You are on page 1of 206

Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: 10797434, DktEntry: 8-2, Page 1 of 206

NO. 17-35897
__________________________________

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE
NINTH CIRCUIT
___________________________________________

AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE INITIATIVE;
PAMELA GELLER; AND ROBERT SPENCER,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

V.

KING COUNTY,
Defendant-Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
______________________________________________________________________________

EXCERPTS OF RECORD VOLUME II
______________________________________________________________________________

ROBERT JOSEPH MUISE, ESQ. DAVID YERUSHALMI, ESQ.
AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER
P.O. BOX 131098 2020 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48113 SUITE 189
(734) 635-3756 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
(646) 262-0500
Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: 10797434, DktEntry: 8-2, Page 2 of 206

INDEX TO EXCERPTS OF RECORD

Volume I

Order Granting King County’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment entered November 2, 2017
(Doc. 75) ...................................................................................................... 1-9

Volume II

Notice of Appeal filed November 2, 2017 (Doc. 76) ........................................ 10-11

Exhibit 1: Declaration of Pamela Geller with Exhibits filed March 7, 2017
(Doc. 56-1) ............................................................................................... 12-23

Exhibit A: FBI “Most Wanted Terrorists” List .................................... 24-27

Exhibit B: Twenty-Eight Terrorists Listed by the FBI......................... 28-29

Exhibit C: Rewards for Justice “Wanted for Terrorism” List .............. 30-32

Exhibit D: Definition of “Jihad” ........................................................... 33-34

Exhibit E: “Wanted Posters” of Jihadis................................................ 35-38

Exhibit F: Rewards for Justice Use of the Term “Jihad” ..................... 39-41

Exhibit G: Rewards for Justice “Program Overview” .......................... 42-43

Exhibit H: Rewards for Justice Program Advertisement...................... 44-45

Exhibit I: FBI “New Rewards Offered” .............................................. 46-48

Exhibit J: “Wanted Poster” for Jehad Serwan Mostafa....................... 49-50

Exhibit K: Rejection Email (AFDI Ad II) ............................................ 51-52

Exhibit 2: Declaration of Robert J. Muise with Exhibits filed March 7, 2017
(Doc. 56-2) ............................................................................................... 53-55

i
 
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: 10797434, DktEntry: 8-2, Page 3 of 206

Exhibit A: Deposition Excerpts of Rob Gannon ..................................... 56-98

Deposition Exhibit 3: “Faces of Global Terrorism” Ad Submitted by the
State Department ........................................................................................... 99

Deposition Exhibit 4: AFDI Ad I ................................................................ 100

Deposition Exhibit 5: AFDI Ad II ............................................................... 101

Deposition Exhibit 6: Transit Advertising Policy ................................. 102-09

Deposition Exhibit 14: Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice ..................... 110-11

Deposition Exhibit 15: Rejection Email (AFDI Ad II) ............................... 112

Declaration of Sharron Shinbo in Support of King County’s Brief in
Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction with Exhibits filed
October 28, 2013 (Doc. 14) ................................................................... 113-22

Exhibit A: Accepted Ads of Palestinian and Israeli issues................. 123-29

Exhibit B: Rejected Ads of Palestinian and Israeli issues .................. 130-39

Exhibit C: Accepted Ads of the Palestinian and Israeli Conflict ....... 140-43

Exhibit D: State Department’s “Faces of Global Terrorism” Ad ....... 144-45

Exhibit E: Forwarded Electronic Mail Message from Arsalan
Bukhari, Executive Director of Council on American-
Islamic Relations (CAIR-WA), subject: “FBI/State Dept.
bus ads with ‘Faces of Global Terrorism’ featuring an all-
Muslim list,” Dated June 14, 2013 ................................... 146-48

Exhibit F: Letter from Congressman Jim McDermott to Robert
Mueller, Dated June 19, 2013 ........................................... 149-51

Exhibit G: Letter from Damon G. Shadid, Arab American
Community Coalition, to Harold Taniguchi, King County
Department of Transportation, subject: “‘Faces of Global
Terrorism’ ad campaign,” Dated June 21, 2013 ............... 152-54
ii
 
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: 10797434, DktEntry: 8-2, Page 4 of 206

Exhibit H: State Department’s “Stop a Terrorist” Replacement Ad .. 155-56

Exhibit I: AFDI’s Initial “Faces of Global Terrorism” Ad ............... 157-58

Exhibit J: AFDI’s Modified “Faces of Global Terrorism” Ad ......... 159-60

Exhibit K: Electronic Mail Message from Sharron Shinbo to Scott E.
Goldsmith, subject: “AFDI proposed ad ‘FACES OF
GLOBAL TERRORISM’ cannot be accepted,” Dated
August 15, 2013 ................................................................ 161-62

Exhibit L: Rewards for Justice Reward Structure .............................. 163-66

Declaration of Kevin Desmond in Support of King County’s Brief in
Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction with Exhibits filed
October 28, 2013 (Doc. 13) ................................................................... 167-76

Exhibit A: Interim Ad Policy .............................................................. 177-81

Exhibit B: 2011 Ad Policy.................................................................. 182-91

Exhibit C: 2012 Ad Policy................................................................ 192-200

District Court Docket Sheet as of March 2, 2018 ............................................ 201-10

iii
 
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
76 Filed
DktEntry:
11/02/17
8-2, Page
Page 51 of
of 206
3

1 HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

2

3

4

5

6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7 AT SEATTLE
8 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE
INITIATIVE; PAMELA GELLER; and Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
9 ROBERT SPENCER,
10 Plaintiffs, NOTICE OF APPEAL

11 -v.-

12
KING COUNTY,
13
Defendant.
14

15 Notice is hereby given that Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela

16 Geller, and Robert Spencer (“Plaintiffs”) hereby appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for

17 the Ninth Circuit from the Order (Doc. No. 75) granting Defendant King County’s motion for

18 summary judgment and denying Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment entered in this action

19 on November 2, 2017.1

20

21

22

23

24
1
25 Pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 3-2(b), a Representation Statement will be filed along with this
Notice of Appeal.
NOTICE OF APPEAL 1 STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-10 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
76 Filed
DktEntry:
11/02/17
8-2, Page
Page 62 of
of 206
3

1 Respectfully submitted,

2 AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER
3
/s/ Robert J. Muise
Robert J. Muise, Esq.* (MI P62849)
4
P.O. Box 131098
5 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113
rmuise@americanfreedomlawcenter.org
6 Tel: (734) 635-3756; Fax: (801) 760-3901

7 /s/ David Yerushalmi
David Yerushalmi, Esq.* (DC # 978179)
8 2020 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 189
Washington, D.C. 20001
9 dyerushalmi@americanfreedomlawcenter.org
Tel: (646) 262-0500; Fax: (801) 760-3901
10

11 *Admitted pro hac vice.
Stephen Pidgeon Attorney at Law, P.S.
12

13 Stephen Pidgeon, Esq. WSBA # 25265
Attorney at Law, P.S.
14 3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
Everett, Washington 98201
15 attorney@stephenpidgeon.com
Tel: (425) 605-4774; Fax: (425) 818-5371
16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NOTICE OF APPEAL 2 STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-11 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page71ofof206
41

EXHIBIT 1

ER-12
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page82ofof206
41

THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES
1

2

3

4

5

6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7 AT SEATTLE
8 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE
INITIATIVE; PAMELA GELLER; and Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
9 ROBERT SPENCER,
10 Plaintiffs,
DECLARATION OF
11 -v.- PAMELA GELLER IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY
12 JUDGMENT
KING COUNTY,
13
Defendant.
14

15 I, Pamela Geller, make this declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and based upon my

16 personal knowledge and upon verifiable public information.

17 1. I am an adult citizen of the United States and a plaintiff in this case.

18 2. I, along with Robert Spencer, who is also a plaintiff in this case, co-founded the

19 American Freedom Defense Initiative (“AFDI”). I am currently the president of AFDI, and Mr.

20 Spencer is the vice president.

21 3. AFDI is a nonprofit organization that is incorporated under the laws of the State

22 of New Hampshire. AFDI is also a plaintiff in this case.

23 4. Mr. Spencer and I engage in free speech activity through various projects of

24 AFDI. One such project is the posting of advertisements on the advertising space of various

25 government transportation agencies throughout the United States, including the Transit Division

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -1- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-13 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page93ofof206
41

1 of the King County Department of Transportation (“King County Metro Transit”), which

2 operates buses throughout King County, Washington.

3 5. AFDI is an advocacy organization dedicated to freedom of speech, freedom of

4 conscience, individual rights, and equality of all before the law.

5 6. AFDI achieves its objective through a variety of lawful means, including through

6 the exercise of its right to freedom of speech under the U.S. Constitution.

7 7. AFDI exercises its right to freedom of speech and promotes its objectives by, inter

8 alia, purchasing advertising space on transit authority property in major cities throughout the

9 United States, including Seattle, Washington. AFDI purchases these advertisements to express

10 its message on current events and public issues, particularly including issues involving global

11 terrorism (hereinafter referred to as “AFDI’s advertising campaign”).

12 8. Defendant King County (“County”) is a municipal corporation. In the

13 performance of its governmental duties, the County operates a public transit system (King

14 County Metro Transit).

15 9. The County leases space on the exterior of its buses for use as advertising space.

16 10. The County accepts noncommercial and commercial advertisements for display

17 on its advertising space.

18 11. The County accepts noncommercial public service, public issue, and political

19 issue advertisements, including advertisements on controversial issues, for display on its

20 advertising space.

21 12. The County has leased its advertising space for political and social commentary

22 advertisements covering a broad spectrum of political views and ideas, including ads addressing

23 the controversial and highly contentious Israeli - Palestinian conflict.

24 13. Under the current Transit Advertising Policy—which is the same policy the

25 County applied to reject our advertisements at issue in this case—the County accepted in 2012

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -2- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-14 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page104 of 206
41

1 and 2013 advertisements expressing controversial political messages such as “I’m a Palestinian.

2 Equal Rights for All,” “Equal Rights for Palestinians. The Way to Peace,” “Share the Land.

3 Palestinian Refugees Have the Right to Return. Equal Rights for Palestinians.,” and “The

4 Palestinian Authority Is Calling For A Jew-Free State, Equal Rights For Jews.” (Dkt. # 14 at

5 ECF pp. 12 to17).

6 14. Based upon published reports and information developed in this case, in June

7 2013, the State Department displayed on the County’s transit advertising space an advertisement

8 addressing global terrorism. A true and accurate copy of the State Department ad appears as

9 follows:

10

11

12

13

14 15. Based upon reports and information developed during this case, the State

15 Department ad was displayed on the County’s buses from June 6, 2013 to June 25, 2013.

16 16. According to press reports and information developed during this case, the federal

17 government decided to terminate its “Faces of Global Terrorism” ad campaign after receiving

18 complaints from a politician and advocacy groups that the list of wanted global terrorists pictured

19 in the advertisement appeared to include mostly Muslim terrorists.

20 17. For example, Congressman Jim McDermott complained about the ad to Robert

21 Mueller, the director of the FBI, in a letter dated June 19, 2013. (Dkt. # 14 at ECF p. 38). In that

22 letter, Congressman McDermott stated, in relevant part, “I agree that civilian vigilance is

23 important to the fight against extremism. Representing terrorists, however, from only one ethnic

24 or religious group, promotes stereotypes and ignores other forms of extremism. The FBI’s Most

25 Wanted Terrorist List includes individuals of other races and associated with other religions and

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -3- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-15 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page115 of 206
41

1 causes, but their faces are missing from this campaign.”

2 18. Congressman McDermott’s objection was factually incorrect.

3 19. The FBI publishes a listing of the most wanted global terrorists on its website.

4 That listing in its current form is located at: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists (“FBI

5 Terrorist List”).

6 20. At the time of Congressman McDermott’s objection, the FBI Terrorist List

7 included pictures and “wanted posters” for thirty-two terrorists. Of the thirty-two listed terrorists,

8 thirty were individuals with Muslim names and/or were wanted for terrorism related to

9 organizations conducting terrorist acts in the name of Islam. A true and accurate copy of this

10 listing is attached to this declaration as Exhibit A.

11 21. Of the two non-Islamic terrorists, one (Daniel Andreas San Diego) has ties to

12 animal rights extremist groups and the other (Joanne Deborah Chesimard) is an escaped murderer

13 who was part of a revolutionary extremist organization known as the Black Liberation Party.

14 The only religion represented on the FBI Terrorist List is Islam.

15 22. The FBI Terrorist List currently includes pictures and “wanted posters” for

16 twenty-eight terrorists. https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists (last visited February 27,

17 2017). Of the twenty-eight terrorists currently listed, twenty-six are individuals with Muslim

18 names and/or are wanted for terrorism related to organizations conducting terrorist acts in the

19 name of Islam. The other two non-Islamic terrorist are, once again, Daniel Andreas San Diego

20 and Joanne Deborah Chesimard. Attached as Exhibit B to this declaration is a true and accurate

21 screenshot of the twenty-eight listed terrorists.

22 23. The Rewards for Justice listing of individuals who are “Wanted for Terrorism”

23 currently lists sixty-six terrorists, and virtually every one of these terrorists are individuals with

24 Muslim names and/or are wanted for terrorism related to organizations conducting terrorist acts

25 in the name of Islam. The listing is located at https://www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/most-

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -4- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-16 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page126 of 206
41

1 wanted/all-regions.html (last visited on February 27, 2017). A true and accurate copy of this

2 listing is attached to this declaration as Exhibit C.

3 24. Pursuant to the County’s Transit Advertising Policy and particularly in light of

4 the fact that the County permitted and displayed the State Department ad, AFDI submitted for

5 approval on or about July 30, 2013, an advertisement that was substantively similar to the State

6 Department ad (“AFDI Ad I”).

7 25. AFDI Ad I appears as follows:

8

9

10

11

12 26. AFDI Ad I included the identical pictures and names of the wanted global

13 terrorists that appeared in the State Department ad.

14 27. AFDI Ad I uses the term “jihadis” to refer to the terrorists listed in the ad (“One

15 of These Jihadis”) because these terrorists are committing acts of violence in the name of Islam.

16 A Google search for the definition of “jihad” reveals the top definition as follows: “a struggle or

17 fight against the enemies of Islam.” The example provided is as follows: “he declared a jihad

18 against the infidels.” A true and accurate copy of a screenshot of the Google search “jihad define”

19 is attached to this declaration as Exhibit D.

20 28. Additionally, the “Wanted for Terrorism” listing for “Abubakar Shekau” states

21 that he “is the leader of Jama’atu Ahl as-Sunnah il-Da’awati wal-Jihad, more commonly known

22 as Boko Haram. Boko Haram, which means ‘Western education is forbidden,’ is a Nigeria-based

23 terrorist organization that seeks to overthrow the current Nigerian government and replace it with

24 a regime based on Islamic law.” As another example, the listing for “Abu Ubaidah (Direye)”

25 states that “[h]e is believed to subscribe to Godane’s view that al-Shabaab is more than a Somali

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -5- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-17 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page137 of 206
41

1 nationalist movement and instead is one front in al-Qaida’s global jihad.” And yet another

2 example, among many others, is the listing for “Abu Mohammed Al-Adnani,” which states that

3 he “is ISIL’s main conduit for the dissemination of official messages, including ISIL’s

4 declaration of the creation of an Islamic Caliphate.” (emphasis added). True and accurate copies

5 of the “Wanted” posters of these jihadis from the Rewards for Justice program website are

6 attached to this declaration as Exhibit E.

7 29. A true and accurate copy of the results of a search of the Rewards for Justice

8 website using the term “jihad” is attached to this declaration as Exhibit F.

9 30. Consequently, the State Department’s “Faces of Global Terrorism” ad is, in fact,

10 an accurate representation of the “faces” of those who engage in terrorist acts around the world

11 and here in the United States, and so too are the “faces” represented in the AFDI advertisements

12 submitted for display in this case. Moreover, it is factually accurate to refer to these terrorists as

13 “jihadis.”

14 31. Per the federal government, “The Rewards for Justice program continues to be

15 one of the most valuable U.S. Government assets in the fight against international terrorism.

16 Established by the 1984 Act to Combat International Terrorism, Public Law 98-533, the Program

17 is administered by the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Under this

18 program, the Secretary of State may authorize rewards for information that leads to the arrest or

19 conviction of anyone who plans, commits, or attempts international terrorist acts against U.S.

20 persons or property, that prevents such acts from occurring in the first place, that leads to the

21 location of a key terrorist leader, or that disrupts terrorism financing. The Secretary is authorized

22 to pay a reward greater than $25 million if he/she determines that a greater amount is necessary

23 to combat terrorism or to defend the United States against terrorist acts. Since the inception of

24 the Rewards for Justice program in 1984, the United States Government has paid more than $125

25 million to over 80 people who provided actionable information that put terrorists behind bars or

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -6- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-18 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page148 of 206
41

1 prevented acts of international terrorism worldwide.”

2 https://www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/about-rfj/program-overview.html (last visited

3 February 28, 2017) (emphasis added). A true and accurate copy of the “Program Overview” is

4 attached to this declaration as Exhibit G.

5 32. Consequently, per the Rewards for Justice program website, the amount of a

6 reward can change based on the circumstances. In fact, the Secretary of State “is authorized to

7 pay a reward greater than $25 million if he/she determines that a greater amount is necessary.”

8 33. The Rewards for Justice program also directs people to the FBI if they have

9 information and believe they could be eligible for a reward. For example, the following Rewards

10 for Justice program advertisement is available to the public:

11 The United States is offering substantial rewards for information that would help
locate terrorists or that could prevent terrorism from occurring here or abroad. But
12 we need your help. Your information could save lives and you could be eligible
for a reward and relocation. Please visit www.RewardsForJustice.net to submit a
13 confidential tip or contact the FBI or your local law enforcement agency.
(emphasis added).
14
A true and accurate copy of this ad is attached to this declaration as Exhibit H.
15
34. Additionally, the reward “offers” are also posted on the FBI’s website. A true and
16
accurate copy of a page from the FBI’s website titled, “New Rewards Offered,” is attached to
17
this declaration as Exhibit I.
18
35. One of the individuals included on the State Department ad and on AFDI Ad I is
19
Jehad Serwan Mostafa—a U.S.-born, brown-haired, blue-eyed, Caucasian terrorist—the only
20
one of the thirty-two listed at the time. A true and accurate copy of the “Wanted” poster for
21
Jehad Serwan Mostafa is attached to this declaration as Exhibit J.
22
36. AFD Ad I presents a political message, and it was submitted for display because
23
the State Department made a decision based on political correctness—and not based on national
24
security or the truth about global terrorism—to pull its ad.
25

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -7- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-19 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page159 of 206
41

1 37. The message of AFDI Ad I is very timely in light of current world events where

2 global terrorists are engaging in violent jihad against America’s national security interests

3 throughout the world and at home.

4 38. On August 15, 2013, AFDI’s attorney, David Yerushalmi of the American

5 Freedom Law Center, received an email from Mr. Scott Goldsmith, Esq., the executive vice

6 president and chief commercial officer of Titan Outdoor LLC (a/k/a Titan360 and Titan)

7 (hereinafter “Titan”), the advertising contractor working for and on behalf of the County to lease

8 advertising space on the County’s buses. A true and accurate copy of this email, received by me

9 in my capacity as custodian of AFDI’s business records and as a business record in the ordinary

10 course of business, is accurately reproduced as follows:

11 From: Scott Goldsmith [mailto:Scott.Goldsmith@titan360.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 3:02 PM
12
To: david.yerushalmi@verizon.net
13 Cc: rmuise@americanfreedomlawcenter.org
Subject: AFDI proposed ad “FACES OF GLOBAL TERRORISM” cannot be
14 accepted.

15 David: Please see below. I am available to discuss. Thank you. Scott.
Scott E. Goldsmith, Esq.
16 EVP & Chief Commercial Officer
100 Park Avenue
17 New York, NY 10017
T (212) 891-5688
18
F (212) 418-1082
scott.goldsmith@titan360.com
19
TITAN
20
titan360.com

21 From: Sharron Shinbo <Sharron.Shinbo@kingcounty.gov>
Date: Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:38 PM
22 To: Scott Goldsmith <Scott.Goldsmith@titan360.com>
Cc: Don Allman <Don.Allman@titan360.com>, Pamela Quadros
23 <Pamela.Quadros@titan360.com>
Subject: AFDI proposed ad “FACES OF GLOBAL TERRORISM” cannot be
24 accepted
25

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -8- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-20 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page16
10ofof206
41

1 Dear Mr. Goldsmith,
2
Based on our current advertising policy, the American Freedom Defense
3 Initiative ad, “FACES OF GLOBAL TERRORISM”, cannot be accepted.
The advertisement does not comply with Subsections 6.2.4, 6.2.8 and 6.2.9,
4 set forth below.

5 6.2.4 False or Misleading. Any material that is or that the sponsor reasonably
should have known is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would
6 constitute a tort of defamation or invasion of privacy.
7 6.2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that
demeans or disparages an individual, group of individuals or entity. For
8
purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the
9
County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable
of the County’s ridership and using prevailing community standards, would
10 believe that the advertisement contains material that ridicules or mocks, is
abusive or hostile to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group
11 of individuals or entity.

12 6.2.9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains
material that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will
13 result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system.
For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material,
14
the County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person,
knowledgeable of the County’s ridership and using prevailing community
15
standards, would believe that the material is so objectionable that it is
16 reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of or
interference with the transportation system.
17
For your reference, I have attached a copy of Metro’s Transit Advertising
18 Policy.

19 39. This email represented the final decision by the County to reject AFDI Ad I and

20 thereby restrict AFDI’s, Robert Spencer’s, and my speech.

21 40. Attached to the email was a document titled, Transit Advertising Policy, which is

22 the County’s current policy on advertising. A true and accurate copy of this policy has been

23 marked and identified during the course of depositions in this case as Exhibit 6.

24 41. In response to the County’s rejection of AFDI Ad I, we modified our

25 advertisement as follows (“AFDI Ad II”):

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. -9- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-21 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page17
11ofof206
41

1

2

3

4

5

6 42. Our revised advertisement (AFDI Ad II), was submitted for display on the

7 County’s transit advertising space on or about September 18, 2015.

8 43. On or about October 4, 2015, I received via email from Mr. Goldsmith the official

9 response from the County rejecting AFDI Ad II. The official rejection stated as follows:

10 Pamela: Please see below form (sic) King County in regard to the proposed Faces
of Global Terrorism ad. Thank you. Scott.
11
Dear Mr. Goldsmith,
12
Based on our current advertising policy, the American Freedom Defense Initiative
13 (AFDI) ad, “FACES OF GLOBAL TERRIORISM” (sic), submitted and shown in
your September 18, 2015 email cannot be accepted. The advertisements do not
14
comply with Subsections 6.2.8 and 6.2.9 set forth below.
15 6.2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that demeans
or disparages an individual, group of individuals or entity. For purposes of
16
determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will
17
determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County’s
ridership and using prevailing community standards, would believe that the
18 advertisement contains material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile to, or
debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group of individuals or entity.
19
6.2.9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains material
20 that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to,
disruption of or interference with the transportation system. For purposes of
21 determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will
determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County’s
22 ridership and using prevailing community standards, would believe that the
material is so objectionable that it is reasonably foreseeable that it will result in
23 harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system.
24 In the ongoing litigation with AFDI, we have explained the problems with AFDI’s
use of the “Faces of Global Terrorism” motif under Metro’s Transit Advertising
25 Policy. We remain willing to discuss other ways for AFDI to communicate its
GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. - 10 - STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-22 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page18
12ofof206
41

“catch a terrorist” message in our nonpublic forum. For example, AFDI may want
1 to re-caption the ad “Most Wanted Global Terrorists” or “Wanted for Global
Terrorism”—both of which would comply with our advertising policy by removing
2
the demeaning and disparaging aspect of the current ad copy. Please communicate
3 to AFDI our willingness to accept revised ad copy that comply with the advertising
policy.
4 For your reference, I have attached a copy of Metro’s Transit Advertising Policy.
5 44. A true and accurate copy of this rejection email has been marked and identified

6 during the course of depositions in this case as Exhibit 15, and a true and accurate copy of this

7 email is attached to this declaration as Exhibit K.

8 45. The policy attached to the October 4, 2015 email was the same policy utilized by

9 the County to reject AFDI Ad I. As noted previously, a true and accurate copy of this policy has

10 been marked and identified during the course of depositions in this case as Exhibit 6.

11 46. The County’s rejection of AFDI Ads I and II caused irreparable harm to AFDI,

12 Mr. Spencer and me in that, aside from the loss of our First Amendment freedoms caused by the

13 rejections themselves, there are no other comparable forums available for our speech. That is,

14 there are no other forums available that would permit us to reach our target audience—the

15 commuting public, which is the very same group of people who are most likely to observe, and

16 thus be in a position to help stop, an act of terrorism. Additionally, there are no other forums

17 available to us that would allow us express our messages to our target audience with the same

18 impact and effect as the display of AFDI Ads I and II on the County’s buses, which function as

19 mobile billboards. There are no other such forums available to us in Seattle, Washington.

20 I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true

21 and correct.

22 Executed on the 1st day of March, 2017.

23
_______________________
24
Pamela Geller
25

GELLER DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J. - 11 - STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-23 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page19
13ofof206
41

EXHIBIT A

ER-24
FBI — Most Wanted Terrorists Page 1 of 3
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page20
14ofof206
41

Home • Most Wanted • Most Wanted Terrorists

Most Wanted Terrorists

ABDUL RAHMAN YASIN

HAKIMULLAH MEHSUD

DANIEL ANDREAS SAN DIEGO

JOANNE DEBORAH CHESIMARD

ADAM YAHIYE GADAHN

FAOUZI MOHAMAD AYOUB

JEHAD SERWAN MOSTAFA

JABER A. ELBANEH

JAMEL AHMED MOHAMMED ALI AL-BADAWI

JAMAL SAEED ABDUL RAHIM

OMAR SHAFIK HAMMAMI

ALI SAED BIN ALI EL-HOORIE

ISNILON TOTONI HAPILON

ADNAN G. EL SHUKRIJUMAH

ABD AL AZIZ AWDA

ER-25
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/@@wanted-group-listing 9/3/2013
FBI — Most Wanted Terrorists Page 2 of 3
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page21
15ofof206
41

IBRAHIM SALIH MOHAMMED AL YACOUB

ALI ATWA

HUSAYN MUHAMMAD AL-UMARI

MUHAMMAD AHMED AL-MUNAWAR

AYMAN AL-ZAWAHIRI

ABDULLAH AHMED ABDULLAH

RAMADAN ABDULLAH MOHAMMAD SHALLAH

HASAN IZZ-AL-DIN

MOHAMMED ALI HAMADEI

ABDELKARIM HUSSEIN MOHAMED AL-NASSER

AHMAD IBRAHIM AL-MUGHASSIL

SAIF AL-ADEL

ANAS AL-LIBY

WADOUD MUHAMMAD HAFIZ AL-TURKI

MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH KHALIL HUSSAIN AR-RAHAYYAL

ZULKIFLI ABDHIR

RADDULAN SAHIRON

The alleged terrorists on this list have been indicted by sitting Federal Grand Juries in various jurisdictions in the United States for the crimes reflected on their wanted posters. Evidence was gathered and
presented to the Grand Juries, which led to their being charged. The indictments currently listed on the posters allow them to be arrested and brought to justice. Future indictments may be handed down as various
investigations proceed in connection to other terrorist incidents, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

The Rewards for Justice program, administered by the United States Department of State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, offers rewards for information leading to the arrest of many of these terrorists.

ER-26
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/@@wanted-group-listing 9/3/2013
FBI — Most Wanted Terrorists Page 3 of 3
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page22
16ofof206
41

It is also important to note that these individuals will remain wanted in connection with their alleged crimes until such time as the charges are dropped or when credible physical evidence is obtained, which proves
with 100% accuracy, that they are deceased.

