Jackson Free Press

Council President Ben Allen has proposed a new ordinance that would criminalize panhandling in Jackson, particularly downtown. The ordinance, which has been sent to the Quality of Life Committee, bans "aggressive" panhandling and introduces a host of new rules for panhandlers to follow.

"We are reacting to complaints from numerous businesses, not only those downtown but those that are contemplating coming to downtown, and others that are considering leaving," Allen said. "A month ago, when I held a press conference on this, I told people that if they didn't believe me, all they had to do was go to Smith Park and sit down for 10 minutes." Allen said that Mayor Frank Melton has since cleared the park of panhandlers.

"What we're really trying to do is address the more aggressive panhandling going on downtown," Allen said.

Aggressive solicitation is defined as blocking the path of a person, walking alongside them, using profanity or abusive language, by "accosting" someone or by "any other statement, gesture or other communication which a reasonable person in the situation of the person solicited would perceive to be a threat."

The ordinance also bans solicitation from a yet-to-be-defined central business district, as well as solicitation within 15 feet of ATMs, public telephones, public restrooms, parking-lot pay boxes and buses. Furthermore, it bans all panhandling at night.

Critics say the proposal is misguided. "Someone who's truly aggressive can already be arrested under existing laws," said Michael Stoops, Executive Director of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

The ordinance, if passed, would join a slew of such legislation nationwide. Ordinances penalizing panhandling have been passed in Albuquerque, Denver, San Francisco, Miami, Portland, Little Rock and Atlanta. In fact, according to a January 2006 report by the National Coalition for the Homeless and the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 43 percent of 224 surveyed cities prohibit begging in particular public places; 45 percent prohibit aggressive panhandling and 21 percent have city-wide prohibitions on begging.

Allen acknowledges that the proposed ordinance most closely resembles an ordinance passed in Atlanta last year. That troubles Brent Cox of the Mississippi ACLU, who spoke at Tuesday's City Council meeting.

"The law in Atlanta is far from settled," Cox said. "In the year since its passage, it hasn't been enforced once, not because nobody's panhandling but because the city police understand that enforcing it is an invitation to litigation. The ACLU of Georgia is looking for anybody who's arrested to come talk to them, and the National Coalition for the Homeless has an interest if somebody should be arrested." Cox added that he hoped the city would work closely with homeless advocates to avoid both lawsuits and a useless city ordinance.

"The law is unenforceable," Stoops said. "Police officers want to do police work, and social workers want to do social work. Only as a last resort should we call in the police."

The ordinance might pass court review based on its language. In 2000, the Supreme Court found in Hill v. Colorado that governments may regulate the time, place and manner of panhandling as long as they do not outright ban panhandling, which is protected speech. As a result, Allen's ordinance states: "[T]his ordinance lists specific actions that are prohibited when and where they occur in the context of soliciting, while allowing solicitors to say anything they please on the streets."

On a first violation, the panhandler is to be issued a written warning and a court summons. The police officer writing the citation is to wait for "an outreach team evaluator" to make an onsite evaluation. A second offense carries a potential 30-day community service penalty, and a third offense carries a maximum 30 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. Allen said that last provision is likely to change in committee. "We had the city's legal department help us draft the ordinance based on other cities' ordinances, but we're going to be working on this for weeks," Allen said.

Perhaps the most dubious provision in the ordinance is a ban on "false or misleading solicitation." This section makes it illegal for panhandlers to say that they are from out of town and stranded if they are not, to pretend to be a former member of the armed services if they are not, and to pretend to be homeless if they are not. Most ludicrously, it bans panhandlers from using "any makeup or device" to simulate a disability. It is unclear how police or citizens are to determine the veracity of panhandlers' stories.

The ordinance requires "legitimate" solicitation groups like the Girl Scouts or Katrina relief groups to register with the police and wear photo ID badges while they collect money.

"People are going to wind up in jail for panhandling, or they'll just be pushed into other parts of town," Stoops said. "Until we address the root causes of homelessness, we're always going to have this problem, no matter what ordinances we pass."

Previous Comments

ID

172606

Comment

The panhandlers are actually in some danger already. I know some bussiness owners who threaten then with bodily harm. It would be nice to have vouchers for food that you could buy at a grocery store and hand them to panhandlers. They could be set up such that the vouchers could not be used to buy anything but food. That way, if you didn't want anyone to by booze or smokes with your money, they couldn't. If you don't care if they buy those things, you could just hand them some money. Of course, they often ask for other things (like shoes or bus money). You could certainly hand out bus vouchers, but shoe vouchers may be a bit of a stretch. In my experience, having spoken to literally hundreds of panhandlers in my life, I don't think even one of them ever wanted quite what they were asking me for -- except the few that just asked for beer money. Still, many would accept a meal if I bought it for them, so if grocery vouchers were available they'd probably get used.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-06T17:09:42-06:00

ID

172607

Comment

Most I've seen just wanted cash for booze. I met very few who actually wanted food.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-09-06T20:31:02-06:00

ID

172608

Comment

That's true. But about 1 on 5 will accept it anyway.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-06T21:19:47-06:00

ID

172609

Comment

Sorry, 1 IN 5.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-06T21:20:05-06:00

ID

172610

Comment

But after hearing the same sob story from the same guy five or six times in a row... It gets old, ya know? I don't seriously think that guys family was down at the Greyhound station for weeks on end, waiting for that guy to come back. It's always the squeaky wheel, ya know.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-09-06T22:17:43-06:00

ID

172611

Comment

Ironghost, how about the same story in several different cities! Either that or the same family keep following me! I don't understand how they can enforce a no-panhandling zone? We have laws in the book now why do we need new ones? Just enforce the ones we have when a homeless person actually breaks the law.

