2008 Misc. Panhandling Committee Documents & Notes2007 * LEADERSHIP
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
*he NLC * Leadership Training
stitute Seminars... promote
excellence in local government and
municipal leadership with high quality
education and training for local officials.
Jan 25 -27, 2007 * Santa Monica, CA
Building Public - Private Partnerships
for Stronger Communities...
Strengthen your community as you learn
new tools and valuable strategies to build
successful public - private partnerships.
March 10 -14, 2007 * Washington, DC
LTI Seminars at the annual NLC
Congressional City Conference
April 26 -28, 2007 * Little Rock, AR
The Price of Local Government and
Budgeting For Outcomes...
Examine vital local government finance
issues and a budgeting- for - outcomes
process from a local leader's perspective.
Jl'� � 7 -9, 2007 * Syracuse, NY
. Seminars at the Maxwell School
of Citizenship and Public Affairs...
Examine practical solutions to local
community issues in a unique academic
environment with hands -on seminars.
September 27 -29, 2007 *
Union League Club, Chicago, IL
15th Annual Leadership Summit...
An engaging and reflective retreat -style
program, designed for local city officials
to develop vital skills and abilities that
cultivate your personal leadership.
November 13 -17, 2007 *
Convention Center, New Orleans, LA
LTI Seminars at the annual NLC
Congress of Cities and Exposition
For more information, contact
the Leadership Training Hotline
at (202) 626 -3170 or www.ntc.org
A1@10154%1
National League of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
®-4�z,
_36 A
LEADERSHIP
TRAINING INSTITUTE
A df l--P _S (mss i� t4
(^3 • Mrs/ ".�� 1�l �� / ii% i r7 "j
m r Y4,_- P_ CE / 5 4e L C
1 � J d t5
(mot -okA -P 0cd h+-!�pW n
Q l
ter- -
�
L;
-:11 . /Vt 0 ) C
1.e
CiV1 \\ C e at C I.
Plee, n Quern a
vi54�e.d
LGr �/C
� ��—� �� ��� y.°✓ ,�- P�21�— Guy s � �� h-°�(
�r
le SS C6'h -c t,,'
—�°'�
k9k ct Zl vtv)
I-et4-94
1
47Y-'
���-e-- --cet- 6� c uPg V-) e55
Vu � sr
C1'r X�e-- dv--Lelti-s=l
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services g
COP49
COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SER V=s
u.£ DEMN"MENT OF Jus"eff
)Of
Panhandlin
by
Michael S. Scott
Problems - oriented Guides for pamee
Guides Series
No. 13
k
www.cops.us oj.gov
Ebel Ride
1. Mess behind Liquidation World
A. they were not homeless
B. They were peeking in windows of nearby resident
C. They forced the door open of nearby resident
D. Two are now in jail
Jared Moore (the shaved head guy)
A. Lives in Spokane
B. Has a job in Spokane
C. Comes out here on weekends
Deputy Ebel estimated they receive three calls per day about panhandling
No Trespassing signs helped. Now deputies can arrest anyone trespassing.
Ronny Howell (guy at Sullivan exit)
A. Lives at House of Charity, sometimes. Otherwise outdoors.
B. Comes out here because he could get a green ticket (civil infraction, pedestrian
interfering with traffic), or a Gold ticket (mandatory court appearance).
C. Sign said he was a veteran. However, he says he was in less than 60 days, then
discharged.
D. Been arrested multiple times for criminal trespassing and DUI.
E. Says he has a leg problem and back problem, but stays out panhandling all day.
F. Says he earns $15 -20 per day panhandling
Deputy Ebel's wife was approached while in her car, and the guy argued with her about giving
him some money.
Seattle
"I think (giving money) is the worst thing people can do," said Bill VanderMeer, director of the Union Gospel
Mission's Men's Shelter. "It enables panhandlers. That's how they make their living and manage their
addiction."
The Give Smart campaign urges Seattleites to stop dropping dollars into coffee cans. Instead, it says, direct
that money to a local homeless agency.
"There's this woman panhandler we've seen who has a nice Suburban with two big kennels in the back," said
Dalana Slaughter, safety supervisor to the ambassadors who patrol Seattle for the Give Smart campaign. "To
me, that's not homeless."
Slaughter also knows another beggar who fakes injury. "I've seen her sit in the wheelchair, I've seen her get
out of the wheelchair," Slaughter said. "Her husband sits down and then he panhandles."
Dreisinger said she knows of a beggar who makes $300 a day. She also heard one panhandler boast that
begging got him $26,000 a year -- tax -free.
"Seattle is a smart city and a generous city," Dreisinger said. "The campaign goes after the source of funding
and redirects it to agencies that make a difference."
Dallas, TX, Steven Malanga: The plague of professional panhandling
A big part of the cities' woes is the professionalization of panhandling. The old type of
panhandler — a mentally impaired or disabled homeless person trying to scrape together a few
bucks for a meal — is giving way to the full -time spanger who supports himself through a
combination of begging, working at odd jobs and other sources, like government assistance from
disability payments.
Some full -time panhandlers are kids — "road warriors" who have largely dropped out of society
and'drift from town to town, often "couch surfing" at friends' homes, or "street loiterers" who
daily make their way downtown from the suburbs where they live.
Atlanta
Stop Panhandling Atlanta
Panhandling is not the answer. Central Atlanta Downtown Improvement District, 2009
You lose because panhandlers often use your money to support their addictions to alcohol and
drugs. They lose by continuing these destructive behaviors rather than seeking help. The more
you give your change to panhandlers, the more their lives don't change.