Accessibility |eRulem aking |Freedom ofInform ation Act|LegalN otices |LegalPolicies and D isclaim ers |Links |Privacy Policy |U SA.gov |W hite H ouse
FBI.gov is an officialsite ofthe U .S.governm ent,U .S.D epartm entofJustice

Close

ER-27
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/@@wanted-group-listing 9/3/2013
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page23
17ofof206
41

EXHIBIT B

ER-28
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page24
18ofof206
41

. - FBI- ....
-.-,.1-

.

; •
'
111...:11\AVA.11 "''-0\IU,A,t
IIIK....,,A.,,,Y.AO ~ALUtl

AS0u..ot...JIM\ IIU$$UM
....I.OUU,1,fl lollO<IJ.- ... tAI ... SV-11

•t1"'1A. tlU'UAJII ,t, 111.
«,t,>l...ffA\.

·~
J ,UN11 L SI.ell ...lli:111\.
~•N
,.;ai,.;ai-

ER-29 
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page25
19ofof206
41

EXHIBIT C

ER-30
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page26
20ofof206
41

. Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist. Save lives.

WANTED FOR TERRORISM

Up to $25 Million Reward

Ayman al·
l.awahlrt

Up to $10 Million Reward

Up to $7 Million Reward

Up to $6 Million Reward

Abu Ubaidah
(Dlreye)

Up to $5 Million Reward

Ibrahim Hassan
Tall al~Asltl

~
LBJ .........
Ibrahim al~Banna Faker Ben
Abdelaziz
Ma'allm Oaud Jaber A. Bbaneh

Abdelbasit Alhllj Mohammed Ali Yahya Abu el Isnilon Hapilon Aziz Haqqani Khalil Kaqqani
Alhassan Haj Hamadel Hamrnam
Hamad

ER-31
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page27
21ofof206
41

Hamad el Khalry Fuad Mohamed
Khalaf
Bashir Mohamed
Mahamoud
I
Mohamed Makawl Jehad Serwan
Ibrahim
Mohamed
Mostafa
~
Ahmad Ibrahim
al-Mughassil

Muhammad Abdelkarim Muhanmad Jamal 5aeed Qas:im al-Rimi Mukhtar Robow
Ahmed al- Hussein Abdullah Khalll Abdul Rahim
Munawar Mohamed al- Hussain ar--
Nasser Rahayyal

Ramadan
Abdullah
Mohammad
Shallah
Abu-Muhammad
al-Shlmall
~~~
Wadoud Husayn
Muhammad Haflz Muhammed al-
a1-n.u1d Umatl
Ibrahim Salih
Mohammed al-
Yacoub

Up to $3 Million Reward

Abu-Yusuf al- Abdul Saboor Maalim Salman zerrin Sari
Muhajir

Up to $2 Million Reward

Up to $1 Million Reward

Radullan Sahlron

Submit a lip
www.rewardsforjustice.net
1-800-US-REWARO
(1-800-877-3927)
RFJ@state.gov

ER-32
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page28
22ofof206
41

EXHIBIT D

ER-33
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page29
23ofof206
41












ER-34
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page30
24ofof206
41

EXHIBIT E

ER-35
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page31
25ofof206
41

. Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist, Save lives.

WANTED
Information that brings to justice...
AbubakarShekau
Up to $7 Million Reward
Abubakar Shekau is the leader of Jama'atu Ahl as-Sunnah il-Da'awati wal-Jihad, more
commonly known as Boko Haram. Boko Haram, which means "Western education is
forbidden," is a Nigeria-based terrorist organization that seeks to overthrow the current
Nigerian government and replace it with a regime based on Islamic law. The group has
existed in various fonms since the late 1990s. There are reported communications,
~:~~~~b (~tma)~~~Jh~i~a~~e~-~~~a~~ril,"i t)~~~~aP~n~:u::n~~i~~ ~~:slamic
strengthen Boko Haram's capacity to conduct terrorist attacks.

~~~~~a::~ ~il~~r~~t~~~~ugia~~~~~~:= 1
i~nN~~~i~? i?at~~'iti~r 1~~~l\'; \~!~~~~~:~~~~d
statement expressing solidarity with al·Qaida and threatening the United States. Under Shekau's leadership,
Boko Haram's operational capabilities have grown.

The group set off its first vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (!ED) in June 2011, and has increasingly
utilized IEDs in attacks against soft targets. Boko Haram's August 26, 2011 vehicle-bomb attack on the United

~:~~~ ~~t?~~~ ~71:ti~d ~8~;r~~~~ i~~~r~d~~R'~h'!'!t/a~~~~og~;~~~t~t::,;~p~nki:.~:· At
claimed responsibility for the attack and promised future targeting of U.S. and Nigerian government interests.

On May 1, 2012, less than one week after the group bombed a Nirerian newspaper building in Abuja, Boko
~ir~mo}~~~ri~av~~ ~~r!!::~~~~~"N'e:~~t~~ o~~°f: s:~:~ernational news outlets, including the

On June 21, 2012, the U.S. Department of State designated Shekau a Specially Designated Global Terrorist
under Executive Order 13224.

Subm~aTip
Gates of Birth Used: 1965, 1969, 1975 www.rewardsforjustice.net
! ·BOO-US-REWARD
Place of Birth: Yobe, Nigeria (l·BOO-Bn-3927)
RFJ @state.9ov
Height: Tall

Build: Slim
Sex: Male
Complexion: Dark

Ethnicity: Kanuri

languages: Arabic, Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri

Aliases: Abu Bakr Skikwa, Imam Abu Bakr Shiku, Abu
Muhammad Abu Bakr Bin Muhammad Al Shakwi Al Muslimi
Bishku, Abubakar Shakkau

ER-36
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page32
26ofof206
41

. Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist, Save lives.

WANTED
Information that brings to justice...
Abu Ubaidah (Direyel
Up to $6 Million Reward"
Abu Ubaidah (Direye) is the leader of al-Shabaab. AI-Shabaab spokesman, Ahmed Abdi aw
Mohamed, announced Abu Ubaidah as the group's leader on September 6, 2014, after the
death of former al-Shabaab emir Ahmed Abdi aw-Mohamed (Godane). Abu Ubaidah was
part of Godane's inner circle at the time of Godane's death. The United Nations (UN)
subjected him to sanctions pursuant to paragraph 8 of UN Security Council Resolution
1844 on September 24, 2014.
He is believed to subscribe to Godane's view that al-Shabaab is more than a Somali
nationalist movement and instead is one front in al-Qaida's global jihad.
As the emir, Abu Ubaidah is directly responsible for al-Shabaab's activities, which continue to threaten the
rse:~e~;i) ;,~dorc~!~fr~~~a~s~~~ii!;ii~~~~at~ region. He is believed to be in his forties and

SubmitaTip
Aliases: Sheikh Ahmed Umar Abu Ubaidah, Sheikh Omar www.rewardsforjustlce.net
Abu Ubaidaha, Sheikh Ahmed Umar, Sheikh Mahad Omar 1-800-US-REWARO
Abdikarim, Abu Ubaidah, Abu Diriye, Diriye (1-800-877-3927)
RFJ@st,te.gov

ER-37
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page33
27ofof206
41

. Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist, Save lives.

WANTED
Information that brings to justice...
Abu Mohammed al-Adnani
Up to $5 Million Reward

!~~ ~:~i~r~~d!1;~1~~ii~~~1;J~P.:I~~~r:; 1;~~ i~esr~.~i ~~~,Ef~t~~~~~f~I[?:
main conduit for the dissemination of official messages, including ISIL's declaration of the
creation of an Islamic caliphate. AI-Adnani was one of the first foreign fighters to oppose
Coalition Forces in Iraq before becoming ISIL's spokesman.

g,~i~n~t~egfo:'1e;!r~~:r::u~i~~~~~ed~t~i~:nb:e~~i~r4~8, 2014, as a Specially
SUbmftaTip
Date of Birth: 1977 www.rewardsforjustice.net
1-800-US-REWARD
Place of Birth: Banash, Syria (l-BOO-Bn-3927)
RFJ @state.gov
Nationality: Syria

Aliases: Taha SObhi Falaha, Taha al-Banshi, Abu
Mohammad al-Adnani, Abu Mohamed al-Adnani, Abu-
Muhammad al-Adnani al-Shami, Vasser Khalaf Hussein
Nazal al-Rawi, Jaber Taha Falah, Abu Baker al-Khatab,
Abu Sadek al-Rawi

ER-38
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page34
28ofof206
41

EXHIBIT F

ER-39
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
jihad ID: 10797434,
- Rewards 56-1
for JusticeFiled
DktEntry:
Search 03/07/17
Results 8-2, Page
Page35
29ofof206
41

Skip to main content

Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist. Save lives.

Enter your search term liihad

Clear
Search I

Search results
Powered by Bing

Ayman al-Zawahiri - Rewards for Justice - Wanted

www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/ayman_zawahiri.html
Information that brings to justice ... Ayman al-Zawahiri is the current leader
of the al-Qa'ida terrorist group and a former leader of the Egyptian ...

Rewards for Justice - Wanted

www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/abderraouf_jdey.html
Following a return to the Montreal area in 2001 in which Jdey consorted with
extremists on methods of joining the jihad, Jdey left Canada.

Wanted Poster for Ali Sayyid al-Bakri - Rewards for Justice

www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/ali_sayyid_al_bakri.html
Prior to joining al-Qaida, al-Bakri was a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad
terrorist group, under the direction of Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Rewards for Justice - Wanted

www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/abu_ubaidah.html
... s view that al-Shabaab is more than a Somali nationalist movement and
instead is one front in al-Qaida's global jihad. As the emir, ...
ER-40
https://findit.state.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=dos_rlj_en&query=jihad&commit=Search
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page36
30ofof206
41

ER-41
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page37
31ofof206
41

EXHIBIT G

ER-42
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Rewards
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document for Justice
ID: 10797434,
56-1 - Program
FiledOverview
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page38
32ofof206
41

~ Rewards for Justice
~ Stop a terrorist. Save lives.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW
RFJ, the U.S. Department of State's Counter-Terrorism Rewards Program, was established by the 1984 Act to
Combat International Terrorism, Public Law 98-533 (codified at 22 U.S.C. § 2708). Administered by the State
Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, RFJ's goal is to bring international terrorists to justice and prevent
acts of international terrorism against U.S. persons or property. Under this program, the Secretary of State may
authorize rewards for information that leads to the arrest or conviction of anyone who plans, commits, aids, or
attempts international terrorist acts against U.S. persons or property, that prevents such acts from occurring in
the first place, that leads to the identification or location of a key terrorist leader, or that disrupts terrorism
financing .
The Secretary is authorized to pay a reward greater than $25 million if he/she determines that a greater
amount is necessary to combat terrorism or to defend the United States against terrorist acts.
Since the inception of the Rewards for Justice program in 1984, the United States Government has paid more
than $125 million to over 80 people who provided actionable information that put terrorists behind bars or
prevented acts of international terrorism worldwide. The program played a significant role in the arrest of
international terrorist Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
While the law governing the Rewards for Justice program is aimed at terrorism directed against Americans, the
United States shares information with other nations whose citizens are at risk. Every government and every
citizen has a stake in bringing terrorists to justice and in preventing acts of terrorism.
SUbmitaTip
www.rewardsforjustice.net
1-800-US-REWARD
( 1-800-877-3927)
info@rewardsforjustice.net
A reward of $1 million was paid for the
information that led to the location of
Hamsiraji Sali, commander of Abu
Sayyaf Group.

Stop a terrorist.
Save lives.

ER-43
https://www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/about-rfj/program-overview.html 1/1
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page39
33ofof206
41

EXHIBIT H

ER-44
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page40
34ofof206
41

You Are America's Best Defense
The United States is offering substantial rewards for information that
would help locate terrorists or that could prevent terrorism from
occurring here or abroad. But we need your help. Your information
could save lives and you may be eligible for a reward and relocation.
Please visit www.RewardsforJustice.net to submit a confidential tip
or contact the FBI or your local law enforcement agency.

REWARDS FORJUSTICE
Washington, D.C. 20522-0303 U.S.A.
www.rewardsforjustice.net I 1-800-877-3927
Email: info@rewardsforjustice.net

ER-45Save lives.
Stop a terrorist.
Doc-6
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page41
35ofof206
41

EXHIBIT I

ER-46
1/3/2017 Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
FBI -ID: 10797434,
New 56-1for Two
Rewards Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
Terrorists 8-2, Page
Page42
36ofof206
41

Stories
Home • News • Stories • 2007 • February • New Rewards for Two Tenorists

Story Index
New Rewards Offered
For Two Most Wanted Terrorists By Date

02/12/07 By Subject
- Art Theft
Someone, somewhere, has information on the whereabouts of
- Civil Rights
Mohammed Ali Hamadei and Ramadan Abdullah Mohammad
- Counterterrorism
Shallah-both among our Most Wanted Terrorists-
- Crimes Against Children
information that person might be willing to provide for a
- Criminal Justice Information Services
sizeable chunk of cash.
- Cyber Crimes
That's the thinking behind the just announced rewards of up to - Director/FBI Leadership
$5 million for tips that lead authorities to these individuals. The - Field Cases
rewards-offered by the U.S. Department of State's Reward - Foreign Counterintelligence
for Justice Program at the request of the FBI-are the first for - General
both terrorists. - History
- Intelligence
The state Department's Rewards for Justice Who are these extremists and what are their crimes? - International
program is now offering a bounty up to $5 ... Hamadei is wanted for hijacking TWA Flight 847 overseas in - Lab/Operational Technology
million for Mohammed Ali Hamadei, left, 1985. Hamadei and his accomplices tied passengers up and - Linguist/Translation Program
and Ramadan Abdullah Mohammad . .
Shallah. beatthem .. .then summarily executed U.S. Navy diver Robert - Major TheftsNiolent Crime
Stethem and dumped his body on the tarmac. An alleged - Organized Crime/Drugs
member of the terrorist organization Hizballah, Hamadei is believed to be living in Lebanon . Read - Partnerships
more about Hamadei and see his wanted poster. - Public/Community Outreach
- Public Corruption
... Shallah is a founding member and leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, or PIJ, a terrorist - Recruiting/Diversity
organization headquartered in Damascus, Syria. He is wanted for a series of bombings, murders, - Responding to Your Concerns
extortions. and racketeering crimes. See his wanted poster for more details. - Technology
If you have information about either extremist-or any of our Most Wanted Terrorists-please contact - Training
us immediately: - White-Collar Crime

FBI Contact Information

• Secure Internet Tip Line
• Local FBI offices
• Overseas FBI offices

Rewards forJustice Contact Information

• Secure Internet Tip Line
• E-mail: RFJ@state .gov
• Hotline: 1-800-US-REWARDS (1-800-877-3927)
• Mail : Rewards for Justice, Washington , DC 20522-0303

The other wanted terrorists included in Rewards for Justice:

• Usama bin Laden, $25 million, with another $2 million offered through two airline associations;
• Ayman Al-Zawahiri $25 million;
• Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, $5 million;
• Anas AI-Liby, $5 million;
• Ahmed Mohammed Hamed Ali, $5 million;
• Abdul Rahman Yasin , $5 million;
• Ali Saed Bin Ali EI-Hoorie, $5 million;
• lsnilon Totoni Hapilon, $5 million;
• Jamel Ahmed Mohammed Ali AI-Badawi, $5 million;
• Fazul Abdullah Mohammed • $5 million;
• lmad Fayez Mugniyah, $5 million;
• Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam, $5 million;
• Saif Al-Adel , $5 million ;
• Jaber Elbaneh, $5 million;
• Abdelkarim Hussein Mohamed Al-Nasser, $5 million;
• Ali Atwa , $5 million;
• Hasan lzz-AI-Din, $5 million;
• Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan, $5 million;
Doc-5
• 6hm~rl lhr~him 6LPu111nh~ccil ¢,:::; millinn ·
ER-47
https://archives.fbi .gov/archives/news/stori es/2007/february/rewards_021207 1/2
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page43
37ofof206
41

ER-48
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page44
38ofof206
41

EXHIBIT J

ER-49
1/19/2017 Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
Rewards 56-1
for JusticeFiled
- DktEntry:
Wanted03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page45
39ofof206
41

r· ~. ': Rewards for Justice
Stop a terrorist. Save lives.

WANTED
Information that brings to justice ...
Jehad Serwan Mostafa
Up to $5 Million Reward
Jehad Serwan Mostafa, a.k.a. Ahmed Gurey, Anwar al-Amriki, or Emir Anwar; is a United
States citizen and former resident of California. He has performed various functions for al-
Shabaab, including acting as a training camp instructor and a leader of foreign fighters.
He is also skilled in the group's media activities. Mostafa is an American citizen who lived
in San Diego, California before moving to Somalia in 2005. He may have or is likely to visit
the following areas: Somalia, Yemen, Ethiopia, Kenya, and other African countries.
Mostafa is on the FBl's Most Wanted Terrorists List, and is sought by the FBI for his
alleged terrorist activities. On October 9, 2009, a federal arrest warrant was issued for Mostafa in the United
States District Court, Southern District of California. Mostafa was charged with the following crimes: conspiracy
to provide material support to terrorists; conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist
organization; and providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization .
AI-Shabaab was the militant wing of the Somali Council of Islamic Courts that took over most of southern
Somalia in the second half of 2006. AI-Shabaab has continued its violent insurgency in southern and central
Somalia. The group has claimed responsibility for many bombings-including various types of suicide attacks-
in Mogadishu and in central and northern Somalia, typically targeting Somali Government officials and
perceived allies of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) of Somalia. AI-Shabaab was likely responsible for
a wave of five coordinated suicide car bombings in October 2008 that simultaneously hit targets in two cities in
northern Somalia, killing at least 26 people and injuring 29 others. AI-Shabaab was responsible for the twin
suicide bombings in Kampala, Uganda, on July 11, 2010, which killed more than 70 people, including one
American. The group is responsible for the assassination of Somali peace activists, international aid workers,
numerous civil society figures, and journalists. In February 2012, al-Shabaab and al-Qaida announced their
formal alliance.
The U.S. Department of State named al-Shabaab a Foreign Terrorist Organization under Section 219 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (as amended) on February 26, 2008, and a Specially Designated Global
Terrorist entity under Executive Order 13224 on February 29, 2008.
SUbmitaTip
Date of Birth: December 28, 1981 www.rewardsforjustice.net
1-800-US-REWARD
Place of Birth: Waukesha, Wisconsin ( 1-800-877-3927)
info@rewardsforjustice.net
Height: 6'1" (185 cm)

Weight: 170 lbs (77 kg)

Build: Tall, thin

Hair: Brown

Eyes: Blue

Sex: Male
Complexion: Light

Citizenship: American

Languages: Arabic, Somali, English

Special Identifiers: Mostafa is left-handed. He wears a
full beard and glasses. He has a large scar on his right
hand and a small scar on the top of his left index finger.
Aliases: Emir Anwar, Ahmed Gurey, Anwar al-Amriki, Abu
Abdullah al-Muhajir, "Ahmed" (moniker), "Anwar"
(moniker)

ER-50
htt.ps://www.rewardsforjustice.net/english/jehad_mostafa.html 1/1
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page46
40ofof206
41

EXHIBIT K

ER-51
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-1 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page47
41ofof206
41

From: Scott Goldsmith <Scott.Goldsmith@intersection.com >
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 10:53 AM
To: dyerushalmi@americanfreedomlawcenter.org; Pamela Geller (writeatlas@aol.com)
Cc: 'Robert Muise AFLC'
Subject: Faces of Global Terrorism Ad - KCM Response
Attachments: King County Ad Pol icy.pdf

Pamela: Please see below form King County In regard to the proposed Faces of Global Terrorism ad . Thank you. Scott.

Dear Mr. Goldsmith ,

Based on our current advertising policy, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) ad , "FACES OF
GLOBAL TERRIORISM ", submitted and shown in your September 18,2015 email cannot be accepted . The
advertisements do not comply with Subsections 6.2.8 and 6.2.9 set forth below.

6 .2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that demeans or disparages an individual ,
group of individuals or entity. For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material,
the County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person , knowledgeable of the County's ridership and
using prevailing community standards, would believe that the advertisement contains material that ridicules or
mocks , is abusive or hostile to, or debases the dign ity or stature of any individual, group of individuals or
entity.

6.2 .9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains material that is so objectionable as to
be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation
system. For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will
determine whether a reasonably prudent person , knowledgeable of the County's ridersh ip and using prevailing
community standards , would believe that the material is so objectionable that it is reasonably foreseeable that
it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system .

In the ongoing litigation with AFDI , we have explained the problems with AFDl 's use of the "Faces of Global
Terrorism" motif under Metro's Transit Advertising Policy. We remain willing to discuss other ways for AFDI to
communicate its "catch a terrorist" message in our nonpublic forum . For example, AFDI may want to re-
caption the ad "Most Wanted Global Terrorists" or "Wanted for Global Terrorism" - both of which would comply
with our advertising policy by removing the demeaning and disparaging aspect of the current ad copy. Please
communicate to AFDI our willingness to accept revised ad copy that comply with the advertising policy.

For your refe rence , I have attached a copy of Metro's Transit Advertising Policy.

Scott E. Goldsmith
' .:r.. IJ

212 891 -5688
2 12 644-2010

I EXHIBIT
Intersection
I \15 ~•
1 I'll I< \
intersection.com
i.;1 ll '1'1 I ( 1 \ '1 11 ~ I ( 1J

I~. Git~ l\ol\
~

ER-52 Doc-2
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page481 of 206
61

EXHIBIT 2

ER-53
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page492 of 206
61

THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES
1

2

3

4

5

6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7 AT SEATTLE
8 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE
INITIATIVE; PAMELA GELLER; and Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
9 ROBERT SPENCER,
10 Plaintiffs,
DECLARATION OF
11 -v.- ROBERT J. MUISE IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY
12 JUDGMENT
KING COUNTY,
13
Defendant.
14

15 I, Robert J. Muise, make this declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and based upon

16 my personal knowledge and upon verifiable public information.

17 1. I am an adult citizen of the United States and counsel for Plaintiffs in this case.

18 2. I am familiar with the pleadings and papers of record, including the deposition

19 transcripts and associated exhibits.

20 3. The parties agreed to number the deposition exhibits sequentially.

21 4. Attached to this declaration as Exhibit A are true and accurate excerpts from the

22 deposition of Rob Gannon, the witness identified by Defendant King County to testify on its

23 behalf pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

24 5. The numbered deposition exhibits included with Exhibit A are true and accurate

25 copies of the exhibits referenced in the deposition of Mr. Gannon. These exhibits include the

MUISE DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J; -1- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-54 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page503 of 206
61

1 following: a copy of the “Faces of Global Terrorism” ad submitted by the State Department

2 (Exhibit 3); a copy of Plaintiffs’ first advertisement, referred to in these proceedings as AFDI

3 Advertisement I or AFDI Ad I (Exhibit 4); a copy of Plaintiffs’ second advertisement, referred

4 to in these proceedings as AFDI Advertisement II or AFDI Ad II (Exhibit 5); a copy of Defendant

5 King County’s Transit Advertising Policy (Exhibit 6), which is the policy at issue in this case; a

6 copy of the deposition notice (amended) of Defendant King County pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6)

7 (Exhibit 14); and a copy of the email setting forth the bases for Defendant King County’s

8 rejection of AFDI Ad II (Exhibit 15).

9 I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true

10 and correct.

11 Executed on the 2d day of March, 2017.

12 /s/ Robert J. Muise
Robert J. Muise, Esq.
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

MUISE DECL./MOT. FOR SUMM. J; -2- STEPHEN PIDGEON
Case No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ Attorney at Law, P.S.
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
ER-55 Everett, Washington 98201
(425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page514 of 206
61

EXHIBIT A

ER-56
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page525 of 206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 1

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
3 AT SEATTLE
4 _________________________________________________________
5 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE )
INITIATIVE, PAMELA GELLER, )
6 and ROBERT SPENCER, )
)
7 Plaintiffs, )
) No. 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
8 vs. )
)
9 KING COUNTY, )
)
10 Defendant. )
_________________________________________________________
11
12 DEPOSITION UPON ORAL EXAMINATION OF ROB GANNON
13 AS A RULE 30(b)(6) DESIGNEE OF KING COUNTY
14 _________________________________________________________
15
600 University Street, Suite 320
16
Seattle, Washington
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 DATE: Friday, February 3, 2017
25 REPORTED BY: Donald W. McKay, RMR, CRR, CCR 3237

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-57
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page536 of 206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 9

1 A. Not that I recall at this time.
2 Q. Did you discuss this deposition with anyone
3 outside of your counsel?
4 A. In order to be prepared to attend this, I had to
5 let my assistant and my chief of staff know that I would
6 be in a deposition today. I let my supervisor know that
7 I would be in a deposition today. I let my deputy
8 general manager know that I would be in a deposition
9 today, because he will have primary operational
10 responsibility for the transit agency.
11 Q. Did you discuss anything substantively about the
12 contents of your deposition with anyone outside of
13 counsel?
14 A. The transit advertising program manager, Sharron
15 Shinbo, was in the meetings with counsel.
16 MR. MUISE: I'd ask the court reporter if he
17 could hand to the witness what we'll be marking as
18 Exhibit No. 14, since we're marking exhibits
19 sequentially during the course of all the depositions.
20 It's captioned, "Plaintiffs' Amended Notice of
21 Deposition of Defendant King County." I'd ask the court
22 reporter to do that. And the witness, when you have
23 that document in front of you, if you could just give me
24 the signal.
25 (Exhibit 14 marked for identification.)