Author

pikersam

Date

2006-09-06T22:27:12-06:00

ID

172612

Comment

I know. There are usually only a few stories that make the rounds. I've actually had the same guy approach me with the same story, once on one day, and then again on the next day. This has happened to me TWICE -- once here, and once in Gainesville Florida. The guy in Gainesville actually walked right into my apartment and started to deliver his story to me and my surprised roomate (whose only response to me was "dude!"). So, anyway, I know the stories are generally the same. But sometimes, even when the guys know you are on to them and that you won't be guilted out of your dough, they are still happy to have some food if you are willing to buy it for them.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-06T23:10:03-06:00

ID

172613

Comment

A correction to the story: The ordinance was actually crafted by long-suffering and infinitely patient Sarah Bentley at City Hall. City legal vetted the document.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2006-09-07T15:10:12-06:00

ID

172614

Comment

Brian: I don't know who Sarah Bentley is. Is "long-suffering and infinitely patient" intended to be sarcastic or complimentary? By the way, very nice job on this story. From reading it, I now know a lot about both sides of the debate over this proposed ordinance. I really do appreciate that.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-07T15:21:07-06:00

ID

172615

Comment

It had better be complimentary. Thanks for my pens, Brian. Adam tells me that I was a little too intense about losing that one but I really appreciate you bringing me two new ones back. You're my new hero.

Author

Sarah Bentley

Date

2006-09-07T16:18:48-06:00

ID

172616

Comment

GLB, Sarah. Sarah, GLB. I love this site. ;-)

Author

ladd

Date

2006-09-07T16:23:21-06:00

ID

172617

Comment

But after hearing the same sob story from the same guy five or six times in a row... It gets old, ya know? This is just a funny story, not a comment on the homeless problem. Just sayin'. When I lived in Dupont Circle in DC, there was a guy who used to hang out right outside the Metro station entrance at 20th and Q streets on weekend evenings, singing his song: "Somebody PLEASE help me with $3 so I can get to a shelter in Fairfax!" I mean, to the point where I can actually reproduce his chant note for note to this day (and I haven't lived in DC in twelve years!). I gave him $3 once, right before I got on the Metro, just to see what would happen, and you betcha -- as I proceeded down the escalator, I heard behind me: "Somebody PLEASE help me with $3 so I can get to a shelter in Fairfax!" :-P Best, Tim

Author

Tim Kynerd

Date

2006-09-07T16:24:08-06:00

ID

172618

Comment

My favoriate panhandler ever was a guy in the East Village who would walk up to folks and say in an exaggerated voice, "Pardon me ... have you any Grey Poupon?" He made lots of money that way, especially off unsuspecting tourists. ;-) I guess I've known enough homeless people and panhandlers in my life to understand that they're human like the rest of us. Very few are threatening; some are. Same with mayors; there are some good and some bad.

Author

ladd

Date

2006-09-07T16:30:31-06:00

ID

172619

Comment

I also learned not to worry much about what they're going to use the money for. Giving is as much for us as for the people we give to. Giving, whether a buck or a thousand bucks, brings abundance into our own lives. And it's not like I spend every dollar I get wisely. I also grew to understand that many homeless people deal with living on the streets with alcohol, drugs and cigarettes—just as many people deal with living off the streets that way. Trying to regulate begging is absurd. Are we absolutely certain that our spiritual mentors would approve? Do we care?

Author

ladd

Date

2006-09-07T16:33:12-06:00

ID

172620

Comment

Sarah is the deputy city clerk. Mr. Allen called me today to make sure I posted that correction, as Sarah is an unsung hero at City Hall, constantly doing the council members' homework for them. Eh? Anyway, I felt bad because last week I stole her only pen, which happened to look just like my pen, and she had payed for it with her own money. I entrusted JFP Action News report Adam Lynch to return the pen to her, but he lost it (for the record, Adam claims the pen was stolen). Then this week I attributed her hard work to city legal. So I hope that she does not send her army of the night after me.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2006-09-07T16:40:59-06:00

ID

172621

Comment

My point being, I'd rather not contribute to anyone's alcoholism. I'm unconcerned about what God might think on that matter.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2006-09-07T22:33:21-06:00

ID

172622

Comment

Hi Sarah. You have a lovely name (I've always liked that name). That was also complimentary, and not sarcastic.

Author

GLB

Date

2006-09-07T23:20:31-06:00

ID

172623

Comment

On Monday, October 30th at 2:00 p.m., the Council's Quality of Life committee is holding a meeting to discuss the proposed Commercial Solicitation ordinance. Anyone who has concerns or questions about the proposed ordinance is welcome to come to the meeting. Just remember to come about 10 minutes before 2:00 p.m. and sign up to speak at the Clerk's window.

Author

Sarah Bentley

Date

2006-10-27T11:05:27-06:00