Food is readily available for those in need, as well as shelter and other support services.
Supporting local organizations that provide these services is the best way to help. A donation of
$100 can provide one week of transitional housing with intensive professional services for
someone in need.
Invest in long -term solutions by giving your financial support and volunteering your time to help
local organizations and service providers. To learn more about alternatives to handouts, please
call the Ambassador Force of Downtown Atlanta at (404) 215 -9600.
Responding to Panhandlers
• Asking for money is illegal anytime in Downtown Atlanta, and after dark throughout the
City.
• If you would like to report an illegal panhandler, please call the Ambassador Force of
Downtown Atlanta at (404) 215 -9600. Of course, if you feel threatened or if the
panhandler shows aggressive behavior, immediately call 911 for police assistance.
• If you encounter a panhandler, always walk away with certainty and confidence.
• Make eye contact and acknowledge the person with a nod. Choose to respond politely,
and simply say "no" or "sorry".
• If you want to offer panhandlers something, consider bottled water or food gift
certificates rather than money
All �1
• s
+>i3x
3111 C. D0e1110
Cenmisolener
C I T Y OF W O R C E S T E R
Department of Code Enforcement
MEMORANDUM
25 Meade Street, Worcester, MA 01610 -2715
Phone 505 799 -0534 Fax 506 709 -6544
E -mail: cade4licl.worcester.ma.us
TO: Michael V. O'Brien, City Manager
FROM: Jill C. Dagilis, Commissioner of Code Enforcement
DATE: April 8, 2005
SUBJECT: Action Plan to Reduce the Incidence of Panhandling
■l I
a&Amwi= Cly
Davao
1949'1960' 1914
1"1'2000
oarld F. Holden, P.C.
alroetor
Pursuant to your request, the following report outlines the action agenda designed
to reduce the incidence of panhandling and related concerns in the City of
Worcester. Given your prior review and approval of this plan, strategies defined
herein have begun and will continue throughout the year.
This initiative is the culmination of many months of planning through collaboration with
a broad network of community partners. The goal of this public- private, interagency plan
is twofold: To provide an extensive community education campaign that defines and
supports the solutions to positively address the complex challenges associated with
panhandling, 2. To provide a comprehensive system of social service /treatment response
strategies to address the needs of the individuals who panhandle. The effort must be
grounded in a responsive, holistic, and compassionate approach.
1. Both the national research and the local social service agency partners advise
that we must educate those who give money directly to people who panhandle
that this is not the solution, unfortunately it exacerbates the problem.
Tragically, seven out of ten people who panhandle will use the money to buy
drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes. Worcester has proven that it is a generous and
giving community, particularly to those in need; citizens open their hearts and
their wallets in an effort to help. There is a better way to help.
2. Redirecting these same donations to targeted social service /treatment response
systems is the solution. This approach strengthens the capacity of the
agencies to provide food for the hungry, shelter and housing for the homeless,
mental health support services, and substance abuse recovery services for
those challenged by addictions. A program is in place to receive and direct
these funds to the service agencies.
Core objectives include:
➢ Development and implementation of a 12 -month multi- faceted public education
campaign with strategies that include print (newspapers, magazines, brochures),
Panhandling Report April 2005
broadcast (television/radio), web -based, billboard, signage and bus placard
mediums, and community informational sessions (neighborhood, business, faith -
based, educational) effective immediately.
➢ Development and implementation of an inter - agency social service /treatment
response system including outreach, case management, and
communication/coordination protocols effective immediately.
➢ Implementation of a centralized charitable giving system via the United Way of
Central Massachusetts effective immediately.
➢ Implementation of a centralized telephone call center to report cases of
panhandling via the United Way of Central Massachusetts for social service
agency intervention (508) 755 -1233 effective immediately.
➢ Implementation of a centralized telephone call center to report aggressive
panhandling with police department intervention (911) effective immediately.
➢ Analysis of social service /treatment response effectiveness, monthly, for twelve
months.
➢ Conduct a semi - annual review to assess the effectiveness of the public education
campaign.
The message for this campaign, developed in partnership with local marketing and media
professionals, as well as from the research on program models across the country, is:
Panhandling is not the Solution!
If you think your spare change is helping, think again. There is a better way to help.
Support the solution not the problem Please give to a local charity.
Research
This report is the result of months of collaboration and research conducted by the City of
Worcester's new Department of Health and Human Services and the Worcester Police
and Law Departments in partnership with a host of community agencies. This effort
included an extensive review of the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services (COPS) guide entitled Panhandling, the National Coalition
for the Homeless August 2003 report entitled Illegal to Be Homeless - the
Criminalization of Homelessness in the United States, the 2004 City Manager's
Commission on Homelessness Plan to End Chronic Homelessness in Worcester, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts' Ten -Year State Plan to End Chronic Homelessness - A
Report of the Policy Academy on Chronic Homelessness, as well as harm reduction
Panhandling .Report April 2005 2
Elements of a public education campaign addressing panhandling
1
711
3
9
5.