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-58
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page547 of 206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 10

1 BY MR. MUISE:
2 Q. Sir, have you seen this document prior to today?
3 A. It will take me a moment to review it before I
4 can answer that question.
5 Q. Please review then.
6 A. (Complies).
7 Having reviewed this document, I recall that it
8 was among the documents in the large binder of
9 preparatory materials.
10 Q. You'll see that the notice for this deposition
11 that we are taking today was amended because we moved it
12 to this date due to a scheduling conflict as noted in
13 the first paragraph. And pursuant to this notice, the
14 plaintiffs requested that the County designate a person
15 who would testify on its behalf as to the matters listed
16 on page two of this amended deposition notice, and the
17 County designated you as that witness. Is that your
18 understanding, sir?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So you understand that your testimony today is
21 not your personal testimony, but the testimony of King
22 County pursuant to what is Federal Rule of Procedure
23 30(b)(6). Do you understand that, sir?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. If you look at the notice -- and again, page

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-59
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page558 of 206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 11

1 two, where it lists the categories about which you've
2 been designated to testify about -- do you see those
3 listed as Nos. 1 through 3, sir?
4 A. I do.
5 Q. Are you prepared to testify on behalf of the
6 County as to these subject matters?
7 A. Could you repeat your question.
8 Q. My question is, are you prepared to testify
9 today as to those subject matters listed in the amended
10 deposition notice, Exhibit No. 14, as found on page two?
11 A. What do you mean by "prepared"? Could I ask
12 that question, please.
13 Q. Surely. As I believe you agreed to, that you
14 were designated by the County to be the witness who will
15 testify on its behalf as to those subject matters listed
16 on page two, and I just want to confirm with you that
17 you are, in fact, prepared to do so.
18 A. I believe I am prepared to do so, yes.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 Sir, what is your current position with the
21 County? Just a clarification, when I'm referring to the
22 County, I'm referring to King County. You understand
23 that. Right, sir?
24 A. I do understand that, yes.
25 Q. So my question is, what is your current position

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-60
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page569 of 206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 13

1 Q. And the County permits advertising on its
2 transit system; isn't that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. What locations are available to an advertiser?
5 MR. HACKETT: Objection, vague. If you could --
6 you're talking about the transit system.
7 MR. MUISE: Exactly.
8 BY MR. MUISE:
9 Q. I'll clarify, sir. What locations on the
10 transit advertising system are available to outside
11 advertisers?
12 A. There are designated areas on our buses that are
13 available to advertisers. There are areas in our
14 Downtown Seattle transit tunnel that are available to
15 advertisers.
16 Q. The areas in the downtown transit tunnel, are
17 they posters that go on the wall? Are they dioramas?
18 Kiosks? What type of advertising is over there?
19 A. May I look at our Transit Advertising Policy?
20 MR. MUISE: Certainly. And for the record, it
21 has already previously been marked as Exhibit No. 6.
22 The court reporter, if you could hand the
23 witness Exhibit No. 6.
24 MR. HACKETT: Robert, for the record, I don't
25 believe the court reporter has the official exhibits, so

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-61
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page57
10ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 14

1 I'm handing him the copies --
2 MR. MUISE: He should.
3 MR. HACKETT: Oh, does he?
4 MR. MUISE: Yes, I sent him the ones I was going
5 to be using.
6 MR. HACKETT: I'm talking about the one through
7 thirteen.
8 MR. MUISE: He has the ones I'm going to be
9 using and six is one of them.
10 MR. HACKETT: All right. Well, I will take my
11 notebook back. I was just going to let you know I
12 printed off all the ones from the court reporter. So if
13 you do have ones that you didn't anticipate using, I've
14 got them here.
15 MR. MUISE: Okay. Thank you.
16 (Previously marked Exhibit 6 referenced.)
17 BY MR. MUISE:
18 Q. You wanted to look at the Transit Advertising
19 Policy, Exhibit No. 6, to perhaps help you refresh your
20 recollection as to what areas are available for
21 advertising in the downtown transit tunnel. Is that
22 fair?
23 A. Yes, I have the document in front of me and I am
24 reviewing it.
25 If you could repeat your question, I am prepared

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-62
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page58
11ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 16

1 Q. Does the county transit authority own any
2 billboards that are available for advertising?
3 A. If, by "billboards," you mean something other
4 than I've already described as available on our buses,
5 our facilities, or our railcars, or from personal
6 experience having been in the transit tunnel, I do not
7 know of any billboard that Metro Transit offers for
8 advertising space.
9 Q. The advertising that is offered by the county
10 transit authority is paid advertising. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And this advertising is a source of revenue for
13 the County. Is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Does that revenue go to the transit authority's
16 budget or does it go into a general county budget?
17 A. It goes into the transit authority's budget.
18 Q. Does the transit authority offer any free
19 advertising, like, for example, for non-profit
20 organizations or public service messages or the
21 government?
22 A. As the general manager, I do not know the answer
23 to that question. I would rely on our transit
24 advertising program manager to provide that level of
25 detail to me.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-63
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page59
12ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 18

1 I have two core functions with respect to the
2 transit advertising policy. The overarching function is
3 I'm responsible, in conjunction with the transit
4 advertising program manager, for the overall
5 implementation of the Transit Advertising Policy. And
6 at the request of the transit advertising program
7 manager, I may approve or reject any proposed
8 advertising that requires my review.
9 MR. MUISE: So I'm going to ask the court
10 reporter if he can hand you three exhibits that were
11 previously marked, Exhibit Nos. 3, 4, and 5. Mr. McKay,
12 they should be color prints of advertisements.
13 (Previously marked Exhibit 3 referenced.)
14 (Previously marked Exhibit 4 referenced.)
15 (Previously marked Exhibit 5 referenced.)
16 BY MR. MUISE:
17 Q. Sir, the court reporter has handed you what has
18 been previously marked as Exhibits 3, 4, and 5. Do you
19 see those?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Okay. Exhibit 3, I'll represent to you -- you
22 can correct me if I'm wrong -- is an advertisement
23 submitted to the county transit authority by the State
24 Department. Is that your understanding, sir?
25 A. Yes.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-64
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page60
13ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 19

1 Q. And this advertisement actually ran for a period
2 of time on the transit authority advertising space. Is
3 that right, sir?
4 A. Yes. As I recall, that is correct.
5 Q. If it's okay with you, through the course of
6 this deposition, I'll refer to this simply as the State
7 Department ad. Is that okay?
8 A. I have no concerns with that description.
9 Q. Very good.
10 And if you could look at Exhibit No. 4. Do you
11 recognize this as one of the ads submitted by my client
12 to the transit authority advertising space that was
13 rejected by the county transit authority? Do you
14 recognize that as one of those ads, sir?
15 A. Yes, I recognize this ad.
16 Q. And this is one of the ads that's at issue in
17 this litigation. Is that right, sir?
18 A. As I understand this litigation, yes.
19 Q. And if it's okay with you, I'll refer to this
20 throughout this deposition as AFDI Ad 1. Is that okay
21 with you, sir?
22 A. That's okay with me.
23 Q. Okay. If you look at Exhibit No. 5, do you
24 recognize this as a subsequent ad that was submitted by
25 my client through the King County transit authority for

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-65
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page61
14ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 21

1 Q. Absolutely. Again, that's the Transit
2 Advertising Policy. Right, sir?
3 A. That is correct.
4 Could I ask you to repeat your question.
5 MR. MUISE: Court reporter, could you read it
6 back, please.
7 (Question read by the reporter.)
8 THE WITNESS: No.
9 BY MR. MUISE:
10 Q. Do you know if the general manager was involved
11 in the decision to reject either of my clients' ads at
12 issue in this litigation, AFDI Ad No. 1 and/or AFDI Ad
13 No. 2?
14 A. Yes. As I recall, the general manager was
15 involved in that decision.
16 Q. In both decisions, sir?
17 A. Could you repeat that question.
18 Q. Yes. I was asking about the two advertisements
19 that were rejected, AFDI Advertisement 1 and AFDI
20 Advertisement 2. I wanted to clarify whether the
21 general manager was involved in denying both
22 advertisements.
23 A. As I recall, the general manager was involved in
24 each of those decisions.
25 Q. Now, you already testified that there is no

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-66
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page62
15ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 22

1 listing of standards or circumstances when a general
2 manager's decision on an advertisement may be sought.
3 But what are the types of circumstances that would
4 trigger the general manager getting involved in deciding
5 whether to accept an advertisement for display?
6 A. There is only one set of circumstances that
7 would involve -- that would activate the general
8 manager's involvement in the decision-making process,
9 and that is a request from the transit advertising
10 program manager.
11 Q. Okay. And what circumstances are there that
12 would trigger such a request by the program manager?
13 A. May I refer to Exhibit 6, the Transit
14 Advertising Policy?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. The transit advertising program manager utilizes
17 her discretion to decide when to bring an advertisement
18 forward to the general manager for consideration.
19 Q. What type of criteria guide that discretion?
20 A. Under the Transit Advertising Policy, the
21 transit advertising program manager reviews the proposed
22 advertisement for compliance with the guidelines set
23 forth in the Transit Advertising Policy.
24 Q. Okay. You said that not every time that she or
25 he would conduct that review, do they request a general

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-67
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page63
16ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 30

1 program manager; isn't that correct?
2 A. That is correct.
3 Q. So if you read this the way it's written, it
4 appears to be sequential, meaning the transit
5 advertising contractor will make a first review; and if
6 they determine that it is acceptable, then it's
7 acceptable; if they determine it's not acceptable, then
8 it moves to 7.2. Is that a fair reading of this policy,
9 sir?
10 A. That is not my reading of the policy.
11 Q. What is your understanding of how the policy
12 actually operates in practice?
13 A. I read the policy and understand it in practice
14 that 7.2 comes into play in all cases. The transit
15 advertising program manager will review the proposed
16 advertisement for compliance with the guidelines set
17 forth in this policy and will direct the transit
18 advertising contractor as to whether the proposed
19 advertisement will be accepted.
20 Q. Do you know if anyone from the County trains
21 your transit advertising contractor on how your
22 advertising policy should be applied?
23 A. What do you mean by "trains"?
24 Q. Do they provide -- let me put it this way: Do
25 you provide any instruction to them beyond providing

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-68
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page64
17ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 31

1 them copies of the Transit Advertising Policy,
2 Exhibit 6?
3 A. And by "you," you mean the County. Is that
4 correct?
5 Q. Exactly. Yes.
6 A. To my knowledge and understanding, we do not
7 provide training as you describe it.
8 MR. MUISE: Let's just go off the record for a
9 moment.
10 (Discussion off the record.)
11 MR. MUISE: Let's go back on the record.
12 BY MR. MUISE:
13 Q. Sir, you understand that you're still testifying
14 under oath?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. We were asking you some questions about
17 Exhibit No. 6, which is the Transit Advertising Policy.
18 This policy was the policy that was in place when the
19 County rejected my client's two advertisements at issue,
20 that being AFDI Advertisement 1 and 2. Is that correct?
21 A. Yes. That's correct.
22 Q. And we were talking about -- previously, I had
23 some questions about the procedures, and it's
24 Section 7.0 in the Transit Advertising Policy. Is that
25 correct, sir?

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-69
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page65
18ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 33

1 MR. MUISE: So I would request the court
2 reporter to hand you what has been previously marked as
3 a document in this case, document No. 14, the
4 Declaration of Sharron Shinbo in Support of King
5 County's Brief in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary
6 Injunction. It's listed as one of 54 pages.
7 So if he can put that in front of you and let me
8 know when you have it.
9 (Previously marked Document 14 referenced.)
10 THE WITNESS: I have it.
11 BY MR. MUISE:
12 Q. I understand from your testimony that this is
13 one of the documents that you reviewed in preparation
14 for this deposition. Is that right, sir?
15 A. That is correct.
16 Q. I'm going to refer you to paragraph eight of
17 this declaration. It's on page three of 54. Let me
18 know when you get there.
19 A. I am there.
20 Q. In paragraph eight, it says, "All potential
21 creatives or proposed ads are screened by Titan, and if
22 there is a question about compliance with the Transit
23 Advertising Policy, they are passed through to me for
24 further evaluation." Do you see that?
25 A. I do see that.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-70
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page66
19ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 34

1 Q. And the Titan referred to here in paragraph
2 eight would be the transit advertising contractor that's
3 referred to in Part 7.0, Procedures, of the advertising
4 policy. Is that right?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. So going back again to my question about
7 procedures, based on the sworn testimony here of
8 Ms. Shinbo, it would appear, as I had asked, that the
9 transit advertising contractor does the initial review;
10 and only if they find that it's not in compliance, then
11 they push it up to the transit advertising program
12 manager. Is that correct?
13 A. May I take a moment to read paragraph eight in
14 full?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. Could you repeat your question.
17 MR. MUISE: Mr. McKay.
18 (Question read by the reporter.)
19 THE WITNESS: That is correct.
20 BY MR. MUISE:
21 Q. Sir, regarding the Transit Advertising Policy,
22 the policy, itself, does not limit advertising to just
23 commercial advertising. Is that correct?
24 A. That is correct.
25 Q. The advertising policy permits, for example,

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-71
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page67
20ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 35

1 advertisements that convey non-commercial messages.
2 A. I'm sorry. That sounded like a statement. Was
3 there a question that you wanted me to answer?
4 Q. Yes. It was a question. The advertising policy
5 permits non-commercial advertising. Is that correct?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. It permits advertisements that address
8 controversial issues; isn't that correct?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. It permits advertisements that address political
11 issues with the one exception being political campaign
12 speech. Is that right, sir?
13 A. Yes. That is correct.
14 Q. Looking at my client's advertisements that are
15 at issue here -- and those are at Exhibit 4 and 5 -- if
16 you could put those in front of you, sir.
17 A. I have those advertisements in front of me.
18 Q. Would it be fair to say that neither of these
19 advertisements are commercial advertisements?
20 A. I would say that that is a fair understanding,
21 yes.
22 Q. Would you characterize both of these
23 advertisements as conveying a political message?
24 A. May I pause to refer to the policy?
25 Q. Yes, sir.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-72
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page68
21ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 36

1 A. I think it is reasonable to review these ads and
2 consider them to have a political message.
3 Q. Would it be also reasonable to conclude that the
4 subject matter of both ads is global terrorism?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And global terrorism is not a subject matter
7 that is excluded by the advertising policy. Is that
8 right, sir?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Would you take a moment and look at the
11 advertisement that's marked as Exhibit No. 3, we've been
12 referring to as the State Department advertisement. Do
13 you have it in front of you, sir?
14 A. I have that ad in front of me, yes, and I have
15 reviewed this ad.
16 Q. Thank you. Is it fair to say that the subject
17 matter of this advertisement is global terrorism?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Sir, it's your understanding that my client,
20 American Freedom Defense Initiative -- we've been
21 referring to them as AFDI -- is a non-profit
22 organization?
23 A. I am not well familiar with the status of AFDI.
24 Q. It's your understanding that my client's two ads
25 at issue here, AFDI Advertisements No. 1 and 2, never

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-73
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page69
22ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 37

1 ran on the transit authority's advertising space. Is
2 that correct?
3 A. Yes. That is correct.
4 Q. Consequently, because these ads were never
5 displayed, you don't have any evidence of any violence
6 being conducted against any transit advertising property
7 as a result of these ads; do you?
8 A. I do not.
9 Q. And because these ads never ran, you don't have
10 any evidence of a diversion of substantial resources of
11 the Transit Advertising Policy -- excuse me --
12 advertising agency because of these ads. Is that right?
13 A. That is right.
14 Q. And because these ads never ran, you don't have
15 any evidence that these ads caused any disruption
16 whatsoever to the transit system. Is that right?
17 A. That is right.
18 Q. Do you know if there were any surveys conducted
19 by the transit authority regarding what the majority of
20 its ridership would -- strike that.
21 Have there been any polls taken or market
22 research done to determine what your ridership would
23 consider about either of these advertisements should
24 they run on the transit advertising space?
25 A. I can only speak to what I know of surveys

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-74
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page70
23ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 38

1 potentially conducted by King County Metro Transit, and
2 to my knowledge, there have not been surveys run on this
3 particular set of proposed ads.
4 Q. Sir, if you look at Exhibit 3 again, the State
5 Department advertisement, is it your understanding that
6 this advertisement actually ran on the transit
7 advertising space for a period of time?
8 A. Yes. That is my understanding.
9 Q. What is the general period of time -- I'm asking
10 generally about the advertising policy and its
11 application -- what is the general period of time in
12 which an advertisement will be displayed on the transit
13 advertising space? Is it one week? Two weeks? Three
14 weeks? Is there a standard or is it just depending on
15 the advertiser?
16 A. I am not intimately familiar with the details of
17 our advertising contract, so I do not know if there is a
18 standard. In my capacity as general manager, I would
19 say it depends on the intention of the entity proposing
20 the advertisement and how long they're willing to pay to
21 have the advertisement posted under the Transit
22 Advertising Policy.
23 Q. Do you have any sense of what a standard time
24 frame is? Seven days? Fourteen days? Any idea?
25 A. That is a level of detail I would rely on my

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-75
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page71
24ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 39

1 advertising program manager to understand, so I do not
2 have even a general sense of whether it's seven days or
3 14 days.
4 Q. Or perhaps longer or shorter. Right?
5 A. (No response).
6 Q. Is that right, sir?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. It could be longer than 14 days. You just don't
9 know. I want to make sure I understood your answer.
10 You're not sure what the terms are of the contract in
11 terms of length of display. Is that fair?
12 A. That is a fair characterization, yes.
13 Q. Looking at the State Department ad, Exhibit
14 No. 3, is it your understanding that it ran from
15 June 6th of 2013 to June 25th of 2013?
16 A. I would need to refer to the specific document
17 related to this ad to verify those dates.
18 Q. If you want to look at the Shinbo declaration,
19 which was Document No. 14, it might help you either
20 confirm or refresh your recollection. And I would point
21 you to paragraph Nos. 13 and 18.
22 A. If you can restate your question, I'm now
23 prepared to answer.
24 Q. Is it your understanding that the State
25 Department ad ran on the transit advertising space

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-76
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page72
25ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 40

1 beginning on June 6, 2013 and ending on June 25th, 2013?
2 A. That is my understanding.
3 Q. And during that time, was there any evidence of
4 vandalism, violence, or other acts endangering
5 passengers and preventing the County's buses from
6 running on account of this ad, the State Department ad?
7 A. Without reviewing a record of all incidents that
8 occurred during that period of time, I cannot state
9 definitively that there were no incidents.
10 Q. Do you recall, in your preparation for the
11 deposition today, seeing any evidence of vandalism,
12 violence, or other acts endangering passengers and
13 preventing county buses from running on account of the
14 State Department ad?
15 A. I do not recall any from my preparation.
16 Q. Do you recall, in your preparation for your
17 testimony today, seeing any evidence of a reduced
18 ridership because of any public fear of such vandalism,
19 violence, or other acts endangering passengers?
20 MR. HACKETT: I'm going to object that the FBI
21 ad is beyond the scope of the three questions that are
22 asked, unless you have specific documents you want to
23 refer him to.
24 MR. MUISE: It's not beyond the scope. I'm
25 asking him. He's the one that prepared for the

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-77
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page73
26ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 48

1 types of channels used to express those complaints
2 relative to the ad.
3 Q. Okay. What is your correction, sir?
4 A. So to the degree I was speculating, it was on my
5 ability to recollect what was in the declaration of the
6 advertising program manager, Sharron Shinbo. I still
7 cannot cite an exact number of complaints, but I would
8 say between eight and ten complaints were received
9 through multiple channels, including e-mail, telephone;
10 and in addition, there was a community meeting where a
11 number of complaints or at least concerns were expressed
12 about the advertisement.
13 Q. Was anybody from the transit authority at this
14 community meeting?
15 A. It's my understanding that yes, somebody from
16 the transit authority was at that community meeting.
17 Q. Who was it?
18 A. I do not know specifically.
19 Q. Do you know when that community meeting was
20 held?
21 A. I do not know the specific date, but it would
22 have been held during the period that the ad was run and
23 during the time we were receiving these complaints.
24 Q. In her declaration, Ms. Shinbo described the
25 volume of complaints as, quote, "small," unquote. Would

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-78
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page74
27ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 49

1 you agree with that assessment?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Describe what you mean by "reputational harm."
4 A. Metro Transit is a large public-facing transit
5 agency, encountering many millions of people each and
6 every day. We work hard to maintain a brand that is
7 positive and encourages people to ride on our system.
8 When negative events occur, that can directly or
9 indirectly impact the perceived value of our brand and
10 the quality of our service. So, as a general statement,
11 I'm concerned about any and all negative issues that may
12 occur and detract from the value of our brand and the
13 way our customers view the services we provide to a very
14 large community.
15 Q. Now, with that said, you testified previously
16 that there is no prohibition on ads that are
17 controversial. Correct?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. And no prohibition on political messages.
20 Correct?
21 A. That is correct, except as noted in the Transit
22 Advertising Policy.
23 Q. And that's with campaign advertisements
24 specifically. Correct?
25 A. Correct.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-79
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page75
28ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 54

1 take the Shinbo declaration -- if you brought other
2 documents that would help you to testify about the
3 application of your policy to AFDI Advertisement No. 1
4 and 2 -- then I think we'll be able speed up this
5 deposition.
6 So let's go off the record.
7 (Discussion off the record.)
8 MR. MUISE: Let's go back on the record.
9 BY MR. MUISE:
10 Q. Sir, you're still testifying under oath.
11 The question we left off before the break was
12 the question for all the bases that the County used to
13 reject AFDI Advertisement No. 1. And my understanding
14 is you're referring to a document to refresh your
15 recollection as to those bases. Is that correct?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And the document you're referring to is
18 Exhibit K in the Shinbo declaration, which is actually
19 pages 49 and 50 of Document 14, the specific document
20 beginning on page 50 of the declaration, page 49 being
21 just the exhibit marking. Is that correct?
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. So what were the bases that the County used to
24 reject AFDI Advertisement No. 1?
25 A. The County used three bases, all related or

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-80
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page76
29ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 55

1 stemming directly from the Transit Advertising Policy.
2 They were Item 6.2.4, that the material in the ad was
3 false or misleading; Item 6.2.8, that the advertising
4 contained material that was demeaning or disparaging;
5 and Item 6.2.9, that in the view of the transit agency,
6 it would be harmful or disruptive to the transit system.
7 Q. Looking at that first basis that you've
8 established, 6.2.4, false and misleading, what was it
9 about AFDI Advertisement 1 that was false or misleading
10 in violation of that provision of the Transit
11 Advertising Policy?
12 A. As I understand, there were at least two
13 elements that were deemed to be false or misleading, one
14 referring to the amount of the reward, and the other
15 being the use of the term "jihadis."
16 Q. What was false about the amount of the reward?
17 A. The statement related to the FBI offering a
18 reward.
19 Q. What was false about that?
20 A. In Advertisement No. 1, in AFDI No. 1, the
21 statement reads, the FBI is offering up to $25 million
22 reward if you help capture one of those faces. That was
23 not accurate.
24 Q. What was inaccurate about it?
25 A. Based on our evaluation, no one individual was

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-81
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page77
30ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 56

1 worth $25 million reward on the FBI's website.
2 Q. Based on your evaluation, did you determine that
3 the Rewards for Justice allowed for rewards of up to
4 $25 million?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Was it your understanding, based on your
7 evaluation, that the award amounts for any particular
8 individual could adjust depending on any particular
9 circumstance?
10 A. I did not review to figure out whether awards --
11 rewards would be adjusted. We evaluated the ad and
12 determined that the statement was not accurate, because
13 there was no single individual listed that was worth
14 $25 million reward.
15 Q. Isn't it true that one of these individuals,
16 based on the program, could eventually result in an
17 award of up to $25 million, which is what the State
18 Department authorizes?
19 A. That is not my understanding.
20 Q. Look at Exhibit 3, which is the State Department
21 ad.
22 A. I'm now looking at this ad.
23 Q. Let me ask you this: Is there anything about
24 this ad that was false or misleading as determined by
25 the County?

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-82
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page78
31ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 57

1 A. As best I can recall, this ad was withdrawn
2 before we were ever able to render such a conclusion.
3 Q. But it actually ran on your advertising space
4 from June 6th to June 25th of 2013. Is that right?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. So when it ran during that period of time of
7 June 6th to June 25th of 2013, there was no
8 determination by the County that anything in this ad was
9 false or misleading; isn't that correct?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. And on this advertisement, it says, "Up to
12 $25 million reward." Do you see that?
13 A. I do see that portion of the sentence, yes.
14 Q. And do you know if any of the faces listed on
15 this advertisement, at the time this ad was run, you
16 could receive up to a $25 million reward for stopping
17 them?
18 A. Our review led us to conclude that no single
19 individual listed was worth the $25 million reward.
20 Q. So I'm asking you about Exhibit 3, the State
21 Department ad.
22 A. I'm sorry. Please restate your question, then.
23 I thought you were referring to Exhibit No. 4.
24 Q. I was still on Exhibit 3 where it says, "Up to
25 $25 million reward." Do you see that, sir? The State

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-83
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page79
32ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 58

1 Department ad.
2 A. I do. "Up to $25 million reward."
3 Q. Right. Do you know if any of those individuals
4 listed on the State Department ad, you could receive a
5 $25 million reward for that person's capture?
6 A. I do not.
7 Q. So going back to AFDI Ad 1, Plaintiff's Exhibit
8 No. 4, do you have any understanding as to whether or
9 not the amount of the awards for individuals can
10 adjustment either upward or downward, depending on the
11 circumstances at the time?
12 MR. HACKETT: Objection, asked and answered.
13 THE WITNESS: I do not.
14 BY MR. MUISE:
15 Q. It's your understanding, though, that the
16 Rewards for Justice program, the government is
17 authorized to provide awards of up to $25 million for
18 individuals.
19 MR. HACKETT: Objection, asked and answered
20 again.
21 THE WITNESS: That is my understanding of the
22 program, generally.
23 BY MR. MUISE:
24 Q. You mentioned about the term "jihadis." You
25 said that was part of the determination that was false

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-84
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page80
33ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 60

1 A. Because as we evaluated AFDI No. 1, we came to
2 understand the term "jihadi" as part of something that
3 was false or misleading. Our evaluation was limited to
4 what is on this particular proposed ad. Had the word --
5 Q. And -- I'm sorry.
6 MR. HACKETT: Go ahead, if you need to.
7 THE WITNESS: The word "jihadi" does not appear
8 on Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3, the Faces of Global
9 Terrorism ad, the State Department ad.
10 BY MR. MUISE:
11 Q. If you look at AFDI Advertisement No. 1,
12 Exhibit 4, the term "jihadi" is in the context of the
13 Faces of Global Terrorism advertisement; is it not?
14 A. It is.
15 Q. And it's in reference to the individuals who are
16 listed in the FBI's most wanted global terrorists list;
17 isn't it?
18 A. In the context of this ad, yes, that is its
19 reference.
20 Q. So in the context of this ad, its reference is
21 more closely associated with the understanding of jihadi
22 as those who commit terrorist acts. Isn't that a fair
23 assessment, sir?
24 A. I think it is one fair assessment, but it is
25 also a misleading assessment.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-85
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page81
34ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 61

1 Q. How is it misleading?
2 A. This ad would suggest that all jihadis are
3 terrorists, and all jihadis are not terrorists.
4 Q. So this ad is referring to one of these jihadis,
5 listing those individuals on the FBI's terrorist list;
6 is it not?
7 A. I think I've answered this question, but that is
8 the context of this advertisement, yes.
9 MR. HACKETT: Counsel, we are around lunch here.
10 So whenever you want to let us take a lunch break, let
11 us know.
12 MR. MUISE: Let me finish up a little bit more
13 on this line of questioning and then we'll break for
14 lunch.
15 BY MR. MUISE:
16 Q. Sir, refer back to Exhibit No. 6, the
17 advertising policy. And in reference to AFDI ads,
18 you've again stated three reasons, false and misleading.
19 We discussed the first one. And the two items that you
20 said were false and misleading is the fact of the up to
21 $25 million reward and the use of the term "jihadis."
22 Is that correct?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. And the other bases that you said was demeaning
25 or disparaging. Is that correct?

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-86
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page82
35ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 62

1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. How is this ad, AFDI Ad No. 1, demeaning or
3 disparaging?
4 A. We viewed this ad to be demeaning and
5 disparaging to Muslims or people of color, because all
6 of the faces listed under that headline were people of
7 color or had names that appeared to be foreign born or
8 associated with Islam.
9 Q. Are any of these pictures that are listed on
10 this advertisement pictures of individuals who are not
11 wanted for global terrorism by the FBI?
12 A. To my knowledge, no.
13 Q. Do you know what percentage of your ridership
14 are Muslims?
15 A. I do not know, nor do we collect that data.
16 Q. Do you know what percentage of your ridership
17 are non-Caucasian?
18 A. I do not know the exact percentage.
19 Q. Do you know if one of the individuals listed or
20 pictured in this Faces of Global Terrorism is, in fact,
21 a Caucasian?
22 A. I do not know that as a point of fact, no.
23 Q. Would it make a difference if one of these
24 individuals depicted here was, in fact, an American-born
25 Caucasian individual?

