Likely looking to cut off controversy before it began, Jennifer Kim started off last week’s City Council meeting by pulling an item concerning a new anti-panhandling ordinance off the agenda. Citing a “need to come together and think about this a little more,” she deep-sixed the item setting a September 27 public hearing and possible adoption of new, broader rules against solicitation; instead, she asked city staff to instead prepare a presentation for that day, describing “where we are” with respect to current panhandling laws. (Solicitation is currently outlawed in the central business district, encompassing Downtown up to the campus area; also, state laws prohibit panhandling on roadways.)
Brewster McCracken, the item’s co-sponsor, characterized it as settling old business; after “aggressive” panhandling was criminalized Downtown, he said the ordinance was due to be expanded citywide after the city’s second day labor site was opened – presumably after any potential overlap was resolved (i.e., peep the Home Depot parking lot). “Now it’s time to move forward,” said McCracken.
But with the ACLU and homeless advocates protesting – and the item only naming two sponsors, instead of three – Kim and McCracken are “moving forward” in a more agreeable, less potentially civil liberty-violating sorta way: for the presentation later this month, McCracken asked the city for more specific proposals – like expanded enforcement of current laws, or expanding the “safety zone” around schools – than a blanket citywide ban on ‘spanging. “I don’t believe there is a free speech right for strangers to approach your child at school. That’s an area where we need protection.”
This article appears in August 31 • 2007.