Al
Develop campaign slogan and talking points
a. Acknowledge desire to support
b. Why other alternatives are better
C. List of alternatives
d. List of organizations providing support services
Community involvement — gain participation/support from
a. Social service providers
b. Community service groups
C. Homelessness /low income advocacy groups
d. Other communities
Create educational materials
a. Brochures/handouts
i. handout with social services for people to give to panhandlers
b. Create Public Service Announcements (radio /tv student project ?)
i. Radio
ii. Television
Paid advertising
a. Print ads in newspapers during panhandling season each year
Media
a. Media briefing to launch campaign
i. Make presentation on effort
ii. Provide sample educational materials
iii. Provide PSAs
iv. Arrange interviews
Signage on alternatives at popular panhandling locations
F,-0 rV\ Ca N-6 ( I -e )), 2 -0 re? h C l -
Anchorage Real Change Program
1. Called Chris Schutte, Chair of the Anchorage Downtown Partnership (ADP). He
helped develop the program. 1- 907 - 279 -5650
2. The program was initially funded by a municipal grant. However it now is
funded by ADP. The program was front loaded, requiring effort to get it started,
but minimal effort to keep it going.
3. The program consists of (a) a web site and (b) written materials — posters and the
like.
4. All was done by volunteers, including the written materials
5. They have a web site, changeforthebetteralaska.org
6. Catholic social service provides a card listing social services available, along with
a wooden token good for a meal and clothing 7. Panhandling is not against the law in Anchorage.
8. The passed a law prohibiting offering money from a car to panhandlers
9. They are initiating four parking meters to receive funds for social agencies
10. He pointed out how a person who gives $1 to a social service agency has a
multiplying effect, for the social service agency is, through grants, able to provide
much more than $1 in service.
- -Bill Gothmann, 7 -28 -08
Change for the Better - Alaska
Chanqe For The Better
Change for the Better is a compassionate alternative program to
address panhandling in Anchorage.
The primary focus of Change for the Better is public awareness to
deter panhandling in favor of supporting human service providers.
It is the central belief of Change for the Better that instead of giving
change to panhandlers, individuals can better serve the homeless
population by giving to services that provide food, clothing, shelter and
other living necessities to those in need.
Why Is This Program Being Launched?
An increasing number of citizens and businesses have voiced concerns
to Muni officials and Anchorage Downtown Partnership, Ltd. over
the growing population of panhandlers and the impact they are having
on the quality of life of citizens, residents, and visitors.
Page 1 of 2
Using examples from other cities, ADP created the Change for the
Better public awareness program in 2004 to combine compassion for
the individual on the streets and alternatives for the panhandler to meet their needs for food, clothing and
shelter with the hope that through the knowledge of these resources panhandling won't be necessary.
Change for the Better is one component of a successful long -term solution to the problem.
Spare change can't help a panhandler - real change occurs when we put panhandlers in touch with social
service providers who can attack the root of the problem.
It's About More Than Just Homelessness
Panhandling is more than just a homeless issue - it is a health & safety
issue for both the public and the panhandlers themselves. Change for
the Better is based on a premise that spare change doesn't make
meaningful impacts on the lives of homeless individuals. Those changes
come from the social service agencies throughout Anchorage.
Change for the Better seeks to educate the public of the many
resources already available to homeless and panhandling individuals.
Social service agencies in Anchorage provide an array of fundamental
basics of food, clothing and shelter - and are well- supported by
businesses and the public. No one needs to panhandle in order to feed
themselves. Spare change is only a short-term solution and does not
create long -term results.
Change for the Better also seeks to provide an alternative to the
accepted behavior of panhandlers and those who give money to
panhandlers. The program encourages the public to contribute directly
to social service providers instead of giving spare change to panhandlers
who may use the money to buy alcohol, drugs or cigarettes. People who
give money to panhandlers cannot be sure where the money will go -
but donors who give money to social service agencies know exactly
where their funds are going and what their money is doing to help the
http:// changeforthebetteralaska .org /index.html 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska Page 2 of 2
problem.
Be Part Of The Solution
This campaign is not the solution; it is just the beginning of a community wide effort to manage and possibly
address the larger issues behind panhandling.
Panhandling is a complex social issue. Many of the root causes behind panhandling, such as poverty, drug and
alcohol addiction and mental illness, are not easily solved. Despite this fact, the community can play an
important role in managing the situation and at the same time ensure that all of our citizens have their needs
met for food, clothing and shelter.
Donating to a local organization rather than to an individual not only benefits individuals in need, but the
entire community as well. Donating to social service providers is one way that we can all help to make a
change.
http:// changeforthebetteralaska .org /index.httnl 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska
M41f l'a1!l1 -A
Why is this program being launched?
It's about more than just homelessness.
What is the goal of this campaign?
Be part of the solution.
Page 1 of 1
Change For The Better Overview
Change for the Better is an educational and compassionate alternative
program to address panhandling in Anchorage.
The primary focus of Change for the Better is a public awareness
campaign to deter panhandling in favor of supporting human service
providers.
Instead of giving change to panhandlers who may use the money to feed an
addiction, individuals can better serve the homeless population by giving to
local service providers who provide food, clothing, shelter and other living
necessities to those in need.
Through its emphasis on giving money to service providers, Change for the
Better is one part of the long -term solution to the problem.
Spare change can't help a .panhandler — real change occurs when we put
panhandlers in touch with social service providers who can attack the root of
the problem.
Click on the links on the left to learn more.
http: / /changeforthebetteralaska.org /overview /index.htrnl 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska
s 1
�.r
YOUR $1.00 CAN
CHANGE HIS' LIFE
IF IT GOES TO THE
RIGHT PLACES
Page 1 of 2
Why Is This Program Needed?