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-87
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page83
36ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 63

1 A. You'll have to clarify your question. I don't
2 understand what you mean by "would it make a difference."
3 Q. Well, correct me if I'm wrong. I thought your
4 testimony was that these were all people of color and
5 Muslims, so it was demeaning and disparaging because
6 that's what's portrayed in this advertisement.
7 A. It would begin to make a difference, yes.
8 MR. MUISE: David, let's go off the record.
9 MR. HACKETT: Okay.
10 (Lunch recess taken from 12:04 to 12:49.)
11 MR. MUISE: Let's go back on the record.
12
13 E X A M I N A T I O N (continued)
14 BY MR. MUISE:
15 Q. Sir, you understand you're still under oath?
16 A. I do understand.
17 Q. When we left off before the break, as we were
18 talking about AFDI Advertisement No. 1, Exhibit 4, we
19 were running through the bases for the County's
20 rejection of the ad. We spoke about the false and
21 misleading, and we were talking about the demeaning or
22 disparaging bases for rejecting. So I'm going to pick
23 up from there.
24 Looking at AFDI Ad No. 1, is it demeaning or
25 disparaging under the advertising policy just to show

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-88
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page84
37ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 64

1 these pictures of the most wanted global terrorists with
2 their names?
3 A. If I understand your question, the answer is no.
4 Q. And you don't dispute that these are actual
5 pictures and names of people who are listed on the FBI's
6 most wanted global terrorists list; do you?
7 A. I do not dispute that.
8 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that my client
9 selectively excluded anyone from appearing on this
10 advertisement that appears on the list?
11 A. I didn't quite understand the middle of your
12 sentence. Did you say deliberately excluded?
13 Q. Selectively excluded individuals from the list
14 from appearing on the advertisement. For example, if
15 you look at Congressman McDermott's letter, he's
16 complaining that there is not a proper representation of
17 other faiths, other races, and so forth. Do you have
18 any evidence that any of these -- that there was a
19 selective exclusion of people from different religions
20 or races from this advertisement?
21 A. No.
22 Q. You probably recall, from looking at the record
23 evidence -- I think, at the time this was submitted,
24 there were 32 names on the most wanted global terrorists
25 list, and there was one of those who apparently didn't

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-89
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page85
38ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 66

1 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that these
2 individuals that are listed on AFDI 1 is not a fair
3 representation of individuals that are listed on the
4 FBI's most wanted global terrorists list?
5 A. No, I do not.
6 Q. Looking at Exhibit No. 6 -- I'm going to go to
7 your policy, the Transit Advertising Policy. Turn to
8 page six where it cites the demeaning or disparaging
9 standard. If I can draw your attention there, I've got
10 some questions about the standards. Are you there, sir?
11 A. I'm there.
12 Q. Just generally, the advertising policy that's
13 contained in this Exhibit 6, is this the entirety of the
14 policy? Meaning are there other aspects of the policy
15 that might have a definitional section or might have
16 some other description of how the policy is put into
17 effect, or is this Exhibit 6 the entirety of the policy?
18 A. Exhibit 6 is the entirety of the policy.
19 Q. Turning to page six of Exhibit 6, the demeaning
20 or disparaging standard, it refers to knowledge of the
21 County's ridership. Is there a certain percentage of
22 the ridership that this is referring to, or can you
23 explain what it means by knowledge of the County's
24 ridership?
25 A. Knowledge of the County's ridership means what

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-90
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page86
39ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 67

1 it says, an understanding of the customers who engage
2 the transit system for purposes of public transportation.
3 Q. Do you know what percentage of the County's
4 ridership would be demeaned or disparaged by AFDI
5 Advertisement No. 1, which is Exhibit 4?
6 A. I do not know an exact percentage.
7 Q. Do you have even an estimate?
8 A. I do not have an estimate, no.
9 Q. The percentage of ridership that would be
10 demeaned or disparaged, is that a way that you apply
11 this particular standard?
12 A. Yes. Maybe I could ask you to repeat your
13 question, please.
14 Q. The one that you just answered yes to?
15 A. Let me ask you this: Will you repeat the
16 question, and I will either correct or confirm my
17 answer.
18 MR. MUISE: I'll ask the court reporter to read
19 back the last question, and if that's not the one you're
20 referring to, I'll try to recall what the one prior to
21 that was.
22 (Question read by the reporter.)
23 THE WITNESS: So I'll amend my answer, yes, it
24 is a part of the way we would apply this standard.
25 BY MR. MUISE:

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-91
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page87
40ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 68

1 Q. Okay. With regard to prevailing community
2 standards, what does that refer to?
3 A. I think prevailing community standards is best
4 understood by what follows in the Transit Advertising
5 Policy, in that it would be that community understanding
6 a standard that believes the advertisement would contain
7 material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile
8 to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual,
9 group of individuals or entity.
10 Q. Is there anywhere in this Exhibit 6 that defines
11 further what community standards are referred to here in
12 this restriction?
13 MR. HACKETT: Objection, asked and answered.
14 THE WITNESS: I would answer that a similar
15 statement is made in Section 6.2.9.
16 BY MR. MUISE:
17 Q. They just repeat the same statement. Is that
18 right?
19 A. Yes. It makes a reference to community
20 standards.
21 Q. Is there anywhere else in this policy where it
22 defines what those community standards are?
23 A. No. Nowhere else in this policy.
24 Q. You referred to the fact that the ad needs to
25 be -- for the ad to be demeaning or disparaging, would

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-92
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page88
41ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 69

1 ridicule or mock, be abusive or hostile to, or debase
2 the dignity or stature of any individual, group or
3 individuals or entity. Is that right?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. Is there anywhere in this policy that it defines
6 what it means to ridicule or mock, be abusive or hostile
7 to, or debase the dignity or stature of any individual,
8 group of individuals or entity?
9 MR. HACKETT: Objection, asked and answered.
10 THE WITNESS: I think that that is contained in
11 6.2.8 and nowhere else.
12 BY MR. MUISE:
13 Q. Are there any objective standards for
14 determining whether or not something ridicules or mocks,
15 is abusive or hostile to, or debases another individual
16 or group?
17 MR. HACKETT: Objection, calls for a legal
18 conclusion.
19 THE WITNESS: There are no standards contained
20 in this policy.
21 BY MR. MUISE:
22 Q. With regard to my client's advertisement, AFDI
23 Advertisement No. 1, surely my clients do not believe
24 that it ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile to, or
25 debases the dignity or stature of any individual or

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-93
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page89
42ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 72

1 disrupt the transit system?
2 A. AFDI 1, Exhibit No. 4, did not cause harm or
3 disruption to the transit system because we denied
4 placing it on any of the available advertising space.
5 Q. Okay. Let's switch to AFDI Advertisement No. 2,
6 which is Exhibit 5.
7 A. I have that exhibit in front of me.
8 Q. This advertisement was rejected by the County.
9 Correct?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. What were the bases for rejecting this
12 advertisement?
13 And to help us out here, if I can have the court
14 reporter hand you what I have marked as document No. 2,
15 and we'll mark this as Exhibit 15. I think that's the
16 next exhibit.
17 (Exhibit 15 marked for identification.)
18 THE WITNESS: I have Exhibit 15 in front of me.
19 BY MR. MUISE:
20 Q. I'll ask you, does Exhibit 15 represent the
21 bases for King County's rejection of AFDI Advertisement
22 No. 2, Exhibit 5?
23 A. It does represent the bases, yes.
24 Q. Are there any bases beyond those listed here in
25 Exhibit 15 for denying AFDI Advertisement No. 2?

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-94
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page90
43ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 73

1 A. There were no additional bases used.
2 Q. So it appears that the County does not consider
3 AFDI Advertisement No. 2 to be false and misleading. Is
4 that correct?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Looking at AFDI Advertisement No. 2, what was it
7 about AFDI Advertisement No. 2 that the County
8 considered to be demeaning or disparaging?
9 A. So I'll preface this remark by saying that the
10 declarations of Sharron Shinbo and Kevin Desmond
11 accurately reflect the reasons why we denied this ad.
12 And I was not involved directly in that decision, but
13 speaking now, I would say we denied this ad because it
14 was demeaning and disparaging, because it had the
15 potential to be harmful and disruptive to the transit
16 system, for the same reasons, setting aside false or
17 misleading, that we rejected AFDI No. 1. That is, it
18 portrayed a group of people of color, under the banner,
19 the words, Faces of Global Terrorism, suggesting that
20 people of color, with foreign-sounding names, associated
21 with the religion of Islam, are all terrorists.
22 Q. Sir, you're aware that this advertisement was
23 submitted and rejected after Mr. Desmond and Ms. Shinbo
24 had submitted their declarations in the case dealing
25 with AFDI Advertisement No. 1.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-95
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page91
44ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 75

1 Global Terrorists" or "Wanted for Global Terrorism." Do
2 you see that, sir?
3 A. I do see that, yes.
4 Q. So with those two changes or with either one of
5 those changes, changing "Faces of Global Terrorism" to
6 "Most Wanted Global Terrorists," or changing "Faces of
7 Global Terrorism" to "Wanted for Global Terrorism," this
8 advertisement would comply with the Transit Advertising
9 Policy. Correct?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. So the fact that you had these pictures with
12 these faces and these names wasn't a basis for rejecting
13 either as demeaning or disparaging or harmful or
14 disruptive to the transit system. Is that correct?
15 A. The pictures of the faces alone were not the
16 reason for the rejection of the ad.
17 Q. Not just the pictures and the faces alone, but
18 with the names listed as well. Correct?
19 A. Yes. That is correct.
20 Q. So the objection to this ad is the "Faces of
21 Global Terrorism" title of it; isn't that correct?
22 A. It is not correct. It is the combination of the
23 banner phrase, "Faces of Global Terrorism," suspended
24 over those selected faces and those selected names.
25 Q. Okay. So if we changed "Faces of Global

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-96
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page92
45ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 76

1 Terrorism," as we just went through, to "Most Wanted
2 Global Terrorists" or "Wanted for Global Terrorism,"
3 everything else remaining equal, the ad would comply
4 with the policy. Correct?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. So if we changed this ad by just removing "Faces
7 of Global Terrorism" and everything else is the same,
8 would that violate the policy?
9 A. I do not believe it would.
10 Q. You do not believe it would violate the policy.
11 Is that right?
12 A. Correct. I do not believe it would violate the
13 policy.
14 MR. MUISE: David, actually, I'd like to take --
15 maybe we can take an in-place break and go off the
16 record. This might have sped things up here quite a
17 bit.
18 Actually, let's do this, David, if we could:
19 Let's take a ten-minute break. I just want to review
20 and see if I missed something on any of these additional
21 documents that I might want to ask, and I think we might
22 be able to wrap this thing up relatively quickly. Does
23 that work for you?
24 MR. HACKETT: Yes. That works for me. Sounds
25 good.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-97
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page93
46ofof206
61

Rob Gannon 30(b)(6) - February 3, 2017 81

1 policy in place at the time.
2 Q. And that was 2011. If you look at Exhibit 6 --
3 because I just want to make a comparison to where we are
4 today.
5 A. Okay.
6 Q. Exhibit 6, as you testified, is the current
7 Transit Advertising Policy. Correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And it's the advertising policy that was applied
10 to reject my client's ads at issue, AFDI 1, AFDI 2.
11 Correct?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. And by adopting this policy in 2012, the County
14 removed the restriction stated in Exhibit 17 regarding
15 public issue advertising. Is that correct?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. So under the current advertising policy as
18 expressed in Exhibit 6, it is permissible to
19 advertise -- excuse me -- to present advertising
20 expressing or advocating an opinion, position or
21 viewpoint on matters of public debate about economic,
22 political, religious, or social issues. Is that
23 correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 MR. MUISE: David, I have no further questions.

Bienenstock Court Reporting & Video
Ph: 248.644.8888 Toll Free: 888.644.8080
ER-98
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page94
47ofof206
61

' PLAINTIFF'S }
s;i EXHIBIT NO. _...._,.:}-..__
~ FOR 1DEtr,1F1CAT10N
Iolr~:11 Il ~ RPTRl\"'r
ER-99
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page95
48ofof206
61

IPLAINTIFF'S / I
§l EXHIBIT NO. 't"
; FO~DElfllF::IC~A::::TI:-:--
ON~~
i I ll ll T'
~ DA : RPTR: (\-,,.-

ER-100
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page96
49ofof206
61

1PLAINTIFF'S r-
i;i EXHIBIT NO._ _...~=--
i~ F~,
DAJ:
l~li'tCATION
RPTR:k
ER-101
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page97
50ofof206
61

Contract 5506032 Exh ibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King County General Department
Department Po.l icies and Procedu res Policies & Procedures
t:iocumen! Code No.

TRANSIT ADVERTISING POLICY CON 1-1-1 (D-P)

Oeparlmentfusuing Agency Date
King County Department of T:nmsportation, Transit Divis.ion January 12, 2012

, Kevin Desmond, 'Transit Geoeral Manager

1.0 SUBJECT W 'LE: King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division, Transit
Advertising Policy

1.1 EFFECTIVEDATE: January 12, 2012

1.2 TYPE OF ACTION: Superseding CON 1-1 {D-P)

1.3 KEY WORDS: (1) Transit; (2) Advertising

2.0 PURPOSE:

2.l King Cotmty'fransit System. The King County Departm.ent of Transportation,
through its Transit Division, operates one of the largest bus systems in the nation, one
that in.eludes more than 225 bus routes throughout the County, with nearly 9,000 bus
stops and more than 130 park-and-ride facilities connecting riders with those routes.
The transit system is a vital component of the broad spectrum of public. services the
County provides. The County's transit advertising program is intended to· generate
revenue to support the transit system.

2.2 Advertising as Revenue Source. The County's transit operations are funded by a
combination of foderal, state and local funds, including grants and ta..'<es, as well as
fare box revenue. Advertising revenues are an important additional source ofrevenue
that supports lransit operations. The Countis fundamental purpose in accepting
transit advertising is to generate revenue to augment the Transit Division:s operating
budget.

The primary p11t'{>OSe of the County's transit system is to provide safe and efficient
public transportation within its service area. Consistent with this purpose, the County
places great importance on maintaining secure, safe, comfortable and convenient
Transi t Facilities and Transit Vehicles in order to, among either things consistent with
the provision of e.ITective and reliable public trans ortation, retain existing riders and
attract new users of public transit services (KCC 28.96.020 and 210). To generate
additional revenue while also accomplishing the primary objectives of transit

IPLAINTIFF'S/,,..
~ EXHIBIT NO. 1../.)
~ FO~ \DENJIFl:=.CA:::TI::'-ON--
1 i DA~ ll t / ~ PTR~

ER-102
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page98
51ofof206
61

Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page2 of8

operations, the County will accept advertising on its Transit Facilities and Transit
Vehicles only if such advertising complies with this Advertising Policy.

2.3 Limited Public Fonun Status. The County's acceptance of transit advertising does not
provide or create a general public fonun for expressive activities. In keeping with its
proprietary function as a provider ofpublic transportation, and consistent with KCC
28.96.020 and .210, the County does not intend its acceptance of transit advertising to
convert its Transit Vehicles or Transit Facilities into open public forums for public
discourse and debate. Rather, as noted, the County's fimdamental purpose and intent is
to accept advertising as an additional means of generating revenue to support its transit
operations. In furtherance of that discreet and limited objective, the County retains
- ----strict-controloverthe-nature of-the ads accepted-for posting-on-or in its Transit---- -
Vehicles and Transit Facilities and maintains its advertising space as a limited public
fa.nun.

In the County's expeiience, certain types of advertisements interfere with the program's
primary purpose of generating revenue to benefit the transit system. This policy
advances the advertising program's revenue-generating objective by prohibiting
advertisements that could detract from that goal by creating substantial-controversy,
interfering with and diverting resources ·from transit operations, and/or posing
significant risks of harm, inconvenience, or annoyance to transit passengers, operators
and vehicles. SU<:h advertisements create an enviromnent that is not conducive to
achieving increased revenue for !he benefit of the transit system or to preserving and
enhancing the security, safety, comfort and convenience ofits operations. The
viewpoint neutral restrictions in this policy thus foster the maintenance of a
professional advertising environment that maximizes advertising revenue.

This policy is intended to provide clear guidance as to the types of advertisements that
will allow the County to generate revenue and enhance transit operations by fulfilling
1he following goals and objectives:

Maximizing advertising revenue;
Preventing the appearance' of favoritism by the County;
Preventing the risk ofimposing demeaning or disparaging views on a captive
audience;
• · Maintaining a position of neutrality on controversial issues;
Preserving the marketing potential of the advertising space by avoiding content
that the community could view as demeaning, disparaging, objectionable,
inappropriate or hann:ful to members of the public generally or to minors in
particular;
Maximizing ridership;
Avoiding claims of discrimination and maintaining a non-discriminatory
environment for riders;
Preventing any harm or abuse that may result .from mnni.ng demeaning,
disparaging or objectionable advertisements;

2

ER-103
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page99
52ofof206
61

Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 3 of8

Reducing the diversion ofresources from transit operations that is
caused by demeaning, disparaging, objectionable, inappropriate or
harmful advertisements.

The County's Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles are a limited public forum and, as
such, the Collllty will accept only that advertising that falls within the categories of
acceptable advertising specified in this viewpoint neutral policy and that satisfies all
other access requirements and restrictions provided herein.

The County reserves the right to suspend, modify or revoke the application of any of
_the standards in this Policyas.it-decms-necessaryto comply-with-legal-mandates,to - -
accommodate its primary transportation function, or to fulfill the goals and objectives
identified above. All of the provisions in this Policy shall be deemed severable.

2.4 Application of Policy. This Transit Advertising Policy applies to the posting of all
new advertisements on Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles on or after the Effective
Date. Any advertisements which would be prohibited under this policy, but which
were posted pursuant to the tenns of a fully executed advertising contractprior to the
Effective Dato of this policy, will be allowed to remain posted for the duration of that
contract

2.5 Disclaimer of Endorsement The County's acceptance of an advertisement does not
constitute express or implied endorsement of the content or message of the
' advertisement, including any person, organization, products, services, iufOJmation or
viewpomts contained therein, or of the advertisement sponsodtself. This endorsement
disclaimer extends to and includes content that may be found via internet addresses,
quick response (QR) codes, and telephone numbers that may appear in posted ads and
that direct viewers to external sources of information.

3.-0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED: King County Department of Transportation, Transit
Division

4.0 REFERENCES:

4. 1 Transit Code of Conduct, chapter 28.96 KCC

4.2 Public Transit Definitions, chapter 28.92 KCC

4.3 King County Charter Section 320.20: Provides that the coWlty executive "shall have
the power to assign duties to admimstrative offices and executive departments which
are not specifically assigned by this charter or ordinance, , , :'

4.4 ExecLttivePolicy/Procedures No. INF 7-ID-l (AEP): Approval and Routing
Procedures for General Department Policies/Procedures (D-P's) and Department Work
Procedures (D-W)

3

ER-104
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page100
53 of 206
61

Contract 5506032 Exhibit C · Transit Advertising Policy

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 4 of 8

5.0 DEF!NlTIONS:

5.1 Transit Facilities. Transit Facilities include the downtown Seattle transit ttmnel (KCC
28.92.190), transit tunnel mezzanine areas (KCC 28.92.200) and transit tunnel
platform areas (KCC 28.92.210).

5.2 Transit Vehicles. Transit Vehicles include all transit passenger buses, trolleys a:nd
street railcars.

6.0 POIJCIES:

6.1 Permitted Advertising Content: The following classes of advertising are authorized on
or in Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles:

6.1.J General Allowance for Advertising. Advertising that does not include any
material that qualifies as Prohibited Advertising under Subsection 6.2 of this
Advertising Policy.

6.1.2 King County Transit Advertising. The C01mty has the right to display
advertising sponsored by the King County Transit Division to promote the
King County Transit System or any of the functions or programs carried out by
the Transit Division.

6.2 Prohibited Advertising Content: Advertising is prohibited on or in Transit Facilities
and Transit Vehicles if it includes any of the following content:

6.2.1 Political Campaign Speech. Advertising that promotes, or opposes a political
party, the election of any candidate or group of candidates for federal, state or
local government offices, or initiatives, referendmns or other ballot measures.

6:2.2 Prohibited Products, Services or Activities. Any advertising that (i) promotes
or depicts the sale, rental, or use of; participation in, or images of the following
products, services or activities; or (ii) that uses brand names, trademarks,
slogans or other material that are identifiable with such products, services or
activities:

(a) Tobacco. Tobacco products, including but not limited to
cigarettes, cigars, and smokeless (e.g., chewing) tobacco;

(b) Alcohol. Beer, wine, distilled spirits or any alcoholic beverage
licensed and regulated under Washington law, however, this
· prohibition shall not prohibit advertising that includes the name
of a restaurant that is open to minors;

4

ER-105
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page101
54 of 206
61
·-
Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

Kmg County Department ofTransportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 5 of8

(c) Firearms. Firearms, ammunition or other fireanns-related
products.

(d) Adult/ Mature Rated Films, Television or Video Garnes. Adult
films rated "X" or "NC-17", television rated "MA" or video
games rated ~'A" or ''111';

(e) Adult Entertainment Facilities. Adult book stores, adult video
stores, nude dance clubs and other adult entertainment
establishments;
-- ---

(t) Other Adult Services. Adult telephone services, adult internet
sites and escort services.

6.2.3 Sexual and/or Excretory Sllbject Matter. Any advertising that contains or
involves any material that describes, depicts or represents sexual or excretory
organs or activities in a way:

(a) that the average adult person, applying contemporary
community standards, would find, when considered as a whole,
appeals to the prurient interest of minors in sex; or

(b) which is patently offensive to contemporary standards in the
adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable
material fur minors to see; or

(c) that depicts, or reasonably appears to depict, a person under the
age of eighteen (18) exhibiting Iris or her sexual or excretory
organs or engaging in sexual or excretory activities.

For purposes of this subsection, "sexual or excretory organs" shall mean and
include the male or female pubic area, anus, buttocks, genitalia, or any portion
of the areola or nipple of the female breast and "sexual or excretory activities"
shall mean and include actual or simulated sex acts of every nature (iocludiog
but not limited to touching of one's own or another's clothed or unclothed
sexual or excretory organs), urination and defecation.

6.2.4 False or Misleading. Any material that is or that the sponsor reasonably should
have known is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would co11Stitute a
tort of defamation or invasion of ptivacy.

6.2.5 Couvri!!ht. Trademark or Otherwise Unlawful. Advertising that contains 311Y
material that is an infringement of copyright, trademark or service mark, or is
otheiwise unlawful or illegal.

5

ER-106
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page102
55 of 206
61

Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 6 of8

6.2.6 lllegal Activity. Any advertising that promotes any activity or product that is
illegal under federal, state or local law.

6.2.7 Profanity and Violence. Advertising that contains any profane language, or
portrays images or descriptions of graphic violence, including dead, mutilated
or disfigured human beiugs or animals, the act of killing, mutilating or
disfiguring human beings ot animals, or iutentional infliction of pain or violent
action towards or upon a person or animal,

6.2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that den1ear1s or
disparages an individual, group of individuals or entity. For purposes of
-- determining whether arnrdvcrti'sement contains sucn mateiial;-tlfeCounty will- --
detennine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County's
ridership and using prevailing community standards, would believe that the
advertisement contains material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile
to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group ofi11dividuals or
entity.

6.2.9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains material
that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in
hann to, disruption oforinterference with the transportation system. For
purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the
County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of
the County's ridership and using prevailing community standards, would
believe that the material is so objectionable that it is reasonably fureseeable
that it will result in hann to, disruption of or interference with the
transportation system.

6.2.10 Lights. Noise and Special Effects. Flashing lights, sound 111l!kers, mirrors or
other special effects that interfere with. the safe operation of the bus or the
safety of bus riders, drivers of other vehicles or the public at large.

6.2.11 Unsafe Transit Behavior. .Any advertisement that encoui'ages or depicts unsafe
behavior with respect to transit-related activities, such as non-use of nounal
safety precautions in awaiting, boarding, riding upon or debarking from transit
vehicles.

6.3 Additional Requirements:

6.3.1 Sponsor Attribution and Contact Information. Any advertising ill which the
identity of the sponsor is not readily and unambiguously identifiable must
include the following phrase to identify the sponsor in clearly visible letters (no
&mailer thJm 72 point type fur exteriors and 24 point type for interiors):

Paid for by _ _ _ _ _._ _ __

6

ER-107
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page103
56 of 206
61

Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King Comity Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-i-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 7 of8

"Teaser ads" that do not identify the sponsor will, however, be allowed so long
as a similar number of follow up advertisements are posted within eight weeks
of the initial teaser ads that do identify the sponsor of those initial ads.

7.0 PROCEDURES:

Action By:

Transit Advertising 7.1 All proposed transit advertising m11st be Sllbmitted to the
Contractor- --Transit-Advertising Contrnctorforifiitial conij,liance
review. The Transit Advertising Contractor will pmfom1
a preliminary evaluation oflhe submission to assess its
compliance with this policy.. If, during its preliminary
review of a proposed advertisement, the Transit
Advertising Contractor is unable to 11lJ!ke a compliance
determination, it will forward the submission to the
Transit Advertising Program Manager for further
evaluation. The Transit Advertising Contractor may at
any time discuss with the entity proposing the
advertisement one or more revisfons to an advertisement,
which, if undertaken, would bring the advertisement into
conformity with this Advertising Policy. The Transit
Advertising Contractor will immediately remove any
advertisement that the Transit Division at any time
directs it to remove.

Transit Advertising 7.2 The Transit Advertising Program Manager will review the
Program Manager proposed advertisement for compliance with the
guidelines set forth in this policy and will direct the
Transit Advertising Contractor as to whether 11,e
proposed advertisement will be accepted. In tl1e
discretion of the Transit Advertising Program Manager,
any proposed transit advertising may be submitted to the
Transit Division General Manager for review.

Transit Division General 7.3 The Transit Division General Manager shall conduct a
Manager fmalreview of proposed advertising at the request of the
Transit Advertising Program Manager. The decision of
the Transit Division General Manager to approve or
reject any proposed advertising shall be final.

Transit Advertising 7.4 The Transit Advertising Program Manager or the Transit
Program Manager and Division General Manager may consult with other
Transit Division General appropriate County employees, including the Co,mty's

7

ER-108
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page104
57 of 206
61
•·
Contract 5506032 Exhibit C Transit Advertising Policy

King County Deparbnent ofTra11Sp01tation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 8 of8

Action By:

Manager legal counsel, at any time during the review proce.ss.

8.0 RESPONSIBILITIES: The Transit Advei.tising Progrnm Manager and Transit Division
General Manager are responsible for the implementation of this Transit Advertising Policy.

8

ER-109
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page105
58 of 206
61

THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

2

3

4

5

6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
7
AT SEATTLE
8 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE
INITIATIVE; PAMELA GELLER; and
9 ROBERT SPENCER, Case No. 2: 13-cv-01804-RAJ

10 Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS' AMENDED NOTICE
OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT
11 -v.- KING COUNTY
12 [Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6)]
KING COUNTY,
13
Defendant.
14

15 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil

16 Procedure, Plaintiffs will take the deposition upon oral examination of Defendant King County

17 on Friday, February 3, 2017 at 9:30 a.m., before an officer authorized to administer oaths at

18 600 University Street, Suite 320, Seattle, Washington 98 l Ol . Said deposition will be conducted

19 by remote means and recorded by stenographic means. It will continue until adjourned. This

20 examination will be subject to further continuance from time to time and place to place until

21 completed.

22 Plaintiffs hereby request that Defendant King County ("County") designate one or more

23 officers, directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf as to

24 the following matters:

25

PLS.' AM. NOTICE OF DEP. OF KING CNTY. - 1 -~-mil!~~--•
i EXHIBIT
Stephen Pidgeon, Esq.
Old Federal Building
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
i
ER-110
\4 Everett, Washington 98201

I
1(. '26-1 noY"\
o..
(425) 605-4774
\ f4_. L . . , •• ,,I

Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page106
59 of 206
61

1. The County's Transit Advertising Policy, as referenced in the First Amended

2 Complaint (Doc. No. 48), and its application to advertisements presented for display on the

3 County's transit advertising space, specifically including its application to reject Plaintiffs'

4 advertisements at issue in this litigation.

5 2. All factors/facts that the County relied upon to reject Plaintiffs' advertisements at

6 issue in this litigation and the evidence used to establish, confirm, or otherwise support these

7 factors/facts.

8 3. All documents produced by the County, including testimony regarding the

9 document's foundation, authentication, and factual context in which it applies.

10 You are invited to attend and cross-examine the witness.

11 Respectfully submitted,

12 AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER

13
By: /s/ Robert J. Muise
Robert J. Muise, Esq.* (MI P62849)
14
P.O. Box 131098
15 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113
rmuise@americanfreedomlawcenter.org
16 Tel: (734) 635-3756; Fax: (801) 760-3901

17 David Yerushalmi, Esq.* (DC# 978179)
1901 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 201
18 Washington, D.C. 20006
dyerushalmi@americanfreedomlawcenter.org
19 Tel: (646) 262-0500; Fax: (801) 760-3901
*Admitted pro hac vice
20

21 Stephen Pidgeon Attorney at Law, P.S.

22 Stephen Pidgeon, Esq. WSBA # 25265
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
23 Everett, Washington 98201
Tel: (425) 605-4774; Fax: (425) 818-5371
24

25

PLS.' AM. NOTICE OF DEP. OF KING CNTY. - 2 - Stephen Pidgeon, Esq.
Old Federal Building
3002 Colby Avenue, Suite 306
Everett, Washington 98201
ER-111 (425) 605-4774
Case
Case:2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
17-35897, 03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
56-2 Filed
DktEntry:
03/07/17
8-2, Page
Page107
61 of 206
61

From: Scott Goldsmith <Scott.Goldsmith@intersection.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 10:53 AM
To: dyerushalmi@americanfreedomlawcenter.org; Pamela Geller (writeatlas@aol.com)
Cc: 'Robert Muise AFLC'
Subject: Faces of Global Terrorism Ad - KCM Response
Attachments: King County Ad Policy.pdf

Pamela: Please see below form King County In regard to the proposed Faces of Global Terrorism ad. Thank you. Scott.

