CTOSEUP ilA]IHATTAII

Phob by Sis

Rodericl

The Naumburg Bandshell in Central Park: The Supreme Court will hear a case betw;en the city and rock musicians over sound mixing at the amphitheater.

for DisputeHeads D.C. Bandshell

burg Bandshell in Central Park will be the subject of arguments on Feb. 27 before the U.S. Supreme Court. Attorneys will debate whether park regulations that require musicians to use a city employee and a city-omed sound mixer viollte the Flrst Amendment right to free expression. The case began in 1986 when Rock Against Racism challenged city regulations that required all performers using the Naumburg Bandshell to use the Parks Department's sound system, a mixing board, and sound technician. Rock Against Racism, an amalgam of local musical groups and artists, has been performing at the bandshell since 1979. Comedienne Whoopie Goldberg has performed for the gtoup, and so has singer MichelleShocked,and the groups Stepasonics, the Dead Kennedys, and DOA (Deadon Arrival). The city's intent, Parks Commissioner Henry Stern said, was to regulate noise in the area of the band-

is Sound :L'ff:[FW:',1i11***, system at issue

shell. It's in an area near residential buildingr and during concerts, some noise spills over to quieter areasofCentralParksuchasSheep Meadow, a designated quiet zone. City attorneys had ar!,ued that 60 percent of the l3 million people that visit Central Park annually go there for quiet relaxation and not loud music, court papers said. The bandshell, at 72nd Street and Fifth Avenue, is an amphitheaterthatcanseatuptoS,O0o. Itis the most frequently used park facility in the city, court papers said. Musicians said they considered the regulation a violation of their right to expression because sound mixing is an artistic freedom- To be forcedtouseacityemployeewhohas control of volume and sound is to give up that freedom, they said. "The sound engineeris an audio artist," said Bob Auld, a trumpet player for the Johnny Colon Orchestra. "He uses the mixing board to create a sound, an expression. Yes, this regrrlation is inhibiting artistic expression." "It's a horrendous overreaching by the government," said Dana Beal, one of the sponsors of Rock Against Racism. Not so, countered Strn. "This is a case of assault by soundwave. We're here to dissent and protect the esrs of the public from high decilrel assault by rock mongers." tn f987, the cse went to U.S. District Court. The court ruled in favor ofthe city. But inJune, 1988, the 2nd U.S. Cirorit Court of Appeals ruled in favor ofRock Against Racism. In October, the Supreme Court agreedto hear the case. "In the highlysubjective realm of music, legitimate regulation of' noise levels does not justify standardization," the appeals court said. "The required use of the city's system and technician forces each performer and sponsor to lilter its

sound quality, tone, mix and other aesthetic factors through the city's technician and sound system." Leonard J. Koerner, appealschief for the city's Office of Corporation Counsel, and William Kunstler, attorney for Rock Against Racism, will argue the case. "It's a significant case," Kunstler said, "because the city wants to put the pow er of cutti ng off Firs t Amendment rights to a city employee. It's like having a government employee ststioned by the newspaper printing presses who can turn off the presses whenever he saw something he'didn't like." To Koerner however, the Parks Department reached a compromise when it imposed the regrlations on use of a city sound system. "To our point of view, you have to control the mix and the sound because if you don't do that, you won't be assured that the concert won't alfect [the neighborhood]," he said. "Pulling the plug is not a viable alternative," he said. "We believe it's much better if everyone knows in advancethe ground rules."

z m
@

I I @

z
c

E E