Panhandlers are growing in numbers for many reasons, not the least of
which is the ease with which they can get money here in Anchorage. We
are a generous city filled with generous individuals.
That's why public education about the Change for the Better program
is so important. We must educate residents, visitors, and businesses on
how donations are more effective than handouts by providing specific
information about what services are offered by the various social
services in town.
One of the biggest hurdles to successful implementation of the Change
for the Better program is convincing people that the instant
gratification of giving a dollar or two to a panhandler would be better
spent at the charities that operate various social service programs
across the city.
It is important to stress that individuals SHOULD NOT feel bad
about NOT giving money directly to panhandlers.
Will This Program Be Effective?
According to the Center for Problem- Oriented Policing, most
researchers and practitioners seem to agree that the enforcement of
laws prohibiting panhandling is only one part of controlling the problem.
Public education to discourage people from giving money to panhandlers
and adequate social services are the essential components of an
effective and comprehensive response.
Providing adequate social services and substance abuse treatment to
reduce panhandlers' need to panhandle has the potential to be a highly
effective tool in reducing overall panhandling.
And directing the generous nature of Anchorage residents to those
social service agencies which can best serve the needs of panhandlers
will help ensure an effective and thorough long -term solution to the
problem.
The Program Will Work If We All Work Together.
This is a city-wide issue that will require a city-wide response. Working
toegther, we can ensure that Change for the Better works.
We invite you to become a part of the solution along with the many
other supporters and partners of Change for the Better:
• Anchorage businesses
• the Downtown Community Council
• the City of Anchorage
• the Mayor's Office
• The SAFECity program
• the Anchorage Police Department
http:// changeforthebetteralaska .org /why.html 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska
• the Anchorage Responsible Beverage Retailers Association
• the Anchorage Downtown Partnership, Ltd.
• and many others!
L III A program of Anchorage Downtown PortntrsPi p, Ltd.
145 §ie, 51h Awnu., Su is 39i Mvh- mm ,,4K 9901
ER I (941 ' 27 v old , rr::x (r 73 $i''�..565 a
http:// changeforthebetteralaska .org /why.html
Page 2 of 2
7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska
G
Page 1 of 1
PARTNERS
Who Else Is Involved In The Program?
ST. FRANCIS FEf1SE
Here are some of the agencies participating in the "Change for the Better"
BEAN' "S CAFE
Program.
Click on the links to the left to learn more about these important partners in
HOMEWARD SOUND
the "Change for the Better" program.
COVENANT FttiI1SE
And to learn more about the "Change for the Better" program, call Anchorage
UNITED WAY
Downtown Partnership at 279 -5650.
http : / /changeforthebetteralaska.org /partners /index.html 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska >> Program Components
COMPONENTS Change For The Better Program Components
Page 1 of 1
POSTERS The key element of Change for the Better is public education. A public education
WESITE campaign was launched in May 2004 and a second was launched in June 2005. The
public education campaign is the primary focus of Change for the Better and will
increase understanding of this issue.
It is the hope of Anchorage Downtown Partnership, Ltd. that this program will
have two effects:
. Increased understanding of the social service agencies available to Anchorage's
homeless population.
. Encouragement to give money to the charities that provide these social
services instead of to the panhandler directly.
Components
In 2004, Anchorage Downtown Partnership, Ltd. produced a series of
informative posters about the Change for the Better program, all of which have been
updated this year. Design work for the posters was donated by Rival Design Studio
of Anchorage.
In addition, ADP produced pocket cards in 2004 that are scheduled to be revised
and updated later this year. These pocket cards will be available in businesses and
other public areas and will describe the options available for those in need, and will
give the public alternatives to act if they are approached by a panhandler.
New to the Change for the Better program this year is this website -- designed to
provide interested individuals with information about the program and related topics.
Design work for the website was donated by Rival Design Studio of Anchorage.
Hosting was donated by Rising Host web hosting service of Rockville, Maryland.
http: / /changeforthebetteralaska.org /components /index.html 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska >> Ways you can help
W
.r
I
[ `44f i -
0
How Can You Help?
Pagel of 2
It is the central belief of the Change for the Better program that
generosity better serves panhandlers when directed towards the
agencies that assist these individuals.
Real change - not spare change - is the best way to help out
panhandlers.
Below is a list of some of the agencies providing real change in people's
lives. These partners in the Change for the Better program work to
make a real difference in people's lives, and all provide opportunities to
help by volunteering or contributing.
ST. FRANCIS HOUSE
St. Francis House - a program of Catholic Social Services - strives to
meet the daily emergency needs of food, clothing, medical
prescriptions, and rent and utility assistance of those who are unable to
provide for themselves and their loved ones.
To make a donation of food, household furnishings or clothing, call 276-
5590 or contact them via email.
To make financial donations, call 277 -2554 or click here make a secure
online donation.
BEAN'S CAFE
Bean's Cafe exists to provide the most basic of human needs without
discrimination or cost to anyone requesting assistance.
Individuals interested in helping Bean's can volunteer, participate in
special events, make financial contributions, and make food and
material donations.
For more information, contact Brian Anderson at 274 -9595 or via
email.
HOMEWARD BOUND
Homeward Bound provides the homeless chronic alcoholic with the
tools needed to travel the journey home. At Homeward Bound,
residents and staff work together to rebuild the whole person: mind,
body, and spirit. Only with this foundation, can residents rejoin the
world confident and empowered.
To learn more about the program, click here.