Dear Mr. Goldsmith,

Based on our current advertising policy , the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) ad , "FACES OF
GLOBAL TERRIORISM ", submitted and shown in your September 18,2015 email cannot be accepted. The
advertisements do not comply with Subsections 6.2.8 and 6.2.9 set forth below.

6.2 .8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that demeans or disparages an individual,
group of individuals or entity. For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material,
the County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person , knowledgeable of the County's ridership and
using prevailing community standards, would believe that the advertisement contains material that ridicules or
mocks, is abusive or hostile to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group of individuals or
entity.

6 .2.9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains material that is so objectionable as to
be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to , disruption of or interference with the transportation
system. For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County w ill
determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County's ridership and using prevailing
community standards , would believe that the material is so objectionable that it is reasonably foreseeable that
it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system .

In the ongoing litigation with AFDI , we have explained the problems with AFDl 's use of the "Faces of Global
Terrorism" motif under Metro's Transit Advertising Policy. We rema in willing to discuss other ways for AFDI to
communicate its ''catch a terrorist" message in our nonpublic forum. For example, AFDI may want to re-
caption the ad "Most Wanted Global Terrorists" or "Wanted for Global Terrorism" - both of which would comply
with our advertising policy by removing the demeaning and disparaging aspect of the current ad copy. Please
communicate to AFDI our willingness to accept revised ad copy that comply with the advertising policy.

For your reference , I have attached a copy of Metro's Transit Advertising Policy.

Scott E. Goldsmith
I 1Lr ·1.. I J

212 891 -5688
2 12 644-2010

• EXHIBIT
Intersection
11 l'uk \ LI u ·, 1h 11 ,r •\ 't _11lc. ) 1, I i \5 ·
intersection.com
11(:~~C\OI\ ~
ER-112 Doc-2
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page108
1 ofof54206

2

3 Honorable Richard A. Jones

4

5

6

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8 AT SEATTLE

9 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE )
INITIATIVE, PAMELA GELLER and ROBERT ) No. 13-CV-1804-RAJ
10 SPENCER, )
) DECLARATION OF SHARRON
11 Plaintiffs, ) SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF KING
) COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
12 vs. ) TO MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
) INJUNCTION
13 KING COUNTY, a municipal corporation, )
) Noted for November 1, 20 13
14 Defendant. )
)
15 ______________ ____ .)

16
I, Sharron Shinbo, declare that:
17
1. I am over the age of 18 and competent to testify and base this declaration on
18
personal knowledge.
19
2. I am currently the Transit Advertising Program Project Manager for the Transit
20
Division of the King County Department of Transportation (also known as "Metro"). I was
21
originally hired as Metro Marketing and Sales Supervisor in 1985. In my current position, I
22
serve as King County's primary contact with its advertising contractor, Titan Outdoor LLC
23

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
. CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900King countyAdministrationBuilding
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 1 ~~~:i~.u~ha~:~;0: 98104

ER-113 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page109
2 ofof54206

1 ("Titan"). My responsibilities include reviewing and approving artwork (graphics and text) for

2 transit advertisements. I am also responsible for negotiating and administering the Transit

3 Advertising Sales and Related Support Services Agreement (the "Titan Contract") between King

4 County and Titan.

5 3. Metro has contracted with consultants to sell advertising space on its buses since

6 at least 1978. The purpose of the Transit Advertising Program ("Program") is to generate

7 revenue to support Metro transit operations and over the years Metro has worked to expand its

8 advertising program in order to generate increased revenues. Metro receives 64% of the net

9 media billings from the contractor. All revenue received from the Transit Advertising Program

10 goes into Metro's operating budget and helps to fund public transportation.

11 4. I have been involved with the Program for over twenty-five years. It has never

12 been a goal of the Program to create an open forum for public debate. Its overriding purpose has

13 always been to generate revenue for Metro. The Program is subject to rules regulating the

14 content of advertisements in order to make any advertising consistent with Metro's central

15 mission of providing transit service.s to King County riders. The application of restrictions to

16 allowable advertising has been a consistent feature of the Program throughout my tenure.

17 5. Up until late 2010, Program restrictions were accomplished primarily through

18 restrictive clauses in the Titan Contract. Metro has consistently and conscientiously applied

19 those restrictions in order to encourage the use of public transit facilities through the

20 maintenance of a quality ridership experience and environment.

21 6. Beginning in late 2010 with the adoption of an Interim Metro Advertising Policy

22 ("Interim Policy"), regulations applicable to the program were adopted by Metro as a matter of

23 policy. The Interim Policy was replaced by an April 8, 201 1 Transit Advertising Policy, which

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
J>RELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 2 ~~~ti!~~~has~:~~U:n 98104

ER-114 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page110
3 ofof54206

1 is incorporated into general department policies and procedures. The current Transit Advertising

2 Policy was adopted on January 12, 2012. Starting with the Titan contractual provisions, the

3 various policies governing the transit advertising program represent a consistent progression

4 toward establishing advertising restrictions that are supportive of Metro's charter to operate a

5 successful transit system, while allowing additional operating revenue through ad sales.

6 7. One advertising creative may be used to produce displays in one or a number of

7 different sizes. The displays are posted on the number of buses and for the period specified in a

8 contract between Titan and the client. A contract period is generally a multiple of four weeks.

9 The core of Metro's transit advertising products has long consisted of the placement of traditional

10 framed exterior displays and interior bus cards. The framed exterior displays are known as

11 "kings" (generally street side), "queens" (generally curb-side) and "tails" (rear). Metro added

12 new direct application vinyl products and tunnel advertising to generate additional revenue.

13 8. All potential creatives, or proposed ads, are screened by Titan and if there is a

14 question about compliance with the Transit Advertising Policy, they are passed through to me for

15 further evaluation. On rare occasions Metro staff has observed an advertisement that was not

16 appropriately screened for compliance and the advertisement was promptly pulled from service.

17 Under the Transit Advertising Policy, our General Manager, Kevin Desmond, makes the final

18 determination of whether an ad is consistent with the policy. The presence of alcohol and

19 tobacco content has been the most common historical reason that a proposed ad is rejected, but

20 there have been others as well.

21 9. With one partial exception, until the SeaMAC ad that was addressed by this court

22 in Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King County, 771 F.Supp.2d 1266 (2011), I am not

23 aware of any proposed advertisement that was rejected because of the civility clauses in the old

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 3 ~~~:i~.u:a~:~;~;n 98104

ER-115 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page111
4 ofof54206

1 Titan Contract or the similar "demeaning and disparaging" clause of the current Transit

2 Advertising Policy. 1 Since the SeaMAC ad, there has been a significant effort by pro-Palestinian

3 and pro-Israeli groups to place advertisements on the buses. When the proposed advertisements

4 have been consistent with our Transit Advertising Policy, including the demeaning and

5 disparaging provision, we have accepted ads from organizations representing both sides of the

6 Middle Eastern conflict. Attached as Exhibit A are various ads regarding the Palestinian and

7 Israeli issues that we have accepted for publication, including ads submitted by SeaMAC and an

8 ad submitted by plaintiffs Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and the American Freedom Defense

9 Initiative ("AFDI").

10 10. We have also rejected ads from the same organizations on topics related to

11 Palestinian and Israeli issues. These ads have been rejected for violating various provisions of

12 our transit advertising policies, including demeaning and disparaging and false and misleading.

13 Attached as Exhibit B are various ads regarding the Palestinian and Israeli issues that we have

14 rejected for publication, including ads submitted by SeaMAC and plaintiff AFDI. The date of

15 the rejection and the reason for the rejection (through reference to the then-effective transit ad

16 policy) is indicated next to the ad copy.

17 11. In addition to the ads attached as Exhibit A, Metro previously allowed other

18 advertisements related to the Palestinian and Israeli conflict, including two ads sponsored by the

19
1
The.referenced civility clauses are Sections 6.4 C, D & E of the Titan Contract that regulated advertising
20
until the advent of Metro's Transit Advertising Policy. Section 6.4 C required rejection of any material
that is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would constitute a tort of defamation or invasion of
21 privacy. Section 6.4 D required rejection of any material that is so objectionable under contemporary
community standards as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of, or
22 interference with the transportation system. Section 6.4 E required rejection of any material that is so
insulting, degrading or offensive as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will incite or produce imminent
23 lawless action in the form of retaliation, vandalism or other breach of public safety, peace and order.

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ)- 4 ~~~:i~,u:a~::~:n 98104

ER-116 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page112
5 ofof54206

1 Arab American Community Coalition and one .advertisement sponsored by the Jewish Federation

2 of Greater Seattle. The advertisements sponsored by the Arab American Community Coalition

-3 were "SAVE GAZA!" (contracted to post from January 21, 2009 through February 17, 2009),

4 and ""END SIEGE OF GAZA!" (contracted to post on February 9, 2009 through March 8,

5 2009). The advertisement sponsored by the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle stated

6 "THOUSANDS HAVE FALLEN IN PURSUIT OF PEACE, Remember Israel's soldiers and

7 victims of terror. Join us in a moment of Silence on April 28 at 11 :00 am." (contracted to post

8 on April 15, 2009 through April 28, 2009). True and correct images of these ads are attached as

9 Exhibit C.

10 12. Despite our best efforts to restrict bus advertising to accurate, civil, respectful and

11 nondisparaging ads permitted by policy, we occasionally fail to fully appreciate the implications

12 of certain ad copy, and therefore, allow the ad to be published despite noncompliance with our

13 transit advertising policies. The 2010 SeaMAC ad is one example of such an oversight. As I

14 eventually came to understand, the ad submitted by the United States Department of State

15 Diplomatic Security ("State Department") -- "Faces of Global Terrorism" -- is another example

16 of an error in appreciating how an ad violated our transit advertising policies. A copy of this ad

17 is attached as Exhibit D.

18 13. On May 17, 2013, we accepted the State Department's "Faces of Global

19 Terrorism" ad copy. Our contractor, Titan, brought the ad to my attention, but without raising

20 any particular concerns. I looked at the graphics and read the text and read Section 6.0, and then

21 I went to the website www.rewardsforjustice.net and rfj@state.gov to read about the program. I

22 saw that-the phone number on the ad was the same as the one in the rfj@state.gov ad. I looked up

23 five or six of the persons shown in the photographs and read about them. I saw the ad as merely a

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 5 ~~~:i~,u~ha~~:;:n 98104

ER-117 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-88 I 9
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page113
6 ofof54206

1 "wanted poster" and did not perceive any violation of the Transit Ad Policy. As a result, I

2 approved the advertisement. The ad started posting on June 6, 2013.

3 14. On June 14, 2013, I first learned that minority populations in the Seattle area saw

4 the ad as demeaning and disparaging to people of color. An email from Arsalan Bukhari, the

5 Executive Director of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR- WA), was forwarded to

6 me. His email pointed out that the ad would "invite more hate crimes" and attacks against people

7 who "look Muslim." A copy of this email is attached as Exhibit E.

8 15. At about the same time, Metro started receiving complaints about the ad.

9 ' Although the complaint volume was small, the speakers pointed out a disturbing undercurrent in

10 the ad that I had missed during my initial review. The juxtaposition of "Faces of Global

11 Terrorism" next to pictures of persons of color with Muslim-sounding names or traditional

12 Islamic dress suggested that all similar persons were dangerous terrorists . Individuals with

13 Muslim names and dress represented the "Faces of Global Terrorism." One caller pointed out

14 that "just to depict men of certain races is not correct and incendiary itself." Another complaint

15 labeled the ad "inflammatory and demeaning . . . They look like the people I work with, my

16 family members ... I think it is imposing a demeaning view upon us."

17 16. We received a copy of a June 19, 2013 letter from Congressman Jim McDermott,

18 which questioned the wisdom in running the ad. Congressman McDermott pointed out that:

19 Representing terrorists, however, from only one ethnic or religious group, promotes
stereotypes and ignores other forms of extremism. The FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists
20 List includes individuals of other races and associated with other religions and causes, but
their faces are missing from this campaign. This limited representation in the "Faces of
21 Global Terrorism" bus ad will likely only serve to exacerbate the disturbing treat of hate
crimes against Middle Eastern, South Asian, and Muslim-Americans.
22

23

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTI0N(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 6 ~~~:i~,u~ha~:~;~n 98104

ER-118 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-88 I9
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page114
7 ofof54206

1 A copy of Congressman McDermott's letter is attached as Exhibit F. At about the same time that

2 Congressman McDermott issued his letter, the "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad became a topic of

3 considerable dispute.

4 17. On June 24, 2013, Metro received a copy of a letter from Damon G. Shadid of the

5 Arab American Community Coalition ("AACC"). A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit G.

6 The letter states that:

7 These ads constitute a direct and identifiable threat to all metro bus riders who identify
as, or resemble the ethnic and religious minorities depicted in the ad. The ad serves to
8 stigmatize large portions of our community, showing terrorists to be "black" or "brown"
people with foreign sounding names. They open up a strong likelihood that metro bus
9 riders and other Puget Sound residents will be opened up to further discrimination than
they already face in this area. The ads encourage people to "Stop a Terrorist" and
10 therefore encourage people to harass other rµetro bus riders who may resemble one of the
people in the photo, or to simply harass anybody on the bus who seems to be the same
11 ethnicity as someone in the photo.

12 Mr. Shadid points out that the same standard that required the 2010 SeaMAC ad to be removed

13 applied to the State Department ad. "Metro is running an ad that stigmatizes a large portion of

14 their community as terrorists, thereby making it difficult for those communities of color to ride

15 the bus in peace."

16 18. As a result of improved public awareness, on June 25, 2013, the State Department

17 pulled the "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad.2 All of the ad copy was removed by the beginning of

18 July 2013. The State Department submitted a replacement ad that dropped the offensive and

19 demeaning "Faces of Global Terrorism" motif._ A copy of the replacement ad is attached as

20 Exhibit H.

21

22
2
23 Metro was in the process of re-evaluating this ad under the Transit Advertising Policy when the State
Department determined to remove the ad on its own.
DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 7 ~~~:i~,u~h~:~~~n 98104
ER-119 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page115
8 ofof54206

1 19. On July 16, 2013, AFDI submitted its own version of the State Department,

2 "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad. Essentially, the ad differed very little from the State

3 Department version except for the insertion of the AFDI logo. See attached Exhibit I. After

4 concerns were raised that the ad was misleading or in violation of copyright, AFDI voluntarily

5 submitted a modified version of the "Faces of Terrorism" ad with a red background. ·

6 20. The modified "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad with the red background was

7 submitted on August 1, 2013, and is attached as Exhibit J. The new ad retained the "Faces of

8 Global Terrorism" slogan with the same photos use.d by the State Department. The text was

9 changed in important ways, however. It provided that "AFDI wants you to stop a terrorist." It

10 represented that "[t]he FBI is offering up to $25 million reward if you help capture one of these

11 Jihadis." Titan sent the ad to me for further review. I brought it to the attention of Kevin

12 Desmond for a final decision.

13 21. In evaluating the AFDI "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad for compliance with our

14 Transit Advertising Policy, we closely reviewed the similar State Department ad and the

15 concerns that were raised by minority populations in our area. Among other things, we

16 determined that the State Department had participated in a community meeting at the offices of

17 the Washington ACLU in order to better understand the concerns of minority populations. The

18 meeting was hosted by Jennifer Shaw of the Washington ACLU.

19 22. On August 13, 2013, while we were reviewing the AFDI "Faces of Global

20 Terrorism Ad," Metro received notice from AFDl's attorney, David Yerushalmi, threatening

21 litigation if there were further delays in approving the ad. It is common for Metro to engage in a

22 deliberative process when evaluating a proposed ad that potentially violates the Transit Ad

23 Policy. In addition to consulting counsel from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, we review past

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 8 ~~~:i~,uia~::~U:n 98104

ER-120 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page116
9 ofof54206

1 ads in order to ensure that we are consistently interpreting and applying the policy. In the case of

2 the AFDI ad, in order to ensure compliance with the policy, we also endeavored to understand

3 the criticisms of the State Department ad and its reasons for pulling the ad.

4 23. On August 14, 2013, Mr. Desmond informed me that he had made the decision to

5 reject the AFDI "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad because it violated three provisions of the

6 Transit Advertising Policy. I prepared an email transmission to Titan, rejecting the AFDI "Faces

7 of Global Terrorism" ad. A copy of this email is attached as Exhibit K. Titan informed me that

8 it forwarded my email to AFDI along with their own offer to discuss the matter with AFDI. 3

9 Mr.Yerushalmi replied, "No need to discuss. We all know what comes next."

10 24. In Ms. Geller's Declaration, she claims in ,r 19 (a) that a pregnancy counseling

11 center ad was vandalized on a Metro bus. We have been running ads for this client since at least

12 2005. In reviewing our records regarding the ad referenced by Ms. Geller, I was able to find no

13 complaints. In addition, I was able to find no record of the vandalism claimed by Ms. Geller.

14 Through our records and in connection with my position, I am generally aware of complaints or

15 vandalism of transit advertisements.

16 25. In reviewing the AFDI's "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad, consideration was given

· 17 to the amount of the reward claimed by AFDI. Under the "False and Misleading" section of the

18 Transit Advertising policy, I regularly review ads for accuracy. Although AFDI claimed a

19 reward of "up to $25 million," no terrorist on the ad was offered for that amount. In preparing

20 this declaration, I confirmed that the only terrorist with a $25 million reward is Ayman al-

21

22
3
It is unclear what Titan planned to discuss since it was not involved in Metro's decision to reject the ads.
23 Once Titan screens an ad for potential violations, the decision of whether to accept or reject an ad is
solely up to Mr. Desmond as Metro's General Manager.
Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 9 ~~~1~;.u~has~:~;~oen 98104
ER-121 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-88 19
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 117
10 ofof54
206

I Zawahiri, who was not listed on the AFDI advertisement copy. A copy of the Rewards for

2 Justice reward structure is attached as Exhibit L.

3 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States and the State of

4 Washington that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing is true and correct.

5 SIGNED and DATED at Seattle, WA this 28th day of October, 2013.

6

7
SHARRON SHINBO
8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

DECLARATION OF SHARRON SHINBO IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecu_ting Attorney
CIVIL DIV ISION, L11Igallon Sectmn
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(B-CV-1804-RAJ) - 10 ~~~t~~.u~has~:~;:n 98104

ER-122 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 118
11 ofof54
206

EXHIBIT A

ER-123
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 119
12 ofof54
206

ER-124
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 120
13 ofof54
206

ER-125 J
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 121
14 ofof54
206

ER-126
I •
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 122
15 ofof54
206

ER-127
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 123
16 ofof54
206

ER-128 - - _j
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 124
17 ofof54
206

ER-129
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 125
18 ofof54
206

EXHIBITB

ER-130
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 126
19 ofof54
206

(

ER-131
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 127
20 ofof54
206

I

ER-132
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 128
21 ofof54
206

ER-133
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 129
22 ofof54
206

ER-134
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 130
23 ofof54
206

ER-135
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 131
24 ofof54
206

ER-136
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 132
25 ofof54
206

ER-137
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 133
26 ofof54
206

4""-
...
('oi
~

. •
~

t'~
N.

ER-138
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 134
27 ofof54
206

• - -- - -
ER-139
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 135
28 ofof54
206

EXHIBIT C

ER-140
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 136
29 ofof54
206

ER-141
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 137
30 ofof54
206

ER-142
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 138
31 ofof54
206

COPY RECEIPT
Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle

TYPE OF POSTER: Vinyl Soft Sheet

MARKET: Seattle

SIZE OF MEDIA: Kings - 30" x 144"

DATE RECEIVED: 4/10/09

START DATE: 4/1 5/09

QUANTITY RECEIVED: 4

PRINTER: MVP Printing

Account Executive: J. Burkholder
PHOTOGRAPHED BY: B. Hoyt

Titan Worldwide
4636 E. Marginal Way South
Suite B-100
Seattle, WA 98134
Tel: 206-762-2531
Fax: 206-762~2532

VISIT titanoutdoor.com

ER-143
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 139
32 ofof54
206

EXHIBITD

ER-144
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 140
33 ofof54
206

ER-145
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 141
34 ofof54
206

EXHIBITE

ER-146
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 142
35 ofof54
206

Shinbo, Sharron

From: Arkills, Chris
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:54 AM
To: Allison, Michelle; Desmond, Kevin
Cc: Shinbo, Sharron
Subject: Fwd: FBI/State Dept. bus ads with "Faces of Global Terrorism" featuring an all-Muslim
list
Attachments: imageOOl.jpg

I am not aware of these ads, but I am forwarding on to Metro for a response. I am out of town today, but I will
follow up next week.

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Allison, Michelle" <Michelle.Allison@kingcounty.gov>
Date: June 14, 2013, 11 :49 :25 AM PDT
To: "Arkills, Chris" <Clu-is.Arkills@kingcounty.gov>
Subject: Fwd: FBI/State Dept. bus ads with "Faces of Global Terrorism" featuring an all-
Muslim list

Are you aware of these ads?

Michelle

Sent via the HTC Vivid™, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

----- Forwarded message -----
From: "Peeples, Chelsea" <Chelsea.Peeples@kingcounty.gov>
To: "Allison, Michelle" <Michelle.Allison<@kingcounty.gov>
Subject: FBI/State Dept. bus ads with "Faces of Global Tenorism" featuring an all-Muslim list
Date: Fri, Jun 14, 2013 11:14 am

For you.

Chelsea Peeples
Executive Assistant and Legislative Aide to
King County Council member Joe McDermott, District 8
206.296:1008

Subscribe to District 8's eNews

1° ---·--·---·---··--1
This email and any response to it constitute a public record and may be subject to public disclosure ..
ER-147
7
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 143
36 ofof54
206

From: Arsalan Bukhari [mailto:abukhari@cair.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:05 PM
To: McDermott, Joe ·
Subject: FBI/State Dept. bus ads with "Faces of Global Terrorism" featuring an all-Muslim list

Dear Councilmember McDermott:

It was a pleasure to meet you this evening at the Seattle Human Services Coalition event. The buses running these
ads are Metro buses and according to Aaron Fishbone of the Seattle Mayor's office Clear Channel billboard ads
may have also been purchased. Here is the FBI-Seattle's press release: http://www.fbi.gov/seattle/press-
releases/2013/joint-terrorism-task-force-in-seattle-launches-rewards-for-justlce-campaign Below are some
additional thoughts. You may reach me via e-mail or phone at 206.931.3655.

Among other actions, we are considering organizing interfaith and elected officials to hold a press conference this
Monday at either 10am or 11am, at a place TBD, to have these leaders make clear, unequivocal, assertive
comments sharply aimed at the FBI and State Dept. around these three messages:
• Invitation to more hate crimes. Cite anti-Sikh and anti-Hindu coast to coast wave of hate crimes. Pull
these ads before another hate crime wave that results in more hate attacks like what we saw in
Wisconsin.
• Ineffective in actually catching known violent extremists. The rationale provided in the press release
doesn't convince. Lay down the facts and numbers of terror attacks by other faith/ethnic groups on
American soil recently that killed numerous Americans. Why are those threats ignored? Also, why is this .
group more important that their top 10 most wanted list?

Three requests: 1) If we were to have a press conference, would you be able to join and speak? 2) Would you be
able to co-sign a letter upon your review of it when it is drafted, to an appropriate federal oversight agency to have
them examine this action by the FBI/State Dept. (perhaps the Gov't Accountability Office (wwy{,gao.ggy) to
examine wither federal funds were misused, etc.)? 3) Could you see if the KC Council can do something about
ending these ads? The hate attacks they might cause against people who "look Muslim" are the most dangerous
thing about them.

Background:
Over the past few years and even just recently we have seen beatings and killings of people who "look Muslim",
from the killings in Wisconsin and the NY subway murder to the vicious beating of a cab driver in Auburn. There is
a real threat of this bus ad campaign causing more hate attacks. It is intriguing that this new hate promotion is
government-sanctioned and follows similar bus ads on buses nationwide by anti-Muslim hate groups like "Stop
lslarnization of America", etc.

These ads will invite more hate crimes. According to hate crime cases reported to CAIR, waves of anti-Sikh and
anti-Hindu coast to coast wave of hate crimes are launched each time a campaign like this or a series of media
commentary following a violent extremist attack happens. Anyone who sees this ad is going to connect Muslims
to a global terrorism problem and Muslims as a great (if not the greatest) threat to America. Nobody who "looks
like a Muslim" is going to be safe. Cert ainly messages like these will permeate through the current generations and
well into the future generations.

Thank you.

Arsalan Bukhari
Executive Director, CAIR-WA
Office: 206.367.40811 Mobile: 206.931.3655
abukhari@cair.com I ~VW\1[.cai!J,eattle.org

2

ER-148
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 144
37 ofof54
206

EXHIBITF

ER-149
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 145
38 ofof54
206

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AN D MEANS JIM McDERMOH GO-CHNR
7TH DSl mcr. WASHINGTON CONGRESSION/,L TASK FORCE ON
IMTEilN.'I TiONAJ. HII//All1S
COMtvilTTEf: ON THE BU DGET

<ltongress of t1Jc 'QllnttetJ $5,tates CONGRESSION,,L KIDNEY C,\U<.:US

CONGRESSiOMAL INOCNESIA GAU<:,;s

:I!)ousc of l!\cprcsmtatibn:s CONGR!:S'SIONAL MONGOL!/\ CJ.1 1.1CL':S
CONGllESSIONl\l. Cf.NHV,L Arn1c,1
('.AUClJ'.,;
WQ;l11shmcrton, E.:llll: 20515
t, /
June 19, 201~

Robert Mueller
Director
Federal Bure.au oflnvestigation Headquarters
935 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535

Dear Mr. Mueller,

I'm writing to express my deep concern with the Puget Sound Joint Terrorism Task Force's publicity
campaign for the U.S. Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program. The "Faces of Global
Terrorism" bus ad featuring sixteen photos of wanted terrorists is not only offensive to Muslims and
ethnic minorities, but it encourages racial and religious profiling.

I agree that civilian vigilance is important to the fight against extremism. Representing terrorists,
however, from only one ethnic or religious group, promotes stereotypes and ignores other fonns of
extremism. The FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists List includes individuals of other races and associated
with other religions and causes, but.their faces are missing from this campaign. This limited
representation in the "Faces of Global Terrorism" bus ad will likely only serve to exacerbate the
disturbing trend of hate crimes against Middle Eastern, South Asia,n, and Muslim-Americans.

Seattle is proud of the diversity of our people. I ask you to reconsider publicizing the "Faces of Global
Terrorism" in our city.

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact my Chief of Staff, Diane Shust, at
diane.shust@maiI.house.gov.

Thank you.

JIM McDERMOIT
Member of Congress

Cc: · Eric Holder, Attorney General, U.S. Department ofJustic~
... If
Gregory Starr, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security and Director of the
Diplomatic Security Service, Department of State '. , J

Laura Laughlin, Head Special Agent, Seattle Division, FBI
. See enclosed.
1035 LONGWORTH HOUSE Ol·FICE !lUILOING http:IJ\n\'\'l/.hou!io.govi1N.:dconnt t 1!/ll!l 7Tt1 AVENUf:, SUrTE 1212
VVAS l·Hr•GTON. OC 20515-4707 ~1up:1Jwww.fu~ubuo1<.,~omlCon{lre~ll'h1 11Ji1Y,t...1d)ern-:;:in Sf'Ai' fLf:. WA 9,~10 1-·1:J~!l
1202) 225··310il Twitter. 4- RapJUn!l.·1 r0artrmlt t20()t !';;5.?r-·7'1 /D

ER-150
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 146
39 ofof54
206

ER-151
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 147
40 ofof54
206

EXHIBITG

ER-152
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 148
41 ofof54
206

, June 21, 2013

King County Metro Transit
Atb.1: Harold Taniguchi
King Street Center
201 South Jackson Street, Room 815
Seattle, WA 98104-3856

Re: "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad campaign.

