel ruled the city has the right to limit speech if the restrictions are “content-neutral and reasonably restrict the time, place and manner of the speech.” Limitations must also be tailored narrowly to serve a significant governmental interest.

Fogel concluded that the Los Altos ordinance burdens more speech than necessary to further the significant governmental interests identified by the city: to ensure traffic safety by banning vehicles from stopping and to stop the disruption of businesses by day workers.

A person could be standing on the sidewalk with a sign reading “safely and legally park around the corner if you need a worker” and the ordinance could apply to them, the judge said. Such a restriction would then not have anything to do with enhanced traffic safety or business prosperity.

Fogel also suggested that a business which posted a sign on the sidewalk encouraging passing motorists to stop and patronize it could also be subject to the ordinance.

Anna Erickson White, attorney for Morrison & Foerster representing the Workers Commission and the St. Vincent de Paul Society, said the legal argument based on the First Amendment may prove the most important factor in any final decision.

Joan Gallo, attorney for Realty Law LLP representing the council along with City Attorney Marc Hynes, disagreed with claims the ordinance violated the First Amendment.

“We feel very strongly that the city is correct in the ways they are approaching the issue of traffic safety with the ordinance,” she said.