COVENANT HOUSE
Covenant House Alaska has been serving homeless and runaway
youth in Alaska for over fourteen years.
Individuals may donate clothing, hygiene products, recreation items,
safety items, and man others listed on their Agency Wish List.
http: / /changeforthebetteralaska .org/help.html 7/28/2008
Change for the Better - Alaska >> Ways you can help
Page. 2 of 2
Individuals may also make financial donations by printing this form
and mailing the donation to the address on the form.
For more information, please contact Alison Kear - Director of
Development - at 339 -4407 or via email.
UNITED WAY
United Way is not a social service provider, but they are a leader and
partner in making Anchorage a stronger, healthier more compassionate
community by bringing donors and volunteers together with community
leaders, agencies and other experts to address the most pressing issues
in our community.
Click here to learn more about volunteer opportunities, or click here
to learn about donation opportunities. Or feel free to call Adele
Alderman at 263 -3801 with questions.
http: / /changeforthebetteralaska .org/help.html 7/28/2008
Page 1 of 2
Bill Gothmann
From: Bill Gothmann
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:07 PM
To: Dave Mercier; Mike Jackson; City Council; 'Cathy Neet; Connie Nelson (programs @svpart.org); Ian
Robertson (pastorian @aol.com); Joe Shutz (djoemarys @aol.com); Maggie Crabtree
(maggie @crabbytrees.com); Odin Langford (olangford @libertylakewa.gov); Rose Dempsey;
tbabcock @spokanecity.org
Cc: Carolbelle Branch; Cary Driskell; Rick Van Leuven
Subject: Notes from Panhandling Committee
Good Morning:
Below are notes from today's panhandling committee. I spoke to Mike Jackson about obtaining some advice from
Cary (item 2) and about Carolbelle giving Bill some brief advice on how an education campaign can be conducted
(item 3d). I assume such a campaign would be done by other than the City.
Note next meeting time, July 29, 9:30AM.
Bill
Notes from Panhandling Committee
7 -15 -08
The Panhandling Committee has come up with the following findings:
a. Police need more legal tools
b. There are people with legitimate needs
c. Social Resources are available, but are not unlimited
d. We need a public education program on inefficient and efficient giving
e. We need to build a coalition of public and private partners
f. We need to settle legal issues before we devise the education piece
2. We wish to have legal give us advice on the following recommended changes to our ordinances.
We should note that we have included possible changes with the idea that, after legal has
commented, we will evaluate each change.
a. Require a license /permit to solicit
b. Curtail/prohibit cleaning windshields and then asking for donations
c. Prohibit a driver from giving funds while driving
d. Prohibit fraudulent solicitations
e. Time and place restrictions
i. Within 50 feet of an ATM, bus stop, or traffic signal
ii. On business property where permission has not been granted
iii. On medians or islands
iv. On freeway exits or entrances (distance from freeway ?)
v. Along major arterials at intersections that have traffic lights
vi. At four way stops
vii. At nighttime (dusk to dawn ?)
f. Criminalization of pubic intoxication and open containers (change to misdemeanor)
g. Redefine aggressive panhandling to include stepping into streets or onto a median
7/28/2008
Page 2 of 2
3. For next meeting (July 29, 9:30AM)
a. Report from legal
b. Talk to City Manager about the process of ordinance going from committee to adoption
(Bill)
c. Contact Liberty Lake and Spokane so this is a multi jurisdictional effort(Bill)
d. Seek Carolbelle's advice on what the pieces of a campaign should be (Bill)
e. Call Anchorage about their education campaign — how it was.done and how it was financed
(Bill)
7/28/2008
Agenda
Panhandling Committee a-- r S V4 V-
July 16, 2008 �� h wt
Introductions
Discussion of possible panhandling ordinance provisions j
✓1. Require a lice4o solicit money o is wind ' Id- cleaning.
✓2. Prohibit g' ' e �—need o iscuss this further
�because Rose had some co bou
3 Prohibit fraudulent solicitations (such as, "I'm homeless" when they are not
homeless).
Prohibit panhandlin ,/'-""
a. Within of an-AT -M—, �a
b. Within *-Ftof a bus stop
c. Within 50 ft. of a traffic signal
d. On business property where permission has not been granted
e. On medians or islands
f. On freeway exits or entrances �7�
g. Along major arterials at intersections that have traffic lights.
h. At four -way stops
i. At nighttime c� y Y� a < ' ✓ Q
5. Criminalize public intoxication and open containers ��� �5 d ° ti�a✓1Ah�
6. Redefine aggressive panhandling to include stepping into streets or onto a
median
7. Giving list to our Attorney to study
III. Education Program Discussion
a. To whom addressed
b. What cities /areas within the County
c. Contents
d. Other considerations
IV. Comments or other considerations
V. Next Meeting date
��
Memorandum
To: Bill Gothmann, City Council Member
From: Mike Connelly, City Attorney
CC:
Date: June 23, 2008
Re: Panhandling — public awareness campaign
At the request of the City Council, our office has drafted the following memorandum in
relation to potential approaches the City may take toward panhandling. Specifically, the
Council requested more information on the efficacy of a public awareness campaign.
1. Effectiveness of Public Awareness Campaign
Due to the many factors that influence the level of panhandling and the lack of long -term
data on panhandling, it is difficult to accurately gauge the effectiveness of public awareness
campaigns. Additionally, most problems and the associated education campaigns deal with
centralized panhandling in downtown areas. Thus, data on city -wide campaigns is very
limited. In Washington, staff could find no City that had engaged in a large scale public
awareness campaign. However, there were other business districts and non - Washington
cities with public awareness campaigns. Below is a list of cities with different types of
campaigns and discussion about their effectiveness.