Tiie Arab Ame:rican Community Coalition (AACq has recently
· received numerous complaints from our constituents regarding a new
ad currently 11llllun.g on King County Metro buses entitled "Faces of
Global Terrorism". The ad, run by the Puget Sound Joint Terrorism
Task Force· (PSJTTF), depicts photos of 18 individuals with their names
11\rab beneath their pichire. The caption reads: "Stop a Ten·orist. Save Lives.
Up to $25 Million Rewai·d."1
American
Of the 18 people depicted in the ad, all seem to be of a Middle Eastern,
Asian or African ethnicity. Furthermore, many are seen to be wearing
Communit_y cultural clothing, such as tul'bans or othel' forms of head dress that make
them identifiable as a specific ethnic minority. Finally, many of the
Coalition names of the htdividuals identify the individuals as Muslims.

These ads constitute a dil'ect andidentifiable threat to all metro bus
riders who identify as, or l'esemble the ethnic and religious minorities
depicted inthe ad. The ad serves to stigmatize large portions of our
community, showing terrorists to be "black" or "brown" people with
foreign sounding names. They open up a strong likelihood that metro
bus riders and other Puget Sound resic;lents will be opened up to further
discrimination than they already face in this area. The ads encowage
people to "Stop a Tenorist" and therefore encouxage people to harass
other metxo bus riders who may resemble one of the people in the
photo, 01· to simply harass anybody on the bus who seems to be the
same ethnicity as someone in the photo.

The case has some similarities in tone as the objections raised last
P.O. Box 31642 December 2010 regarding Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaigns
Seattle, WA 98103 cancelled advertisements depicting Israeli War Cxim¢s. That ad was
taken down fox a variety of reasons, including that some Jewish
www.theaacc.org

ER-153
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 149
42 ofof54
206

passengers feru:ed stigmatization on the bus, as well as the possibility that activists would
disrupt bus 'service if the ads were to run.

The same standard applies to the case at hand. Metro is running an ad that stigmatizes a large
portion of their community as terrorists, thereby ma.king it difficult fo1· those communities of
color to ride the bus in peace. Furthermore, if Metro were actually concerned about disruption
of bus service and violence by Israeli activists during the previous ad campaign, can they really
say they do not fear the same sort ofresponse to this bus ad?

The ad clearly violates Titan's2 contract, which specifies that they will not run ads that "will
1·esult in harm to, 4isruption of, or interference with the transportation system'' or that contains
''material directed at a person 01· group that is so insulting, degrading or offensive as to be
reasonably foreseeable that it will incite or produce imminent lawless action in the form of
retaliation, vandalism or other breach of public safety, peace and order. ·

Terrorism is not defined by Middle Eastern people, Asian people, or African people. As recent
history has shown us with tragic events like the Oklahoma City bombing, the shootings at the
Holocaust museum, the shootings at the Pentagon, the massacre at the Sikh temple, the
Unibomber, Anders Breivik, and the failed massacres of Daniel Coward and Byron Williams,
terrorism cuts across ethnic boundaries. To post a sign like this
in a public forum stigmatizing a
group of people as tenorists is in bad taste and should be reevaluated.

Sin.cerely, .·

~lJ.~
Dam.011 G. Shadid
Legal Counsel
Arab Amel'ican Community Coalition

Cc:
Titan
Attn: Pamela Quadi'os
4636 East Marginal Way South
Seattle1WA 98134

Dow Co1'1stantine
King County Chinook Bmlding
401 5th Ave. Suite 80o'
Seattle,. WA 98104

Larry Gossett
King County Council
16 Thfrd Ave., Rm.1200
Seattle, WA 98104

2
The.company who runs Metro Bus' ads.
Arab American Communit~ Coalition (AACC)
f .Q. 5ox}l6+2 Seattle, WA98 IO}

ER-154
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 150
43 ofof54
206

EXHIBITH

ER-155
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 151
44 ofof54
206

ER-156
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 152
45 ofof54
206

EXHIBIT I

ER-157
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 153
46 ofof54
206

ER-158
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 154
47 ofof54
206

EXHIBIT J

ER-159
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 155
48 ofof54
206

ER-160
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 156
49 ofof54
206

EXHIBITK

ER-161
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 157
50 ofof54
206

Shinbo, Sharron

From: Shinbo, Sharron
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:39 AM
To: Titan - Scott E. Goldsmith
Cc: Titan - Donald R. Allman; Titan - Pamela Quadros
Subject: AFDI proposed ad "FACES OF GLOBAL TERRORISM" cannot be accepted
Attachments: new AFDI ad global terror copy.jpg; 20130815111916090.pdf

Dear Mr. Goldsmith,

Based on our current advertising policy, the American Freedom Defense Initiative ad, "FACES OF GLOBAL TERRORISM",
cannot be accepted. The advertisement does not comply with Subsections 6.2.4, 6.2.8 and 6.2.9, set forth below.

6.2.4 False or Misleading. Any material that is or that the sponsor reasonably should have known is false, fraudulent,
misleading, deceptive or would constitute a tort of defamation or invasion of privacy.

6.2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that demeans or disparages an individual, group of
individuals or entity. For purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will
determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County's ridership and using prevailing
community standards, would believe that the advertisement ~ontains material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or
hostile to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group of individuals or entity.

6.2.9 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System . Advertising that contains material that is so objectionable as to be
reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system. For
purposes of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will determine whether a
reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County's ridership and using prevailing community standards, would
believe that the material is so objectionable that it is reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of
or interference with the transportation system.

For your reference, I have attached a copy of Metro's Transit Advertising Policy.

ER-162
38
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 158
51 ofof54
206

EXHIBITL

ER-163
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 159
52 ofof54
206
Rewards for Justice-wanted_terrorist - english Page 1 of 3

SUBMIT A TIP

Re\Vards for Justice
Seeking Information Against International Terrorism

Rewards for Justice
Wanted for Terrorism
Home
Program Overview
Up to $25 Million Reward
Rewards Paid
FAQ

Reward Offers
Wanted for Terrorism
Acts of Terror
Regime Elements Ayman al-Zawahiri

War Crimes Up to $10 Million Reward
Fighting Terrorism
Terrorism Financing
WMD Terrorism
Submit aTiJ;!

Links Abu Du'a Mullah Omar Hafiz Mohammad Saeed Yasin al-Suri

DeJ;!artment of State Up to $7 Million Reward
DiJ;!lomatic Security
FBI Most Wanted
RFJ Fund
Voice of America

--··-------·---- ----·- ··· - ---------~-- - - - -·-- ····
Search the RFJ Site: Ahmed Abdi Aw-Mohamed
Muhsin al-Fadhli Abubakar Shekau
I I Up to $5 Million Reward
LSearch I
Languages -~
r ·-·
~
english ti ~\
francais ~
ll
Abdelbasit Alhaj
Abdullah Ahmed Jamal Mohammad
esJ;!aiiol
I
~ Saif al-Adel Alhassan Haj
Abdullah al-Badawi
i..:l.!::=. .LJ: Hamad
tt el- § '@!"
deutsch '1vrn
J:!YCCkllllll .!:!;!
CJ;!nCKIII italiano

bosanski tagalog
Ali Sayyid Mokhtar Zulkifli bin Hir Faker Ben Jaber A. Elbaneh.
.hrvatski melayu
Muhamed Mustafa Belmokhtar Abdelaziz
kiSwahili turkce al-Bakri Boussora

ER-164
http://www.rewardsf01justice.net/index.cfm?page=wanted_terrorist&language=english 10/25/2013
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 160
53 ofof54
206
Rewards for Justice-wanted_terrorist - english Page 2 of 3

EAAQVIKCI.
portugues amharic
somali indonesia.

Mohammed Ali
lsnilon Hapilon Sirajuddun Haqgani
Hamadei

Adel Radi Sagr al- Ali Saed bin Ali el
Hasan lzz-al-Din Ibrahim Haji Jama

Fuad Mohamed Bashir Mohamed Mohamed Makawi
Anas al-Liby Hakimullah Mehsud
!Sb.filfil Mahamoud

Muhammad
Abdelkarim
Jehad Serwan Ahmad Ibrahim al Muhammad Ahmed Abdullah Khalil
Hussein Mohamed
-Muqhassil al-Munawar Hussain ar-
al-Nasser

Ramadan
Jamal Saeed Abdul Abdullah Adnan G. el
Wali Ur Rehman Mukhtar Robow
Rahim Mohammad Shukrijumah
Shallah

Ibrahim Salih
Abdul Rahman
Muhammad Hafiz Muhammed al- Daku Umarov Mohammed al-
Yasin
Yacoub

ER-165
http://www.rewardsf01justice.net/index.cfm ?page=wan ted_ terrorist&language=english 10/25/2013
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
14 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 161
54 ofof54
206
Rewards for Justice-wanted_terrorist - english Page 3 of 3

Zulkarnaen

Up to $3 Million Reward

Malik Abou Abdelkarim Oumar Quid Hamaha Zakariya Ismail Ahmed Hersi Abdullahi Yare

Up to $2 Million Reward

- ~
Hafiz Abdul Rahman Makki

Up to $1 Million Reward

Adam Yahiye Gadahn Radullan Sahiron Abdul Basil Usman

Up to $500,000 Reward

Khair Mundos

Privacy Policy I Contact Us I FAQ I Submit a Tip
Rewards for Justice, Washington, D.C. 20522-0303, USA.
1-800-US REWARDS (1-800-877-3927) I RFJ@state.gov

ER-166
http://www.rewardsfo1justice.net/index.cfm?page=wanted_terrorist&language=english I 0/25/2013
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page162
1 ofof34206

.l

2

3 Honorable Richard A. Jones

4

5

6

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8 AT SEATTLE

9 AMERICAN FREEDOM DEFENSE )
INITIATIVE, PAMELA GELLER and ROBERT ) No. 13-CV-1804-RAJ
10 SPENCER, )
) DECLARATION OF KEVIN
11 Plaintiffs, ) DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF KING
) COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
12 vs. ) TO MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
) INJUNCTION
13 KING COUNTY, a municipal corporation, )
) Noted for November 1, 2013
14 Defendant. )
)
15 __________________ .)

16
I, Kevin Desmond, declare that:
17
1. I am over the age of 18 and competent to testify. I base this declaration on my
18
own personal knowledge.
19
2. I am the General Manager of the Transit Division of the King County Department
20
of Transportation (also known as 11 Metro 11 ). I have been in this position since June of 2004.
21
Prior to coming to King County, I held senior management positions at Pierce Transit from
22

23

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 1 ~~~:i~,u~ha~:~;~en 98104

ER-167 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page163
2 ofof34206

1 1996-2004 and at the New York City Transit Authority from 1991-1996. I have been directly

2 involved in the public transportation field for 20 years.

3 3. · As the General Manager, I am responsible for all aspects of Metro Transit

4 administration, including ensuring the safe, secure, efficient, convenient and reliable provision of

5 all modes of Metro public transportation. Metro's services include fixed route bus, light rail,

6 streetcar, Access paratransit and vanpool transportation. I am responsible for approximately

7 4,600 employees and an annual operating budget of approximately $600 million dollars.

8 4. King County Metro Transit's mission is to provide the best possible public

9 transportation services and improve regional mobility and quality of life in King County. This

10 includes ensuring the safety and security of the riding public as well as our transit operators. It

11 also includes providing a quality transit.experience for our customers in order to both maintain

12 and expand our ridership. King County has twice been honored as the best-run large public

13 transportation system in North America.

14 5. King County Metro Transit is responsible for providing public transportation

15 services throughout all of King County, including the Seattle metropolitan area. We serve a

16 jurisdiction with almost two million residents of diverse cultural and religious backgrounds.

17 Metro's ridership includes people that have chosen public transportation for their transportation

18 needs as well as those who are dependent on public transportation, including riders with special

19 needs and disabilities.

20 6. Metro operates 235 bus routes with approximately 400,000 daily boardings

21 (approximately 120 million annual boardings), over a service area of 2,134 square miles. Metro

22 also transports 1.2 million people with disabilities on its Access vans annually and over three

23 million annual passenger trips using approximately 1,300 vanpools.

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 2 ~~~t~~,u~ha~~~;~en 98104
ER-168 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page164
3 ofof34206

1 7. Metro has had a revenue-based advertising program since 1978. In 2012,

2 advertising revenue was approximately 3.8% of the total Operating Revenue with $5.55 million

3 in Transit Advertising Program revenue out of $144.9 million total Operating Revenue,

4 according to preliminary data.

5 8. The purpose of the Metro advertising program is to generate revenue to support

6 the on-going delivery of transportation services to the public. Advertising income is an essential

7 component of Metro's Operating Revenue, which is also made up of fare box revenue and other

8 miscellaneous revenues. Operating Revenue is used to support at least 30% of the operating cost

9 of fixed bus route service, with tax revenue supporting the balance.

10 9. Metro is a central participant in regional transportation policy development and

11 implementation and maintains relationships with many public organizations and hundreds of

12 businesses (through fare sales agreements and service partnerships). One of our goals as an

13 agency is to attempt to increase ridership.

14 10. Toward this purpose, we conduct annual surveys of our ridership and endeavor to

15 make transit services responsive to the needs of riders. Public transit is a product in a crowded

16 marketplace. As with any product, consumers have many different options, including taking a

17 personal car. We endeavor to make the entire ridership experience both pleasant and efficient.

18 We seek to encourage return boardings and entice new riders to the system, which positively

19 impacts the bottom line for the transit system.

20 11. Transit advertising is subsidiary to Metro's primary mission of providing a quality

21 transit service. The advertising copy that Metro allows outside buses, inside buses and on other

22 transit properties significantly impacts the ridership experience. In adopting the current

23 advertising policy, we decided to limit and regulate allowable advertising in order to preserve a

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900KingCountyAdministrationBuilding
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 3 ~~~t~~,u~ha~:~~~n 9s104
ER-169 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page165
4 ofof34206

1 quality transit experience for our riders and a professional working environment for our staff.

2 Whether at a bus stop or riding the bus, transit passengers are a captive audience. It is

3 inconsistent with Metro's primary objective of increasing ridership to subject those riders to an

4 unpleasant, contentious or quarrelsome environment. One reason our current policies prohibit

5 false advertising, or demeaning and disparaging advertising is to maintain a respectful and

6 courteous level of discourse on our buses. Consistent with the values and standards of our

7 community, we require all allowable advertising to meet this standard, regardless of the view

8 point of the speaker.

9 12. Other aspects of our advertising policy also reflect community values and

10 standards. For example, although revenue is important to transit operations, we do not allow ads

11 featuring nudity, profane language, or products like firearms and tobacco. We also prohibit

12 political campaign ads because, among other reasons, there is too great a risk that Metro will be

13 seen as endorsing a particular candidate or cause. Overall, the provisions of the transit

14 advertising policy are designed to strike an appropriate balance between the need for

15 supplemental revenue, and Metro's primary mission of encouraging ridership through the

16 provision of a quality customer experience.

17 13. Metro has followed a consistent, but evolving transit advertising policy for a

18 number of years. It has never been a part of Metro's mission to provide an open forum for public

19 debate and discussion. Rather, the standards and policies surrounding allowable transit

20 advertising are for the express purpose of restricting and regulating allowable transit advertising

21 to make it consistent with Metro's central mission of operating a quality transit system. We have

22 created a limited public forum for transit advertising in order to minimize and avoid any conflict

23

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section.
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 4 ~~~t~~,u~ha~:,~~~en 98104
ER-170 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page166
5 ofof34206

1 between the advertising program and the maintenance of a quality transit experience for our

2 riders.

3 14. Prior to 2010, as described in Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King

4 County, 771 F.Supp.2d 1266 (2011), the transit advertising standards were embedded in the

5 contract between King County and our advertising contractor, Titan Outdoor ("Titan").

6 15. In late 2010, Metro adopted an Interim Metro Transit Advertising Policy

7 ("Interim Ad Policy"). A copy is attached as Exhibit A. The purpose of the Interim Ad Policy

8 was to govern advertising pending adoption of a permanent advertising policy.

9 16. The Interim Policy was replaced by the April 8, 2011 Transit Advertising Policy

10 ("2011 Ad Policy"). A copy of this policy is attached as Exhibit B. Consistent with prior policy,

11 the 2011 Ad Policy was explicit in creating and supporting a Limited Public Forum.

12 17. The current Transit Advertising Policy was adopted on January 12, 2012 and is

13 attached as Exhibit C ("2012 Ad Policy"). The 2012 Ad Policy reflects a number of important

14 changes toward striking a good balance between a quality ridership experience and revenue to

15 support transit operations. Among other things, the 2012 Ad Policy re-introduced public issue

16 ads, but with a re-worded "demeaning and disparaging" restriction. The policy also continues to

17 require ads that are not misleading and ads that do not interfere with overall tra,nsit operation.

18 18. As the General Manager of Metro, I am charged under the 2012 Ad Policy with

19 conducting a "final review of proposed advertising at the request of the Transit Advertising

20 Program Manager." 2012 Ad Policy at§ 7.3. My decision "to approve or reject any proposed

21 advertising shall be final." Id.

22 19. In reviewing any advertisement, Metro follows the procedural process mandated

23 by § 7.0 of the 2012 Ad Policy in order to ensure compliance with the policy directives. All ads

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900KingcountyActministrationBuilcting
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 5 ~~~t~~,u;:~~~~~n 98104
ER-171 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page167
6 ofof34206

1 are initially screened by Titan. Id. at § 7 .1. If Titan is unable to determine that an ad complies

2 with the 2012 Ad Policy, it is required to submit the ad to Metro's Transit Advertising Program

3 Manager, Sharon Shinbo. Id. at§ 7.2. The Transit Advertising Program Manager has the

4 discretion to submit an ad to the General Manager for final determination when the

5 advertisement raises concerns under the 2012 Ad Policy.

6 20. When an ad is brought to my attention due to compliance concerns, I have

7 implemented a process to ensure that my decisions are consistent with the policy and fair to the

8 proponent of the proposed advertising. Since adoption of the 2012 Ad Policy, I have considered

9 a substantial number of ads for compliance with the policy. I have also evaluated advertisements

10 under prior consistent versions of our policy. By this point, there is a significant body of work

11 composed of ads that we have accepted, and ads that we have rejected under the tenets of the

12 policy.

13 21. When evaluating a proposed ad submission under the policy, I regularly consult

14 with counsel from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office ("PAO") to assist in interpretation of policy

15 language. I will generally cause prior ads similar to the proposed ad submission to be gathered,

16 including ads that we have accepted and ads that we have rejected. I review the prior ads to

17 ensure that there is a high level of consistency in my decision-making. If there is a question

18 regarding the accuracy of an ad, I will cause additional investigation to occur into the claims

19 made in the ad. I am uninterested in the viewpoint espoused by the ad. Rather, I am focused on

20 compliance with the transit advertising policy and consistency in my application of the policy. I

21 pay particular attention to consistency because it is not my purpose to advantage or disadvantage

22 one side or the other on a disputed public issue. I also consider how the ad would impact,

23 negatively or positively, Metro's core business of offering the product of public transit.

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. Satterberg, ~rosecu_tingAttorney
. CIVIL DIVISION, L1t1gat1on Sectmn 1

KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900KingCountyAdministrationBuildit1g
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(l3-CV-1804-RAJ) - 6 ~~~t~~~~:~:~;::n 98104
ER-172 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page168
7 ofof34206

1 22. As the Metro General Manager, on August 14, 2013, I determined to reject the

2 American Freedom Defense Initiative ("AFDI") "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad because it

3 violated our transit advertising policy. As recounted in the Declaration of Sharon Shinbo in

4 Support of King County's Briefln Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction October 25,

5 2013 ("Shinbo Declaration"), Metro had previously published a similar ad from the United States

6 Department of State Diplomatic Security ("State Department"). Shinbo Deel. at ,r 12-13.

7 Following complaints and serious community concerns, the State Department pulled the

8 advertisement. Id. at ,r 14-18.

9 23. After the State Department pulled its ad, AFDI submitted its own version of the

10 "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad. The version of the AFDI that is the subject of this lawsuit -- the

11 one with the red background -- was submitted to Metro on August 1, 2013. Id. at ifl9-20. In

12 reviewing this ad for compliance with the 2012 Ad Policy, I reviewed the complaints that had

13 been generated by the State Department ad and the concerns raised by minority communities. In

14 . order to better understand these concerns, I consulted with both FBI and State Department

15 officials. I consulted with Metro's attorneys at the PAO in order to address interpretation of the

16 ad policy. I also discussed concerns that were raised by attendees at a community meeting
'

17 convened at the Washington ACLU offices. I also examined the factual representations that

18 were made in the AFDI ad for accuracy.

19 24. As reflected in Exhibit K to the Declaration of Sharon Shinbo, I ultimately

20 determined that the AFDI "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad violated three provisions of the 2012

21 Ad Policy. First, the ad violated the ''false and misleading" provisions of§ 6.2.4. The AFDI ad

22 represented that "The FBI is Offering Up to $25 Million Reward If You Help Capture One of

23 These Jihadis." This statement is false, misleading and/or deceptive. The FBI is not offering the

Daniel T. Satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV~l804-RAJ) - 7 ~~~:i~,u~ha~~:;:n 98104

ER-173 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page169
8 ofof34206

1 reward. It is being offered by the State Department. Further, contrary to the claim that up to $25

2 million is available "if you help capture one of these" terrorists, a reward of $25 million was

3 being offered for none of the terrorists pictured above the AFDI caption. Shinbo Deel. at 125.

4 As with any advertisement, we do not allow our riders to be misled by false or deceptive claims.

5 25. The ad also violated the "demeaning and disparaging" provision of§ 6.2.8 of the

6 2012 Ad Policy. The ad both demeaned and disparaged persons of color, as well as individuals

7 who "looked Muslim" by suggesting that such individuals were the actual "Faces of Global

8 Terrorism." A reasonable prudent person knowledgeable of Metro's ridership and using

9 prevailing community standards - which were clearly pointed out and highlighted in connection

10 with the prior State Department ad - would believe that the AFDI adverti'sement contained

11 material that ridiculed or mocked, or was abusive or hostile to, or debased the dignity of minority

12 populations by equating their dress and skin color with terrorists. The juxtaposition of the ad

13 caption with the pictures created the impression that only minorities represented the "Faces of

14 Global Terrorism."

15 26. Moreover, the AFDI ad uses the word "jihadi" in a derogatory manner that is

16 demeaning to practitioners of the Muslim faith. By my understanding of the term, the concept of

17 ''jihad" refers not only to physical struggles, but more importantly, to the inner struggle by a

18 believer to fulfill his religious duties to Islam. In essence, the AFDI ad takes a sacred religious

19 duty and equates it with terrorism by defining "jihadist" to mean criminals on the most wanted

20 terrorist list. This embellishment was not on the State Department ad and denigrates, demeans

21 and disparages persons who practice the Muslim faith.

22 27. Finally, I rejected the AFDI ad under§ 6.2.9 of the 2012 Ad Policy. This section

23 prohibits "material that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 8 ~~~t~~,u:a~~~;:n 98104

ER-174 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page170
9 ofof34206

1 harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system." My focus in this provision

2 was the "interference with" prong of this section. A reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable

3 of our community prevailing standards, would understand that the AFDI ad is so objectionable

4 that it would interfere with operation of the Metro transit system. Just as a private business

5 would lose customers and upset staff by posting uncivil and demeaning placards on its walls, the

6 transit system would similarly lose riders and discomfort Metro staff if the AFDI ad were

7 allowed on our buses. It is unfair to Metro's riders, who are a captive audience, to subject them

8 to the AFDI's offensive advertisement during their daily commute. As such, the AFDI ad

9 interferes with Metro's primary goal of promoting increased ridership through the provision of a

10 quality transit experience.

11 28. The viewpoint espoused by a proposed advertisement is not relevant under the

12 2012 Ad Policy. As the AFDI "Faces of Global Terrorism" ad illustrates, however, the way in

13 which a message is communicated can be very relevant under the policy. Metro customers

14 should not be subjected to false, demeaning or disparaging advertising copy during their use of

15 transit facilities because it harms Metro's proprietary purpose to provide transit services. In

16 order to protect the product offered by Metro - transit services - the 2012 Ad Policy reflects that

17 advertisers must engage in civil and respectful discourse appropriate to the environment and

18 community stand,ards. Although AFDI has complied with this policy in the past, the "Faces of

19 Global Terrorism" ad fell far short of the mark and Metro rejected it consistent with the policy

20 that governs our limited public forum.

21

22

23

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
. CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King county Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 9 ~~~:i~,u~:~~~;~en 98104
ER-175 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 171
10 ofof34
206

1 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States and the State of

2 Washington that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing is true and correct.

3 SIGNED and DATED at Seattle, WA this 28th day of October, 2013.

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

DECLARATION OF KEVIN DESMOND IN SUPPORT OF Daniel T. satterberg, Prosecuting Attorney
CIVIL DIVISION, Litigation Section
KING COUNTY'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 900 King County Administration Building
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION(13-CV-1804-RAJ) - 10 ~~~:i~,u;ha~~~~~n 98104
ER-176 (206) 296-8820 Fax (206) 296-8819
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 172
11 ofof34
206

EXHIBIT A

ER-177
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 173
12 ofof34
206

ti
KingCounty
Department pf Transportation
Metro Transit Divisioa
General Manager's Office
201 S. Jackson Street
KSC-TR-0415
Seattle, WA 98104-3856

December 23, 2010·
. .
· TO: Dow Constantine, King County Executive

FM: Kevin Desmond, General Manager, Metro Transit Division, Department or1t.(}
Transportation

RE:. !nterim Metro Transit Advertising Policy

As you requested on December 20, 201 O, the Transit Division has been reviewing the
transit advertising policies. Based on our review and the purposes of our transit ·
advertising program, subject to your approval, effective immediately the following
Interim Transit Advertising Policy is adopted.

Interim Transit Advertising Policy.
As of December 23, 2010, the following Interim Transit Advertising Policy ("Interim
Policy") shall apply to King County transit advertising. This Interim Policy shall stay in
place until such time as a permanent Transit Advertising Policy"is adopted.
Purpose

The County is adopting this Interim Policy in, order to advance the primary purpose of the
transit advertising program, which is to generate revenue to pen.efit the transit.system. ·
The County's experience with transit advertising has lead to the conclusion that the
display of certain non~commeicial public issue advertisements interferes with the primary
purpose of generating revenue to benefit the transit system.

The Interim Policy advances the primary purpose by prohibiting the class of ·
advertisements that have detracted from the revenue generating purpose of transit
· advertising. This class of advertisements has created substantial controversy-about transit
·advertising, interfered with and diverted resources from transit operations, and posed
significant risks of harm to transit passengers, operators and vehicles. This class of
advertisements creates an environment that is not coudutjve to achieving increased
'' revenue for the benefit of the transit system.

ER-178
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 174
13 ofof34
206

Interim Transit Advertising Policy
December 23, 2010
Page2

The Interim Policy also continues the existing restrictions on other ciasses of
advertisements that interfere with the purposes of the transit advertising program. The
County's transit ad-vertising program is intended to continue to be a nonpublic forum for
limited expressi.on consistent with th~ purposes of the program.