• Spokane — Downtown Spokane Partnership maintained a program downtown asking
for donations in drop boxes located at various businesses. However, this program was
modified and has become the "Give Real Change, Not Spare Change" program. This is a
"prototypical" program in that it is based on brochures handed out in the downtown area in
an attempt to combat downtown shoppers from giving money to panhandlers. This program
is combined with the Downtown Spokane Security Ambassadors program, a service that
provides non - police assistance to downtown customers for a wide range of problems,
including encounters with aggressive panhandlers. Statistics have not been kept, though in
talking with Todd Babcock, a City Council assistant who is working on the panhandling
issue, it appears that Spokane is attempting to adopt an ordinance similar to the recently
enacted Tacoma provision that prevents solicitation in certain areas and in certain forms. See
RCA dated May 22, 2007 for an analysis of time, place and manner restrictions. Spokane is
waiting to see how the Tacoma statute works, and whether it will withstand legal challenge
before adopting such a provision.
Ir
• Seattle — Downtown Seattle Association and Metro Improvement District (MID) in the
City of Seattle started a poster and sign campaign in January of 2007. The campaign, entitled
"Have a heart, Give Smart," was directed at the downtown businesses, the public, and
panhandlers to educate them on panhandling. The program involves use of posters and
handouts placed in downtown businesses. "Give Smart" is supposed to encourage persons to
give to local social organizations rather than individuals. As part of the campaign, MID
began keeping detailed records regarding panhandling solicitations. While statistics for the
first quarter of 2007 showed a 38% increase in panhandling solicitations from the previous
year, the number steadily declined and showed a 32% decline for the month of September
2007 as to September 2006, and a total decline of 14% for the third quarter of 2007. The
police enforce an aggressive panhandling provision for threatening begging that is almost
identical to the City of Spokane Valley provision.
• Portland, Oregon — Portland Business Alliance started a "Real Change, Not Spare
Change" program a little over a year ago. This program involved placing ten "change
meters" throughout Portland that also contain brochures and information regarding
panhandling. It is concentrated in areas with high foot traffic and perceived panhandling
problems. Additionally, the program encourages people to give to the meters as the money
received is matched by the Portland Business Alliance and distributed to local social
organizations. Statistics are sparse, especially since the program involves a large area.
However, the Business Association does have plans to increase the number of meters and are
also looking at alternatives to increase the matching money in order to provide more social
programs. A link to this program is www.portlandalliance.com/downtown services /real-
chan eg html
• Nashville, Tennessee — Again, started within the last year, the Downtown business
administration started a poster and brochure educational program. There is no hard evidence
about the effectiveness of the program, though at least some downtown business owners feel
there are fewer panhandlers downtown. Nashville was going to adopt a time, place, and
manner restriction provision, but after large pressure from various social groups, has decided
to wait and see how the education campaign works.
• Evanston, Illinois — Evanston has a comprehensive program which was specifically
developed as a reaction to a perceived panhandling problem in the downtown area. The
program involves city personnel, police, EvMark, which is a downtown marketing
association, and the Evanston Chamber of Commerce to educate downtown businesses,
customers, and local college students about the negative effects of giving to panhandlers.
The program utilizes downtown posters and handouts to promote donations to local social
service groups rather than to individual panhandlers. In his five year experience with the
program, Sergeant Dennis Preedle feels that there "seems" to be a reduction of the number of
regular panhandlers. However, he is not sure that there has been a major impact in the
overall number of panhandlers. Sergeant Preedle feels that at least part of the reason for this,
however, is due to the yearly crop of new incoming Northwestern University students who
have not been educated by the program.
• Cincinnati, Ohio — While Cincinnati does not have a significant public education
program, they do have a licensing statute and social outreach program that are notable.
Though the statistics regarding the effectiveness of licensing are largely anecdotal, it is clear
that there are typically upwards of 100 registrations yearly. However, some of these are from
lb
I C
people registering as part of a protest group. Additionally, there are normally 100+ arrests
made for violating the panhandling law (though not all for lack of a license). However,
without hard data, the anecdotal evidence suggests that registration has only shifted where
the panhandlers operate and has not significantly impacted the problem. Not surprisingly,
the social outreach program, which was funded by the Downtown Partnership at around the
cost of $50,000, has been the most effective program because the workers get panhandlers
help for any addictions, help them find transitional housing, education, and job opportunities.
Thus, as one police officer noted, the outreach is really a "cure" as opposed to a part-time
band -aid that the law and arrests provide.
2. Legality of Licensing/Permitting Scheme for Panhandlers
Council has also asked about the legality of a licensing/permitting scheme for
panhandling. Staff has not found any city in Washington that has a panhandling
licensing/permitting scheme. However, maintaining such a program would be difficult
unless the scheme did not place an excessive financial burden on applicants, did not allow
unfettered government discretion or delay in granting/denying permits, and allowed
expedited judicial review of denials of permits. Additionally, any measures that punish
panhandlers for not having a license cannot act as a form of restriction or prohibition of the
speech. Additional practical considerations are that such schemes may not effectively reduce
panhandling, could by costly (through administration of issuing permits and enforcement),
and may be difficult to enforce.
In Washington, free speech is afforded greater protection than under the U.S.