As is the case with many transit agencies around the country, the County transit
on
advertising program places strong emphasis generating revenue to benefit the transit
. system and achieving a number of other related purposes that result in enhancing transit
operations. The Interim Policy is intended to achieve these purposes by:

• Supporting Transit revenues;
•· Preventing the appearance of favoritism by the County;
• Preventing the risk of imposi_ng views on a captive audience;
• Maintaining a position of neutrality on controversial issues;
• Preserving the marketing potential of the ~dvertisement spaces;
• Maximizing ridership;
• Preventing any harm or abuse that may result from running offensive
advertisements;
• Reducing the diversion of resources from transit operations that is caused by
controversial advertisements; and ·
•· Advancing poUce power and public health interests to avoid content that may be
hannful to minors and other members of the public.

Interim Policy

Under the Interim Policy, tb,e County will not authbrize approval of any new proposals
· for advertising that 'do· not meet the standards set forth herein. Under the Interim Policy
the following classes of advertising are prohibited:

1. Any advertising that (i) promotes or depicts the sale, rental, or use of, or participation
-in, the following products, servives or activities; or (ii) that uses brand names,
trademarks, slogans or other material which are. identifiable with such products,
services or activities.

A. tobacco products

B. beer, wine, distilled spirits or any alcoholic beverage licensed and regulated
· . under Washington law

C. films rated "Xn cir "NC-17" or video games rated "A"' or "M"

D. adult book stores, adult video stores, nude dance clubs and other adult
entertainment estal;,lishm.ents

E. adult telephone services, adult Internet sites and escort services

ER-179
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 175
14 ofof34
206

Interim Transit Advertising Policy
December 23, 2010
Page3

2. Any adv(?rtising that promotes any activity or product that is illegal under federal,
state or local 'law. ·

3. Any advertising that contam.s or involves the following: ·

.A. A,ny material that describes, depicts or represents sexual ·or excretory organs or
activities in a way:

(1) which the average adult person, applying contemporary community stand&rds,
would find, when considered as a whole." appeals to the prurient interest of
minors in sex; and .

· (2) which is patently offensive to contemporary standards in the adult community
as a who.le ~th respect to what is suitable material for minors to see; and

(3) which, when considered as a whole in the context in which it is used, lacks
serious literary, artistic, political, medical, health or .scientific value.

For purposes ·of this subsection, "sexual or excretory organs" shall mean and
include the male or f~ale pubic area, anus, buttocks, genitalia, or .any portion
of the areola or nipple of the female breast and "sexual or excretory activities"
shall mean and include actual or simulated sex acts of every nature (~eluding
but not limited to t~uching of one's own or another, s clothed or unclothed
sexual or excretory organs). urination and defecation.

B. Any material that depicts, or reasonably appears to depict, a person under the age
of eighteen (18) exhibiting his or her sexual or excretory organs or engaging in
sexual or excretory activities.

C. Any material that the Consultant knows or reasonably should have known is
false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would constitute a tort of defamation or
. invasion of privacy.

D. Any material that is so objectionable under contemporary community standards
as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in harm to, disruption of, or
interference with the transportation system. . ·

E. Any material directed at a person or group that is so insulting, degrading or
.offensive as to be reasonably foreseeable that it Will incite or produce imminent
.Jawle~s action in the fonn of retaliation, yancialism or other breach of public
safety, peace and order.

F. Flashing lights> sound makers~ mirrors.or other special effects that interfere with
the safer operation of the bus or the safety of bus riders, drivers of other vehicles
or the public at large. '

ER-180
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 176
15 ofof34
206

Interim Transit Advertising Policy
December 23, 2010
Page4

4. Any advertising from non-·governmental entities if the subject matter and intent of
said advertising is non-commercial. Specifically, acceptable advertising must
promote for sale, lease or other form ~ffinancial benefit a product, service, event
or other property interest in primarily a ~ercial mann~ for primarily a
CO}!UD.ercial purpose.. Governmental entities, meaning public entities specifically
created by government action, may purchase advertising space for messages that
advance specific. government purposes. It is the County's intent that government
advertising will not be used for comment on issues of public debate.

cc: Harold Taniguchi, Director, Department of Transportation
Pete Ramels, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Prosecuting Attorneys Office
Sharron Shinbo

ER-181
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 177
16 ofof34
206

EXHIBITB

ER-182
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 178
17 ofof34
206

. - ·.
King County General Department
Department Policies and Procedures · Policies & Procedures
DoculJIC(lt Code No.

TRANSIT ADVERTISING POLICY CON 1-1 (D-P)

OcpartmentJissui11g Agi:ncy Date
King County Department of Transpo~tion, Transit Division April 8, 2011
Approved
, Kevin Desmond, Transit General Manager

LO. King County Department of Transportation,. Transit Division, Transit
Advertising Policy ·

1.1 EFFECTNE,DATE: April3, 2011

1.2 TYPE OF ACTION: New

1.3 KEY WORDS: (1) Transit; (2) Advertising

2.0 PURPOSE:

2.1 King County Transit System. The King County Department of Transportation,
through its Transit Division,. operates one of the largest bus systems in the nation, one
that includes more than 225 bus routes throughout the County, with nearly 9,000 bus
stops and more than 130 park-and-ride facilities connecting riders with those routes.
The trtmsit system is a vital component of the broad·spectrum of public services the
County provides. The County's transit advertising program is intended to generate
revenue to support the transit system.

2.2 Advertising as Revenue -Source. The County's transit operations are ftmded by a
combination of federal, state.and local funds, including grants and truces, as well as
fare box revenue. Advertising revenues are an important additional source of revenue ·
that supports transit operations. The County's fundamental purpose in accepting
transit advertising is to generate revenue to augment the Transit Division's operating
budget

The primary pw-pose of the County's transit system is to provide safe and efficient
public transportation within its service area. Consistent with .this purpose, the County
places great importance on maintaining secure, safe, comfortable and convenient
Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles in order to, among other things consistent with
the provision of effective and reliable public transportation, retain existing riders and
attract new users of public transit services (KCC 28.96.020 and .210). To generate
additional revenue while also accomplishing th~ primary objectives of transit

ER-183
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 179
18 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1~1 (D~P)
....
) Effective Date: April 8, 2011 Page 2 of9

operations, the County will accept advertising on its Transit Facilities and Transit
Vehicles only if such advertising complies with this Advertising Policy.

2.3 Limited Public Forum Status. The County's acceptance of transit advertising does not
provide or create a general public forum for expressive activities. In keeping with its
proprietary function as a provider of public transportation, and consistent with KCC
28.96.020 and .210, the County does not intend its acceptance of transit advertising to
convert its Transit Vehicles or Transit Facilities into open public forums for public
discourse and debate. Rather, as noted, the County's fundamental purpose and intent is
to accept advertising as an additional means of generating revenue to support its transit
operations. In furtherance of that discreet and limited objective, the County retains
strict control over the nature of the ads accepted for posting on or in its Transit
Vehicles and Transit Facilities and maintains its advertising space as a limited public
forum. ·

In the County's experience, certain types of advertisements interfere with the program's
primary purpose of generating revenue to benefit the transit system. This policy
advances the advertising program's revenue-generating objective by prohibiting
advertisements that could detract from that goal by creating substantial controversy,
interfering with and diverting resources from transit operations, and/or posing
significant risks of harm, inconvenience, or annoyance to transit passengers, operators
and vehicles. Such advertisements create an environment that is not conducive to
achieving increased revenue for the benefit <?f the transit system or to preserving and
enhancing the security, safety, comfort and convenience of its operations. The
viewpoint neutral restrictions in this policy thus foster the maintenance of a
professional advertising environment that maximizes advertising revenue.

This policy is intended to provide clear guidance as to the types of advertisements that
will allow the County to generate revenue and enhance transit operations by:

• Increasing revenue;_
• Preventing the appearance of favoritism by the County;
• Preventing the risk of imposing views on a captive audience;
• Maintaining a position of neutrality on controversial issues;
• Preserving the marketing potential of the advertising space by avoiding content
that the community could view as offensive, inappropriate or harmful to the
public generally or to minors in particular;
• Maximizing rider$ip;
• Avoiding claims of discrimination and maintaining a non-discriminatory
environment fo~ riders;
·• Preventing any harm or abuse that may result from running
controversial or offensive advertisements;
• Reducing the diversion of resources from transit operations that is
caused by controversial or offensive advertisements.

ER-184
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 180
19 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 Page3 of9

The County's Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles are a limited public forum and, as
such, the County will accept only that advertising that falls within the categories of
acceptable advertising specified in this viewpoint neutral policy and that satisfies all
other access requirements and restrictions provided herein.

2.4 Application of Policy. This Transit Advertising Policy applies to the posting of all
new advertisements on Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles on or after the Effective
Date. Any advertisements which would be prohibited under this policy, but which
were posted·pursuant to the terms of a fully executed advertising contract prior to the
Effective Date of this policy, will be allowed to_ remain posted for the duration of that
contract

3.0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED: King County Department of Transportation, Transit
Division

4.0 REFERENCES:.

4.1 · Transit Code of Conduct, chapter 28.96 KCC ·

4.2 Public Transit Definitions, chapter 28.92 KCC

4.3 King County Charter Section 320.20: Provides that the county executive "shall have
the power to assign duties to administrative offices and executive departments which
are not specifically assigned by this charter or ordinance...."

4.4 Executive Policy/Procedures No. INF 7-lD-1 (A-EP): Approval and Routing
_Procedures for General Department Policies/Procedures (D-P's) and Department Work
Procedures (D-W)

5.0 DEFINITIONS:

5.1 Transit Facilities. Transit Facilities include the downtown. Seattle transit tunnel (KCC
28.9Z.190), transit tunnel mezzanine areas (KCC 28.92.200) and transit tunnel
platform areas (KCC 28.92.210). ·

5.2 Transit Vehicles. Transit Vehicles include all transit passenger buses, trolleys and
street railcars.

ER-185
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 181
20 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 Page 4 of9

6.0 POLICIES:

6.1 PERMITTED ADVERTISING CONTENT

The following classes of advertising are authorized on Transit Facilities and Transit
Vehicles if the advertising does not include any material that qualifies as Prohibited
. Advertising under Subsection 6.2 ofthis Advertising Policy:

6.1.1 Commercial and Promotional Advertising. Commercial and Promotional
Advertising promotes or solicits the sale, rental, distribution or availability of
goods, services, food, entertainment, events, programs, transactions, donations,
products or property (real or personal) for commercial or noncommercial
purposes or more generally promotes an entity that engages in such activities.

6.1.2 Public Service Announcements. The County recognizes that its advertising
program arid its overall public transportation mission are promoted by allowing
for Public Service Announcements. Such announcements enge_nder goodwill
with the public because the transit system is seen as a caring and active
particip;mt in the community. Further, board members and administrators of
nonprofit or government organizations who receive space for Public Service
Announcements are introduced to the benefits oftransit advertising, in9reasing
the likelihood they will purchase transit advertising in the future for their
organizations or other organization in which they are involved.

A Public Service Announcement must satisfy the following criteria:

6.1.2.1 The sponsor of a Public Service Announcement must be a government
entity or a nonprofit corporation that is exempt from taxation under
Section 50l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. 1

6.1 ..2.2 The Public Service Announcement may not include a message that is
commercial or retail in nature or related to a festival, show, sporting
event, concert, lecture or event for which an admission fee is charged.

6.1.2.3. The Public Service Announcement must be directed to the general
public or a significant segment of the public and relate to:

(a) prevention or treatment of illnesses;

1
26 USCS 50l{c)(3) - Corporations, and any community chest. fund, or foundatio11,, organized and operated exclusively fur religious, charitable,
scientific, testing for public safety, Iiterruy or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition ,-., or for the
prevention of cruelty to clilldren or animals, no part of the net earning,i of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no
substantial part of the activities of which is canying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting. to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in
subsection (h), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on
behalfof{or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.

ER-186
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 182
21 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Divisioi:i CON 1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 Page 5 of9

(b) promotion of safety or personal well-being;

(c) provision of children and family services;

(d) solicitation by brc;>ad-based employee contribution
campaigns which provide funds to multiple charitable
organizations (e.g. United Way); or

(e) provision of services and programs that provide support
to low income citizens and citizens with disabilities.

6.2 PROIIlBITED ADVERTISING CONTENT

Advertising is prohibited on Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles if it includes any of the
following content:

6.2.1 Political. Advertising promoting or opposing a political party, or promoting or
opposing the election of any candidate or group of candidates for federal, state
,t or local government offices. Advertising promoting or opposing initiatives,
,;, ·referendums or other ballot measures.

6.2.2 Public Issue. Advertising expressing or advocating an opinion, position or
viewpoint on matters of public debate about economic, political, religious or
social issues.

·· .: 6.2.3 Prohibited Products, Services or Activities. Any advertising that (i) promotes
or depicts the sale, rental," or use of, or participation in, the following products,
services or activities; or (ii) that uses brand names, trademarks, slogans or
other material that are identifiable with such products, services or activities:

(a) Tobacco. Tobacco products, including but not limited to
cigarettes, cigars, and smokeless (e.g., chewing) tobacco;

(b) Alcohol. Beer, wine, distilled spirits or any alcoholic beverage
licensed and regulated under Washington.law, however, this
prohibition shall not prohibit advertising that includes the name
of a restaurant that is open to minors;
I

(c) Adult/ Mature Rated Films, Television or Video Games. Adult
films rated "X" or "NC-17 11 , television rated "MA1 1 or video
gam.es rated "A" or "M";

ER-187
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 183
22 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 20_11 Page 6 of9

(d) Adult Entertainment Facilities. Adult book stores, adult video
stores, nude dance clubs and other adult entertainment
establishments; ·

(e) Other Adult Services. Adult telephone services, adult internet
sites and escort services.

6.2.4 Sexual and/or Excretory Subject Matter. Any advertising that contains or
involves any material that des~ribes, depicts or represents sexual or excretory
organs or activities in a way: ·

(a) that the average adult person, applying contemporary
community standards, would find, when considered as a whole,
appeals to the prurient interest of minors in sex; or

(b) · which is patently offensive to contemporary standards in the
adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable
material for minors to see; or

(c) that depicts, or reasonably appears to depict, a person under the
age of eighteen (18) exhibiting his or her sexual or excretory
· organs or engaging in sexual or excretory activities.

For purposes ofthis subsection, "sexual or excretory organs" shall mean and
include the male or female pubic area, anus, buttocks, genitalia, or any portion
of the areola or nipple of the female breast and "sexual or excretory activities"
shall mean and include actual or simulated sex acts .of every nature (including
but not limited to touching of one's own or another's clothed or unclothed
sexual or excretory organs), urination and defecation.

6.2.5 False or Misleading. Any material that is or that the sponsor reasonably should
have known is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would constitute a
tort of defamation or invasion of privacy.
6.2.6 Copyright Trademark or Otherwise Unlawful. Advertising that contains any
material that is an infringement of copyright, trademark or service mark, or is
otherwise unlawful or illegal.

6.2. 7 illegal Activity. Any advertising that promotes any activity or product that is
illegal under federal, state or local law.

6.2.8 Profanity and Violence. Advertising that contains any profane language, or
portrays images or descriptions of graphic violence, including dead, mutilated
or disfigured human beings or animals, the act of killing, mutilating or

ER-188
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 184
23 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportatio~ Transit Division CON 1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 .Page 7 of9

disfiguring human beings or animals, or intentional infliction of pain or violent
action towards or upon a person or animal.

6.2.9 Firearms. Advertising that promotes or solicits the sale, rental, distribution or
availability of firearms or firearms-related products.

6.2.10 Disparaging. Any advertising that is intended to be (or reasonably could be
interpreted as being) disparaging, disreputable, or disrespectful to persons,
groups, businesses or organizations, including advertising that portrays
individuals as inferior, evil or contemptible because of their race, color, creed,
sex, pregnancy, age, teligion; ancestry, national origin; marital status,
disability, sexual orientation or any other characteristic protected under federal,
state or local law.

6.2.11 Insulting. Degrading or Offensive. Any material directed at a person or group
that is so insulting, degrading or offensive. as to be reasonably foreseeable that
it will incite or produce lawless action in the form of retaliatio~ vandalism or
other breach of public safety, peace and order.

6.2.12 Harmful or Disruptive to Transit System. Any material that is so objectionable
under contemporary community standards as to be reasonably foreseeable that
it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation
system.

6.2.13 Lights, Noise and Special Effects. Flashing lights, sound makers, mirrors or
other special effects that interfere with the safe operation of the bus or the
safety of bus riders, drivers of other vehicles or tlie public at large.

6.2.14 Unsafe Transit Behavior. Any advertisement that encourages or depicts unsafe .
behavior with respect to transit-related activities. such as non-use of normal
safety precautions in awaiting, boarding, riding upon or debarking from transit
vehicles.

6.3 ADDffIONAL REQUIREMENTS

6.3.1 · Sponsor Attribution and Contact Information. Any advertising in which the
identity of the sponsor is not readily and unambiguously identifiable must
include the following phrase to identify the sponsor in clearly v.isible letters (no
smaller than 72 point type for exteriors and 24 point type for interiors):

Advertisement paid for by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

ER-189
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 185
24 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transi~ Division CON 1-1 {D-P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 · Page 8 of9

"Teaser ads" that do not identify the sponsor will, however, be allowed so long
as a similar number of follow up advertisements are posted within eight weeks
of the initial teaser ads that do identify the sponsor of those initial ads.

7.0 PROCEDURES:

Action By: Action:

Transit Advertising 7.1 All proposed transit advertising must be submitted to the
Contractor Transit Advertising Contractor for initial compliance
review. The Transit Advertising Contractor will perform
a preliminary evaluation of the submission to assess its
compliance with this policy. If, during its preliminary
review of a proposed advertisement, the Transit
Advertising Contractor is unable to make a compliance
determination. it will forward the submission to the
Transit Advertising Program Manager for further
evaluation. The Transit Advertising Contractor may at
any time discuss with the entity proposing the ·
advertisement one or more revisions to an advertisement,
which, if undertaken, would bring the advertisement into
conformity with this Advertising Policy. The Transit
Advertising Contractor will immediately remove any
advertisement that the Transit Division at any time
directs it to remove.

Transit Advertising 7.2 The Transit Advertising Program Manager will review the
Program Manager proposed advertisement for compliance with the
guidelines set forth. in this policy and will"direct the
Transit Advertising Contractor as to whether the
proposed advertisement will be accepted. In the.
discretion of the Transit Advertising Program Manager,
any proposed transit advertising may be submitted to the
Transit Division General Managerfor review.

Transit Division General 7.3 · The Transit Division General Manager shall conduct a
Manager final review of proposed advertising at the request of the
Transit Advertising Program. Manager. The decision of
the Transit Division General Manager to approve or
reject any proposed advertising shall be final.

ER-190
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 186
25 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1 (D~P)
Effective Date: April 8, 2011 Page 9 of9

Action By: Action:

Transit Advertising 7.4 The Transit Advertising Program Manager or the Transit
Program Manager and Division General Manager may consult with the County's
Transit Division General legal counsel at any time during the review process.
Manager

8.0 RESPONSIBILITIES:

The Transit Advertising Program Manager and Transit Division General Manager are
responsible for the implementation ofthis Transit Advertising Policy.

ER-191
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 187
26 ofof34
206

EXHIBIT C

ER-192
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 188
27 ofof34
206

King County General Department
Department Policies and Procedures Policies & Procedures
Document Code No.

TRANSIT ADVERTISING POLICY CON 1-1-1 (D-P)

Department/Jssuing Agency Pate
King County Department of Transportation, Transit Divis'ion January 12, 2012

, Kevin Desmond, Transjt General Manager

1.0 SUBJECT TITLE: King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division, Transit
Advertising Policy ·

Ll EFFECTNEDATE: January 12, 2012

1.2 TYPE OF ACTION: Superseding CON 1-1 (D-P)

1.3 KEY WORDS: (1) Transit; (2) Advertising

2.0 .PURPOSE:

2.1 King County Transit System. The King County Department of Transportation,
tlrrough its Transit Division, operates one of the largest bus systems in the nation, one
that includes more than 225 bus routes throughout the County, with nearly 9,000 bus
stops and more thari 130 park-and-ride facilities connecting riders with those routes.
The transit system is a vital component of the broad spectrum of public services the
County provides. The County's transit advertising program is intended to generate
revenue to support the transit system.

2.2 Advertising as Revenue Source. The C01mty's transit operations are funded by a
combination of federal, state and local funds, including grants and tax~s, as well as
fare box revenue. Advertising revenues are an important additional source of revenue
that supports transit operations. The County's fimdamental purpose in accepting
transit advertising is to generate revenue to augment the Transit Division's operating
budget. ·

The primary purpose of the County's transit system is to provide safe and efficient
public transportation within its service area. Consistent with this purpose, the Co)lllty
places great importance on maintaining secure, safe, comfortable and convenient
Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles in order to, among other things consistent with
the provision of effective and reliable public transportation, retain existing riders and
attract new users of public transit services (KCC 28.96.020 and .210). To generate
additional revenue while also accomplishing the primary objectives of transit

ER-193
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 189
28 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1~1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 2 of 8

operations, the County will accept advertising on its Transit Facilities and Transit
Vehicles only if such advertising complies with this Advertising Policy.

2.3 Limited Public Forum Status. The County's acceptance oftransit advertising does nof
provide or create a general public forum for expressive activities. In keeping with its
proprietary function as a provider of public transportation, and consistent with KCC
28.96.020 and .210, the County does not intend its acceptance of transit advertising to
convert its Transit Vehicles or Transit Facilities into open public forums for public
discourse and debate. Rather, as noted, the County's fundamental purpose and intent is
to accept advertising as an additional means of generating revenue to support its transit
operations. In :furtherance of that discreet and limited objective, the County retains
strict control over the nature of the ads accepted for posting on or in its Transit
Vehicles and Transit Facilities and maintains its advertising space as a limited public
forum.

In the County's experience, certain types of advertisements interfere with the program's
primary purpose of generating revenue to benefit the transit system. This policy
advances the advertising program's revenue-generating objective by prohibiting
advertisements that could detract from that goal by creating substantial controversy,
interfering with and diverting resources from transit operations, and/or posing
significant risks of harm, inconvenience, or annoyance to transit passengers, operators
and vehicles. Such advertisements create an environment that is not conducive to
achieving increased revenue for the benefit of the transit system or to preserving and
enhancing the security, safety, comfort and convenience of its operations. The
viewpoint neutral restrictions in this policy thus foster the maintenance· of a
professional advertising environment that maximizes advertising revenue.

This policy is intended to provide clear guidance as to the types of advertisements that
will allow the County to generate revenue and enhance transit operations by fulfilling
the following goals and objectives:

• Maximizing advertising revenue;
• · Preventing the appearance' of favoritism by the County;
• Preventing the risk of imposing demeaning or disparaging views on a captive
audience;
Maintaining a position of neutrality on controversial issues;
• Preserving the marketing potential of the advertising space by avoiding content
that the community could view as demeaning, disparaging, objectionable,
inappropriate or harmful to members of the public generally or to minors in
particular;
• Maximizing ridership;
Avoiding claims of discrimination and maintaining a non-discri:mjnatory
environment for riders;
• Preventing any harm or ab11se that may result from rnnning demeaning,
disparaging or objectionable advertisements;

ER-194
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 190
29 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12; 2012 Page3 of8

Reducing the diversion ofresources from transit operations that is
caused by demeaning, disparaging, objectionable, inappropriate or
harmful advertisements. ·

The County's Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles are a .limited public forum and, as
such, the County will accept only that advertising that falls within the categories of
acceptable advertising specified in this viewpoint neutral policy and that satisfies all
other access requirements and restrictions provided herein.

The County reserves the right to suspend, modify or revoke the application of any of
the standards in this Policy as it deems necessary to comply with legal mandates, to
accommodate its primary transportation function, or to fulfill tlie goals and objectives
identified above. All of the provisions in this Policy shall be deemed severable.

2.4 Application of Policy. This Transit Advertising Policy applies to the posting of all
new advertisements on Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles on or after the Effective
Date. Any advertisements which would be prohibited under this policy, but which
'were posted pursuant to the tenns of a fully executed advertising contract prior to the
Effe~tive Date of this policy, will be allowed to remain posted for the duration of that
contract.

2.5 Disclaimer of Endorsement. The County's acceptance ofan advertisement does not
constitute express or implied endorsement of the content or message of the
advertisement, including any person, organization, products, services, information or
viewpoints contained therein, or of the advertisement sponsor jtself. This endorsement .
disclaimer extends to and includes content that may be found via internet addresses,
quick response (QR) codes, and telephone numbers that may appear in posted ads and
that direct viewers to external sources of information.

. 3.0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED: King County Department of Transportation, Transit
Division

4.0 REFERENCES:

4.1 Transit Code of Conduct, chapter 28.96 KCC

4.2 Public Transit Definitions, chapter 28.92 KCC

4.3 King County Charter Section 320.20: Provides that the county executive ''shall have
the power to assign duties to administrative offices and executive departments which
are not specifically assigned by this charter or ordinance .... 11

.4A Executive Policy/Procedures No. INF 7-lD-1 (AEP): Approval and Routing
Procedures for General Department Policies/Procedures (D-P's) and Department Work
Procedures (D-W)

ER-195
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 191
30 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 4of8

5.0 DEFINITIONS:

5.1 Transit Facilities. Transit Facilities include the downtown Seattle transit tunnel (KCC ·
28.92. 190), transit tunnel mezzanine areas (KCC.28.92.200) and transit tunnel
platform areas (KCC 28.92.210).

5.2 Transit Vehicles. Transit Vehicles include all transit-passenger buses, trolleys and
street railcars.

6.0 . POLICIES:

6.1 Permitted Advertising Content: The following classes of advertising are authorized on
or in Transit Facilities and Transit Vehicles:

6.1.1 General Allowance for Advertising. Advertising that does not include any
material t~t qualifies as Prohibited Advertising under Subsection 6.2 of this
Advertising Policy.

6.1.2 King County TransH Advertising. The County has the right to display
advertising sponsored by the King County Transit_ Division to promote the
King County Transit System or any of the functions or programs carried out by
the Transit Division.

6.2 Prohibited Advertising Content: Advertising is prohibited on or in Transit Facilities
and Transit Vehicles if it includes any of the following content:

6.2.1 Political Campaign Speech. Advertising that promotes, or opposes a political
party, the election of any candidate or group of candidates for federal, state or
local government offices, or initiatives, referendums or other ballot measures.

6.2.2 Prohibited Products, Services or Activities. Any advertising that (i) promotes
o·r depicts the sale, rental, or use of, participation in, or images of the following
products, services or activities; or (ii) that uses brand mi.mes, trademarks,
slogans or other material that are identifiable with such products, services or
activities:

(a) · Tobacco. Tobacco products, including but not limited to
cigarettes, dgars, and smokeless (e.g., chewing) tobacco;

(b) Alcohol. ·Beer, wine, distilled spirits or any alcoholic beverage
licensed and regulated under Washington law, however, this
prohibition shall not prohibit advertising that includes the name
of a restaurant that is open to minors;

ER-196
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 192
31 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 5 of 8

(c) Fiream1s. Firearms, ammunition or other fireanns-related
products.

(d) Adult/ Mature Rated Films, Television or Video Games. Adult
films rated 11X11 or 11NC~l 7", television rated "MA1' or video
games rated "A'' or "M";

(e) Adult Entertainment Facilities,· Adult book stores, adult video
stores, nude dance clubs and other adult entertainment
establishments;

(f) Other Adult Services. Adult telephone services, adult internet
sites arid escort services.

6.2.3 Sexual and/or Excretory Subject Matter. Any advertising that contains or
involves any material that describes,.depicts or represents sexual or excretory
organs or activities in a way:

(a) that the average adult person, applying contemporary
community standards, would find, when considered as a whole,
appeals to the prurient interest of minors in sex; or

(b) which is patently offensive to contemporary standards fa the
adult community as a who.le with respect to what is suitable
material for minors to see; or

. (c) that depicts, or reasonably appears to depict, a person under the
age of eighteen (18) exhibiting his or her sexual or excretory
organs or engaging in sexual or excretory activities.

For purposes of thi!'l subsection, "sexual or excretory organs" shall mean and
include the male or female pubic area, anus, buttocks, genitalia, or any portion
of the areola or nipple of the female breast and "sexual or' excretory activities"
shall mean and include actual or simulated sex acts of every nature (including
but not limited to touching of one's own or another's clothed or unclothed
sexual or excretory organs), urination and defecation.