Constitution. Ino Ino, Inc. v. City of Bellevue, 132 Wash. 2d 103, 117 (1997). Panhandling is
a form of protected speech, and as such, receives strong protection. City of Seattle v.
McConahy, 86 Wash. App. 557, 568 (1997). Prior restraints, or restricting/prohibiting the
speech in advance of publication, are per se unconstitutional when imposed on protected
constitutional speech (of which panhandling/solicitation is a class). JJR, Inc. v. City of
Seattle, 126 Wash. 2d 1, 6 (1995); O'Day v. King County, 109 Wash. 2d 796, 804 (1988).
Thus, when looking at a licensing scheme that involves protected speech, the relevant
question is whether it constitutes "prior restraint ". Prior restraints are "official restrictions
imposed upon speech or other forms of expression in advance of actual publication...." JJR,
126 Wash. 2d at 6, quoting Seattle v. Bittner, 81 Wash. 2d 747, 756 (1973). Because the
licensing scheme cannot effectively ban the speech, the restrictions (such as requiring the
permit, or only allowing licensed panhandlers to operate in certain locations) must be based
on valid time, place, and manner restrictions. See RCA dated May 22, 2007 regarding
requirements for valid time, place and manner restrictions. Additionally, purely subjective
criteria, such as considering character, may only be considered in granting an application
where there is a rational basis for doing so. Most likely there is no rational basis for
considering character when looking at panhandlers. Additionally, the licensing scheme must
have provisions that specifically require licenses to be considered — and thus granted or
denied — without "undue delay" in a "reasonable time ". City of Littleton v. Z.J. Gifts, 541
U.S. 774, 781 (2004).
r
Finally, the commercial exploitation of material protected by the First Amendment may
properly be subject to a licensing fee. However, the fee must be a regulatory measure
reasonably related to costs of administration and enforcement of the statute, and must not act
as a bar to allowing the speech. See Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943). As
those. costs of regulation must be prescribed in advance, they must of necessity be based upon
estimates which it is the right and duty of the licensing authorities to make. See Seattle v.
Barto, 31 Wash. 141 (1903). Because of the nature of panhandling, licensing fees would
most likely have to be very small or even free ((Durham, North Carolina, and Cincinnati,
Ohio, have free license or charge $20 for licenses). Post license revocation/suspension
cannot act as a restriction on speech and if it is used as punishment or prohibits the activity
completely then it will be prior restraint.
Finally, as noted above, staff could not find a Washington city with a licensing scheme for
panhandling. Several cities in other states (which have different laws and constitutional
limitations) have enacted panhandling licensing schemes. Durham, North Carolina, has a
licensing statute that restricts solicitation in certain areas (due to safety concerns). See
Attachments to RCA dated January 15, 2008. Under the Durham code, people wanting to
solicit must get a license that acts more as an ID than anything else. It appears that
approximately 100+ people register each year, though that number includes any charitable
group trying to solicit as well (which would include the Fire Department's "fill the boot"
campaign). Durham's code has not been challenged in court. Cincinnati, Ohio, has a similar
provision, though their code was recently challenged on constitutional grounds. A federal
district court found that the plaintiffs might prevail at trial and thus summary judgment was
not appropriate. Henry v. City of Cincinnati, 2005 WL 1198814 (S.D. Ohio 2005).
However, the parties have entered into settlement negotiations and the court may not reach
the issue of whether that law is constitutional.
While a licensing scheme is possible, there are strict requirements. The scheme must not
prohibit the protected speech, and restrictions must still be based on reasonable time, place
and manner requirements. Additionally, it appears that it would be difficult to administer
from a city standpoint.
Please let us know if you would like additional information.
Page 1 of 1
Bill Gothmann
From: Bill Gothmann
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:20 AM
To: 'Cathy Neet'; Connie Nelson (programs @svpart.org); Ian Robertson (pastorian @aol.com); Joe
Shutz (djoemarys @aol.com); Maggie Crabtree (maggie @crabbytrees.com); Odin Langford
(oaangford @libertylakewa.gov); Rose Dempsey; tbabcock @spokanecity.org
Cc: Sue Passmore; 'Bill Gothmann; Dave Mercier; Mike Connelly; Cary Driskell
Subject: Date of Next Meeting and Status
Good Morning:
The next meeting of the Panhandling Committee will be Tuesday, July 15 at 9:30 AM, in the second floor
conference room.
During this last Thursday's meeting, we heard about the range of services that are offered by Spokane Valley
Partners. There was general consensus that if a panhandler has actual needs, the Police should be able to give
them a card that refers them to SVP for services.
We started making a list of possible provisions to include in a panhandling ordinance. The strategy is to include
all the provisions we could possibly want, and then throw out the ones we don't want after we receive advice and
comments from our City Attorney. The following is the list thus far:
1. Require a license to solicit money or via windshield - cleaning.
2. Prohibit giving funds from a moving vehicle. (We need to discuss this further because Rose had some
concerns about this).
3. Prohibit fraudulent solicitations (such as, "I'm homeless" when they are not homeless).
4. Prohibit panhandling:
a. Within 20 ft. of an ATM
b. Within 20 Ft. of a bus stop
c. Within 50 ft. of a traffic signal
d. On business property where permission has not been granted
e. On medians or islands
f. On freeway exits or entrances
g. Along major arterials at intersections that have traffic lights.
h. At four -way stops
i. At nighttime
5. Criminalize public intoxication and open containers
6. Redefine aggressive panhandling to include stepping into streets or onto a median
I expect to continue this discussion at the next meeting. Following that, we need to discuss the education piece of
the project. Bring your ideas, since we all agree that this is the most important part of the effort.