6.2.4 False or Misleading. Any material that is or that the sponsor reasonably should
have lrn.own is false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive or would constituJe a
tort of defamation or invasion of privacy.

·6.2.5 Copyright, Trademark or Otherwise Unlawful. Advertising that contains any
material that is a:tl infringement of copyright, trademark or service mark, or is
otherwise unlawful or illegal.

ER-197
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 193
32 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 · Page 6 of8

6 .2.6 l1legal Activity. Any advertising that promotes any activity or product that is
illegal under federal, stale or local law.

6.2.7 Profanity and Violence .. Advertisjng that contains any profane language, or
portrays images or descriptions of graphic violence, including dead, II).Utilatcd
or disfigured human beings or animals, the act of killing, mutilating or
disfiguring human beings or animals, or intentional infliction of pain or violent
action towards or upon a person or animal.

6.2.8 Demeaning or Disparaging. Advertising that contains material that demeans or
disparages an individual, group ofindividuals or entity. For purposes of
determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the County will
determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of the County1s
ridership and using prevailing community standards, would believe that the
advertisement contains material that ridicules or mocks, is abusive or hostile
to, or debases the dignity or stature of any individual, group of individuals or
entity.

6.2.9 Hannful or Disruptive to Transit System. Advertising that contains material
that is so objectionable as to be reasonably foreseeable that it will result in
harm to, disruption of or interference with the transportation system. For
pur.poses of determining whether an advertisement contains such material, the
County will determine whether a reasonably prudent person, knowledgeable of
the County's ridership and using prevailing community standards, would
believe that the material is so objectionable that it is reasonably foreseeable
that it will result in harm to, disruption of or interference with the
transportation system.

6.2.10 Lights, Noise and Special Effects. Flashing lights, sound makers, :mirrors or
other special effects that interfere with the safe operation of the bus or the
safety of bus riders, drivers of other vehicles or the public at large.

6.2.11 Unsafe Transit Behavior. Any advertisement that encourages or depicts unsafe
behavior with respect to transit-related activities, such as non-use of nonnal
safety precautions in awaiting, boarding, riding upon or debarking from transit
vehicles.

6.3 Additional Requirements:

6.3 .1 Sponsor Attribution and Contact Information. Any advertising in which the
identity of the sponsor is not readily and unambiguously identifiable must
include the following phrase to identify the sponsor in clearly visible letters (no
smaller than 72 point type for exteriors and 24 point type for interiors): ·

Paid for by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

ER-198
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 194
33 ofof34
206

King Cotmty Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON I-i-1 (D-P)
Effective Date; January 12, 2012 Page 7 of 8

"Teaser ads" that do not identify the sponsor will, however, be allowed so long
as a similar number of follow up advertisements are posted within eight weeks
of the initial teaser ads that do identify the sponsor of those initial ads.

· 7.0 PROCEDURES:

Action By:

Transit Advertising 7.1 AU proposed transit advertising must be submitted to the
Contractor Transit Advertising Contractor for initial compliance
review. The Transit Advertising Contractor will perform
a preliminary evaluation of the submission to assess its
compliance with this policy. If, during its preliminary
review of a proposed advertisement, the Transit
Advertising Contractor is unable to make a compliance
determination, it will forward the submission to the
Transit Advertising Program Manager for further
evaluation. The Transit Advertising Contractor may at
any time discuss with the entity proposing the
advertisement one or more revisions to an advertisement.,
which, if undertaken, would bring' the advertisement into
conformity with this Advertising Policy. The Transit
Advertising Contractor ·will immediately r~ove any .
advertisement that the Transit Division at any time
directs it to remove.

Transit Advertising 7 .2 The Transit Advertising Program Manager will review the
Program Manager proposed advertisement for compliance with the
guidelines set forth in this policy and will direct the
Transit Advertising Contractor as to whether the
proposed advertisement will be accepted. In the
discretion of the Transit Advertising Program Manager,
any proposed transit advertising may be submitted to the
Transit Division General Manager for review.

Transit Division General 7 .3 The Transit Division General Manager shall conduct a
Manager final review of proposed advertising at the request of the
Transit Advertising Program Manager. The deci.sion of
the Transit Division General Manager to approve or
reject any proposed advertising shall be final.

Transit Advertising 7.4 The Transit Advertising Program Manager or the Transit
Program Manager and Division General Manager may consult with other
Transit ])ivision General appropriate County employees, including the County's

ER-199
Case:
Case 17-35897,
2:13-cv-01804-RAJ
03/14/2018,
Document
ID: 10797434,
13 Filed
DktEntry:
10/28/13
8-2, Page
Page 195
34 ofof34
206

King County Department of Transportation, Transit Division CON 1-1-1 (D-P)
Effective Date: January 12, 2012 Page 8 of 8

Action By: Action;

Manager legal counsel, at any time during the review process.

8.0 RESPONSIBILITIES: The Transit Advertising Program Manager and Transit Division
General Manager are responsible for the implementation ofthis Transit Advertising Policy.

ER-200
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 196 of 206
APPEAL,CLOSED,JURYDEMAND

U.S. District Court
United States District Court for the W estern District of W ashington (Seattle)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:13-cv-01804-RAJ

American Freedom Defense Initiative et al v. King County Date Filed: 10/07/2013
Assigned to: Judge Richard A Jones Date Terminated: 11/02/2017
Case in other court: 9th Circuit, 14-35095 Jury Demand: Defendant
Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Plaintiff
American Fr eedom Defense Initiative represented by David Yerushalmi
AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER
1901 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
SUITE 201
WASHINGTON, DC 20006
646-262-0500
Fax: 801-760-3901
Email: dyerushalmi@aflc.us
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert J Muise
AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER
PO BOX 131098
Ann Arbor, MI 48113
734-635-3756
Email: rmuise@aflc.us
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stephen W alter Pidgeon
3002 COLBY AVENUE
SUITE 306
EVERETT, WA 98201
425-605-4774
Fax: 425-818-5371
Email: stephen.pidgeon@comcast.net
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Plaintiff
Pamela Geller represented by David Yerushalmi
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
ER-201
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 1/11
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 197 of 206
Robert J Muise
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stephen W alter Pidgeon
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Plaintiff
Robert Spencer represented by David Yerushalmi
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Robert J Muise
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stephen W alter Pidgeon
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
King County represented by Linda Montecucco Gallagher
KING COUNTY PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (4TH AVE)
500 4TH AVE
STE 900
SEATTLE, WA 98104-5039
206-296-0430
Email: linda.gallagher@kingcounty.gov
TERMINATED: 12/30/2016
LEAD ATTORNEY

David JW Hackett
KING COUNTY PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (4TH AVE)
500 4TH AVE
STE 900
SEATTLE, WA 98104-5039
206-205-0580
Email: david.hackett@kingcounty.gov
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

ER-202
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 2/11
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 198 of 206
Samantha Kanner
KING COUNTY PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (4TH AVE)
500 4TH AVE
STE 900
SEATTLE, WA 98104-5039
206-296-8820
Email: samantha.kanner@kingcounty.gov
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Amicus
ACLU of W ashington Foundation represented by La Rond Baker
OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
(CIVIL RIGHTS UNIT)
800 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 2000
SEATTLE, WA 98104
206-464-7744
Email: larondb@atg.wa.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sarah A Dunne
ACLU OF WASHINGTON
901 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 630
SEATTLE, WA 98164
206-624-2184
Email: sarahadunne@yahoo.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Venkat Balasubramani
FOCAL PLLC
900 FIRST AVENUE S., SUITE 201
SEATTLE, WA 98134
206-529-4827
Fax: 206-260-3966
Email: venkat@focallaw.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Unable to cr eate PDF file.

Date Filed # clear Docket Text
10/07/2013 1 COMPLAINT 42 USC 1983 against defendant(s) King County (Receipt # 0981-
3372732), filed by Pamela Geller, American Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert
Spencer. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5
Exhibit 5, # 6 Civil Cover Sheet, # 7 Summons)(Pidgeon, Stephen) (Entered:
10/07/2013)
10/08/2013 Judge Richard A Jones added. (MKB) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 2 Summons Issued as to defendant King County. (MKB) (Entered: 10/08/2013)

ER-203
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 3/11
3/2/2018 Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: WAWD CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 199 of 206
10/08/2013 NOTICE to Filer - COUNTY ENTERED INCORRECT: When entering the county
on the case data page please enter the county of residence of the Plaintiff as required
on the Civil Cover Sheet. Thank you. (MKB) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 NOTICE to Filer - PARTIES OUT OF ORDER ON DOCKET:In the future please
order the parties on the docket as they appear on the Complaint. In addition to
creating a docket that is a true reflection of the Complaint caption it also helps
eliminate dropping parties. The docket has now been properly ordered. Thank you.
(MKB) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 3 APPLICATION pro hac vice David Yerushalmi [fee paid] by Plaintiffs American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer . (Pidgeon, Stephen)
(Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 4 APPLICATION pro hac vice Robert Muise [fee paid] by Plaintiffs American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer . (Pidgeon, Stephen)
(Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 5 ORDER re 3 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS
Attorney David Yerushalmi for American Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert
Spencer, Pamela Geller by William M McCool(No document associated with this
docket entry, text only.) (JEM) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 Attorney David Yerushalmi for American Freedom Defense Initiative,Pamela
Geller,Robert Spencer added. (JEM) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 6 ORDER re 4 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS
Attorney Robert J Muise for American Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer,
Pamela Geller by William M McCool. (No document associated with this docket
entry; text only.) (JEM) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/08/2013 Attorney Robert J Muise for American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer added. (JEM) (Entered: 10/08/2013)
10/09/2013 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense
Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments:
# 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit A to Ex. 1, # 3 Exhibit B to Ex. 1, # 4 Exhibit C to Ex. 1, #
5 Exhibit D to Ex. 1, # 6 Exhibit E to Ex. 1, # 7 Proposed Order) Noting Date
11/1/2013, (Yerushalmi, David) (Entered: 10/09/2013)
10/17/2013 8 AFFIDAVIT of Service of Summons and Complaint on Angel Allende for Clerk of
the County Council for Defendant on 10/9/2013, filed by Plaintiffs American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit A)(Yerushalmi, David) (Entered: 10/17/2013)
10/17/2013 9 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney David JW Hackett on behalf of Defendant King
County. (Hackett, David) (Entered: 10/17/2013)
10/17/2013 10 MOTION to Stay Further Pr oceedings Pending Ninth Circuit Decision by
Defendant King County. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed
Order) Noting Date 11/1/2013, (Hackett, David) (Entered: 10/17/2013)
10/27/2013 11 RESPONSE, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer, to 10 MOTION to Stay Further Pr oceedings Pending Ninth Circuit
Decision. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)
(Yerushalmi, David) (Entered: 10/27/2013)
10/28/2013 12 RESPONSE, by Defendant King County, to 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction .
Oral Argument Requested. (Hackett, David) (Entered: 10/28/2013)
ER-204
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 4/11
3/2/2018 Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID:WAWD CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 200 of 206
10/28/2013 13 DECLARATION of Kevin Desmond in Support of King County's Brief in
Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Defendant King County re
7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Hackett, David) (Entered: 10/28/2013)
10/28/2013 14 DECLARATION of Sharron Shinbo in Support of King County's Brief in
Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Defendant King County re
7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Hackett,
David) (Entered: 10/28/2013)
10/31/2013 15 MOTION for Leave Amicus Briefby Amicus ACLU of Washington Foundation.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Amicus Brief, # 2 Proposed Order Granting
Leave to File Amicus Brief) Noting Date 11/22/2013, (Balasubramani, Venkat)
(Entered: 10/31/2013)
11/01/2013 16 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Venkat Balasubramani on behalf of Amicus
ACLU of Washington Foundation. (Balasubramani, Venkat) (Entered: 11/01/2013)
11/01/2013 17 REPLY, filed by Defendant King County, TO RESPONSE to 10 MOTION to Stay
Further Pr oceedings Pending Ninth Circuit Decision (Hackett, David) (Entered:
11/01/2013)
11/01/2013 18 ANSWER to 1 Complaint, with JURY DEMAND by King County.(Hackett, David)
(Entered: 11/01/2013)
11/01/2013 19 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1.
Filed by ACLU of Washington Foundation. (Balasubramani, Venkat) (Entered:
11/01/2013)
11/01/2013 20 REPLY, filed by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer, TO RESPONSE to 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction
(Yerushalmi, David) (Entered: 11/01/2013)
11/04/2013 21 MINUTE ORDER - Defendant is ORDERED to submit a courtesy copy that
complies with the Local Civil Rules within 5 days of this order re: Dkt. ## 12-14, by
Judge Richard A Jones. (MD) (Entered: 11/05/2013)
11/14/2013 22 MINUTE ORDER re: courtesy copy of docket nos. 12-14 by Judge Richard A
Jones. (CL) (Entered: 11/14/2013)
01/17/2014 Set Oral Argument on 7 Motion for Preliminary Injunction: MOTION HEARINGset
for 1/27/2014 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 13106 before Judge Richard A. Jones. (VE)
(Entered: 01/17/2014)
01/17/2014 23 NOTICE of Request for Video Recording of Motion for Preliminary Injunction on
1/27/2014 at 2:00 PM before Richard A. Jones. Parties must submit PARTY
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR VIDEO RECORDING before 1/22/2014. Please
Note: This form must not be filed electr onically with the Court. (VE) (Entered:
01/17/2014)
01/21/2014 24 NOTIFICATION REGARDING PROPOSED VIDEO RECORDING. All parties
have consented to the video recording of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction on
1/27/2014 at 2:00 PM. Unless otherwise ordered by the presiding judge, the
proceeding will be video recorded as part of the CAMERAS Pilot Project. (VE)
(Entered: 01/21/2014)
01/23/2014 25 NOTICE of Supplemental Authority re 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by
Defendant King County (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B1, # 3 Exhibit
B2, # 4 Exhibit B3)(Hackett, David) (Entered: 01/23/2014)

ER-205
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 5/11
3/2/2018 Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: WAWD CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 201 of 206
01/27/2014 26 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Richard A. Jones - Dep Clerk:
Victoria Ericksen ; Pla Counsel: David Yerushalmi, Robert Muise; Def Counsel:
David Hackett, Linda Gallagher ; CR: Kari McGrath ; MOTION HEARING held
on 1/27/2014 re 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by American Freedom
Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. The Court hears argument of
counsel and takes this matter under advisement. (VE) (Entered: 01/27/2014)
01/30/2014 27 ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court DENIES plaintiffs' motion for
preliminary injunction (Dkt. # 7 ), and DENIES defendant's motion for a stay
without prejudice (Dkt. # 10 ). Additionally, the court exercises its discretion to
DENY American Civil Liberties Union of Washington's motion for leave to file an
amicus brief. Dkt. # 15 . (CL) (Entered: 01/30/2014)
02/08/2014 28 NOTICE OF APPEAL (14-35095) to Ninth Circuit re 27 Order on Motion for
Preliminary Injunction, Order on Motion to Stay, Order on Motion for Leave,,, by
Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer.
Filing Fee $505, Receipt number 0981-3502438. (Muise, Robert) Modified on
2/10/2014, ADD CCA# (SA). (Entered: 02/08/2014)
02/08/2014 29 REPRESENTATION STATEMENT, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense
Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, (re: 28 Notice of Appeal,.) (Muise,
Robert) (Entered: 02/08/2014)
02/10/2014 30 Stipulated MOTION and Agreed Order Staying District Court Pr oceedings Pending
Review by the Ninth Circuit by Defendant King County. Noting Date 2/10/2014,
(Hackett, David) (Entered: 02/10/2014)
02/10/2014 31 USCA Case Number 14-35095 for 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American Freedom
Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. (SA) (Entered: 02/10/2014)
02/11/2014 32 ORDER granting 30 Stipulated Motion Staying proceedings pending review by the
Ninth Circuit. Case stayed, by Judge Richard A Jones.(MD, mailed copy of order to
petitioner) Modified on 2/11/2014 (MD). (Entered: 02/11/2014)
02/11/2014 CORRECTION: NOTICE of Docket Text Modification re 32 Order on Stipulated
Motion, Case Stayed : Strike - Mailed copy of order to petitioner from Dkt. entry
No. 32 (MD) (Entered: 02/11/2014)
04/04/2014 33 NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Motion Hearing held on
1/27/2014 before Judge Richard A. Jones.

Parties have ten (10) calendar days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to
Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be
made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90
calendar days.

Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the
Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction.
After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Information regarding the policy
can be found on the court's website at www.wawd.uscourts.gov.

To purchase a copy of the transcript, contact court reporter Kari McGrath by
telephone at 206-370-8509 or by e-mail at kari_mcgrath@wawd.uscourts.gov.

Release of Transcript Restriction set for 7/3/2014, (KM) (Entered: 04/04/2014)
04/04/2014 34 TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Defendant King County for proceedings held on
01/27/2014 Requesting Attorney: David JW Hackett. (Hackett, David) (Entered:
ER-206
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 6/11
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 202 of 206
04/04/2014)
03/20/2015 35 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. The parties shall file
supplemental briefs discussing the effect, if any, of Seattle Mideast Awareness
Campaign v. King County, No. 11-35914, 2015 WL 1219330 (9th Cir. March 18,
2015), on the issues in this case. (SG) (Entered: 03/23/2015)
04/13/2015 36 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. This case is scheduled
for oral argument on Monday, June 15, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. in San Francisco,
California. Each party shall be allotted 15 minutes ofargument time. (RE) (Entered:
04/14/2015)
04/21/2015 37 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. For the convenience of
the court, this case is rescheduled from Monday, June 15, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. to
Monday, June 15, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. for oral argument in San Francisco,
California. Each party shall be allotted 15 minutes of argument time. (RE) (Entered:
04/22/2015)
06/25/2015 38 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. Submission of this case
is withdrawn and the case is deferred pending issuance of the mandate in Seattle
Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King County, No. 11-35914, or until further order
of this court. (RE) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
08/05/2015 39 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. This case is resubmitted
for decision as of August 5, 2015. (RE) (Entered: 08/06/2015)
08/05/2015 40 ORDER of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. Appellees Motion to
Take Judicial Notice is DENIED. (RE) (Entered: 08/06/2015)
08/12/2015 41 OPINION of USCA (NOT THE MANDATE 14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal,
filed by American Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller.
AFFIRMED. (RE) (Entered: 08/13/2015)
09/04/2015 42 MANDATE of USCA (14-35095) as to 28 Notice of Appeal, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller. The judgment of this
Court, entered 8/12/15, takes effect this date. AFFIRMED. (SG) (Entered:
09/09/2015)
10/19/2015 43 Stipulated MOTION to Stay Proceedings Pending Review in the U.S. Supreme
Court by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert
Spencer. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 10/19/2015, (Muise,
Robert) (Entered: 10/19/2015)
10/26/2015 44 ORDER granting 43 Stipulated Motion to stay proceedings pending review in the
US Supreme Court by Judge Richard A Jones.(RS) (Entered: 10/26/2015)
04/18/2016 45 Stipulated MOTION to Lift Stay by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative,
Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date
4/18/2016, (Muise, Robert) (Entered: 04/18/2016)
04/26/2016 46 ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones granting 45 Stipulated MOTION to Lift Stay.
Plaintiffs are directed to file their motion to amend Complaint within 30 days of this
order. Case reopened. (PM) (Entered: 04/26/2016)
ER-207
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 7/11
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 203 of 206
04/29/2016 47 STIPULATION /WRITTEN CONSENT O T FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
by parties (Muise, Robert) (Entered: 04/29/2016)
04/29/2016 48 AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant(s) King County, filed by American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit 1--Transit Advertising Policy)(Muise, Robert) (Entered: 04/29/2016)
05/13/2016 49 ANSWER to 48 Amended Complaint with JURY DEMAND by King County.
(Hackett, David) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
05/19/2016 50 ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND JOINT STATUS REPORT.
FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 6/3/2016, Initial Disclosure Deadline is
6/10/2016, Joint Status Report due by 6/17/2016, by Judge Richard A. Jones. (VE)
(Entered: 05/19/2016)
06/06/2016 51 JOINT STATUS REPORT signed by all parties estimated Trial Days: 3. (Muise,
Robert) (Entered: 06/06/2016)
06/10/2016 52 ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE AND RELATED DATES. Length of Trial: 3
days. BENCH TRIALis set for 6/5/2017 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 13106 before
Judge Richard A. Jones. Joinder of Parties due by 9/2/2016, Amended Pleadings due
by 12/7/2016, Expert Witness Disclosure/Reports under FRCP 26(a)(2) due by
12/7/2016, Discovery completed by 2/6/2017, Dispositive motions due by 3/7/2017,
Motions in Limine due by 5/8/2017, Pretrial Order due by 5/22/2017, Trial briefs,
deposition designations, and trial exhibits to be submitted by 5/30/2017, by Judge
Richard A. Jones. (VE) (Entered: 06/10/2016)
06/29/2016 53 NOTICE of Unavailability of counsel David JW Hackett for Defendant King
County from 08/08/2016 - 08/15/2016. (Hackett, David) (Entered: 06/29/2016)
12/30/2016 54 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Linda Montecucco
Gallagher for Defendant King County. (Gallagher, Linda) (Entered: 12/30/2016)
01/24/2017 55 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Samantha Kanner on behalf of Defendant King
County. (Kanner, Samantha) (Entered: 01/24/2017)
03/07/2017 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment , filed by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense
Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments:
# 1 Exhibit 1--Geller Declaration w/ Exs. A-K, # 2 Exhibit 2--Muise Declaration w/
Ex. A) Noting Date 3/31/2017, (Muise, Robert) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment , filed by Defendant King County. Oral Argument
Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Appendix A) Noting Date 3/31/2017,
(Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 58 DECLARATION of Rob Gannon filed by Defendant King County re 57 MOTION
for Summary Judgment (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 59 DECLARATION of David Hackett filed by Defendant King County re 57 MOTION
for Summary Judgment (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 60 DECLARATION of Sharron Shinbo filed by Defendant King County re 57
MOTION for Summary Judgment (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 61 DECLARATION of Jerome Williams filed by Defendant King County re 57
MOTION for Summary Judgment (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/07/2017 62 PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) re 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Hackett,
David) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
ER-208
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 8/11
3/2/2018 WAWD
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 204 of 206
03/07/2017 63 Supplemental DECLARATION of Robert J. Muise filed by Plaintiffs American
Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer re 56 MOTION for
Summary Judgment (Muise, Robert) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
03/27/2017 64 RESPONSE, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer, to 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Oral Argument
Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1--Muise Declaration)(Muise, Robert)
(Entered: 03/27/2017)
03/27/2017 65 RESPONSE, by Defendant King County, to 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment .
Oral Argument Requested. (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/27/2017)
03/27/2017 66 DECLARATION in Support of King County's Opposition to AFDI'S Motion for
Summary Judgment of Samantha Kanner re 65 Response to Motion by Defendant
King County (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/27/2017)
03/27/2017 67 DECLARATION in Support of King County's Opposition to AFDI'S Motion for
Summary Judgment of Rob Gannon re 65 Response to Motion by Defendant King
County (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/27/2017)
03/31/2017 68 REPLY, filed by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer, TO RESPONSE to 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Muise,
Robert) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
03/31/2017 69 REPLY, filed by Defendant King County, TO RESPONSE to 57 MOTION for
Summary Judgment (Hackett, David) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
04/04/2017 70 Stipulated MOTION And Agreed Order Suspending Scheduling Order and Striking
Trial Date , filed by Defendant King County. Noting Date 4/4/2017, (Hackett, David)
(Entered: 04/04/2017)
04/05/2017 Pursuant to the parties' 70 Stipulated MOTION Suspending Scheduling Order and
Striking Trial Date , the scheduling order in this case is suspended and the trial date
stricken pending the Court's decision on the parties' cross motions for summary
judgment. (VE) (Entered: 04/05/2017)
06/21/2017 71 Stipulated MOTION AND AGREED ORDER REGARDING SUBMISSON OF
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, filed by Defendant King County. (Attachments: # 1
Proposed Order) Noting Date 6/21/2017, (Hackett, David) (Entered: 06/21/2017)
06/22/2017 Pursuant to the parties' 71 Stipulated MOTION REGARDING SUBMISSON OF
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, the parties may submit supplemental briefing in this
matter no later than 7/11/2017, which shall not exceed 10 pages, addressing the
impact of the Tam decision on the summary judgment motions that are pending
before the Court. (VE) (Entered: 06/22/2017)
07/10/2017 72 Supplemental BRIEF re 56 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs
American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer (Muise,
Robert) (Entered: 07/10/2017)
07/11/2017 73 Supplemental BRIEF re 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendant King
County (Hackett, David) (Entered: 07/11/2017)
07/11/2017 74 DECLARATION of David Hackett in Support of King County's Supplemental Brief
filed by Defendant King County re 71 Stipulated MOTION AND AGREED ORDER
REGARDING SUBMISSON OF SUPPLEMENT AL BRIEFING, 57 MOTION for
Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Hackett, David) (Entered:
07/11/2017)

ER-209
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 9/11
3/2/2018 Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID:WAWD CM/ECF Version
10797434, 6.1
DktEntry: 8-2, Page 205 of 206
11/02/2017 75 ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 56 Motion for Summary Judgment and granting
Defendant's 57 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Richard A Jones.
(TH) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 76 NOTICE OF APPEAL to Ninth Circuit (17-35897) re 75 Order on Motion for
Summary Judgment, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela
Geller, Robert Spencer. Filing Fee $505, Receipt number 0981-5077217. (Muise,
Robert) Modified on 11/3/2017 to add CCA # (CDA). (Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 77 REPRESENTATION STATEMENT, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense
Initiative, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, (re: 76 Notice of Appeal.) (Muise, Robert)
(Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 78 JUDGMENT BY COURT in favor of Defendant King County against Plaintiffs
American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer. (VE)
(Entered: 11/02/2017)
11/02/2017 79 TIME SCHEDULE ORDER (17-35897) as to 76 Notice of Appeal filed by
American Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller : (CDA)
(Entered: 11/03/2017)
11/21/2017 80 MOTION FOR BILL OF COSTS , filed by Defendant King County. Noting Date
12/8/2017, (Hackett, David) (Entered: 11/21/2017)
11/22/2017 MOTION(S) REFERRED to Deputy in Charge Joe Whiteley: re 80 MOTION FOR
BILL OF COSTS (TH) (Entered: 11/22/2017)
11/27/2017 81 RESPONSE, by Plaintiffs American Freedom Defense Initiative, Pamela Geller,
Robert Spencer, to 80 MOTION FOR BILL OF COSTS . (Muise, Robert) (Entered:
11/27/2017)
12/08/2017 82 REPLY, filed by Defendant King County, TO RESPONSE to 80 MOTION FOR
BILL OF COSTS (Hackett, David) (Entered: 12/08/2017)
12/08/2017 83 DECLARATION of Katelynne Coe in Support of King County's Motion for Bill of
Costs filed by Defendant King County re 80 MOTION FOR BILL OF COSTS
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Hackett, David)
(Entered: 12/08/2017)
12/22/2017 84 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 80 Defendant's Motion for Bill of Costs
signed by Deputy in Charge Joe Whiteley.(JW) (Entered: 12/22/2017)

View Selected
or
Download Selected

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
03/02/2018 12:54:26
PACER
AFLC12345:3296788:0 Client Code:
Login:
Sear ch 2:13-cv-01804-
Description: Docket Report
Criteria: RAJ
Billable
8 Cost: 0.80
Pages:
ER-210
https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?375078697045523-L_1_0-1 10/11
Case: 17-35897, 03/14/2018, ID: 10797434, DktEntry: 8-2, Page 206 of 206

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on March 14, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing

Excerpts of Record (Volumes I and II) with the Clerk of the Court for the United

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.

Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the

appellate CM/ECF system. I also certify that all participants in this case are

registered CM/ECF users.

AMERICAN FREEDOM LAW CENTER

/s/ Robert J. Muise
Robert J. Muise, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiffs-Appellants