I hope this helps.
Bill
7/14/2008
`a
CORE PROGRAMS
Clothing Bank
♦ Provides new and gently used clothing and some personal hygiene items to individuals and
families.
♦ Additional programs furnish kitchen kits, towel and sheet sets to families transitioning from
homelessness.
♦ Car seat program offers a new car seat to families that cannot afford them.
Emergency Services
♦ Provides short-term emergency services for housing, utilities, transportation, and medical /dental
needs. Recently received a small grant for additional housing support.
♦ Emergency Services also provides community voicemail, a collaborative effort with the Spokane
Neighborhood Action Program (SNAP). The service allows homeless individuals and others
without phone service to have a phone number for making appointments, securing housing and
other life necessities.
Food Bank
♦ Provides food and non -food items to families in need.
♦ Families may access the food bank once a month. A typical food basket includes both perishable
and shelf - stable items, as available. Some non -food items, such as personal hygiene and cleaning
supplies, are also offered when available. Food baskets include both pre - packaged commodity
and client self - select items.
♦ Cooking classes, a collaborative partnership with WSU County Extension, are also offered on
Wednesdays, including one for the Russian community. The classes demonstrate simple,
inexpensive meals prepared from food bank items, which the participants can eat and take home
leftovers.
♦ Family members with a birthday are also given a cake and encouraged to select a gift from the
"birthday" table.
♦ The food bank is one of 4 sites in Spokane County providing the Community Supplemental Food
Program, a prescription -based food package to seniors (60 +) and 5 -year old children.
Protective Payee
♦ Provides budget counseling and assists in overcoming barriers to employment for public assistance
and social security recipients.
♦ The protective payee program assures clients financial commitments are made by paying their bills
from their income sources, i.e. public assistance or social security.
♦ Clients may be referred to other SVP services as appropriate or given referral to other community
resources.
SEASONAL PROGRAMS
Have A Heart
♦ The Have A Heart program ensures children receive a box of Valentines for sharing in the
classroom. Families may pick up their Valentines during the first two weeks of February.
♦ Boxed Valentines are also made available to area teachers for those students unable to access SVP.
Smart Start
♦ Appreciating the importance of grade appropriate "tools ", this program provides children with a
backpack of new school supplies for that first day of school.
♦ Backpacks include binders, paper, writing and coloring implements that are age appropriate.
♦ Families are required to attend one life skills class prior to receiving the backpacks. The 2007 class
topics included money management, parenting, helping kids with school, germ warfare and two
classes in Russian.
♦ Children pick out their own backpack and receive a pre - packaged kit of supplies to accompany it.
♦ Area teachers may also request supplies throughout the year as needed.
Rev. 6/25/08 1 Valley Social Services
4 9t
Coats 4 Kids
♦ The Coats 4 Kids distribution, held the last week of October through the first week of November,
ensures that no one greets the winter without a warm coat.
♦ Clients may also receive hats, gloves, mufflers, boots and other cold - weather gear, as available.
♦ Coats are donated throughout the year, but the biggest push for donations comes in the first week
of September. Winter apparel received at other times through the clothing bank is stored offsite in
anticipation of this clothing drive.
♦ Each individual receives at minimum a single coat, although other winter gear may be available
depending on supply.
Season of Sharing
♦ The Season of Sharing (SOS) program provides gently used and new gifts to individuals and
families for gifting during the winter holiday season.
♦ Non - denominational, this event helps family celebrate their holidays with age and gender
appropriate gifts.
♦ Families are assisted by area students in selecting gifts specific to their needs from a variety of
tables.
♦ Beyond the gifts, additional food and non -food commodities are given out, as available. Typical
non -food items have included personal hygiene, towel sets, blankets and home / holiday
decorations.
PARTNER AGENCIES
In addition to SVP- sponsored events and programs, the center is home to other community resources
They provide additional services to our families, making the facility nearly a one -stop resource center.
Alight Counseling
♦ Located on SVP's lower floor, Alight provides counseling to individuals, groups, couples, families,
seminars and trainings.
♦ They specialize in addiction, abuse, anger, anxiety, communication, depression, grief /loss,
guilt /shame, relationships and stress.
ESD 101
♦ ESD 101 provides a fast -track program for students to re -enter high school.
♦ Center for School to Work operates The NET School: Alternatives to Education and Training, a
high school re -entry program for students at risk of not graduating from high school. The NET
School enrolls both high school dropouts and students deficient in credits and provides intensive
instruction so they may prepare to pass the WASL and earn a high school diploma.
♦ Through in -class education and one -on -one mentoring, students short on credits receive a credit
waiver that is their ticket back into high school.
♦ Students are referred into the program through self - referral and through school counselors.
♦ The Center for School to Work also manages programs to help youth successfully transition from
school into careers. Through School to Work Connections, 16 -21 year olds aiming to complete
their high school education and /or enter the workforce can receive job leads, career planning and
guidance, paid work experience, resume writing, dress for success, interviewing techniques and
access to internships.
LUTHERAN COMMUNITY SERVICES
♦ Provided on an outreach basis, LCS provides a social worker to assist with domestic violence issues
and access to legal services.
NICOTINE ANONYMOUS (NA)
♦ NA is a self -help group designed to help people quit nicotine.
♦ The philosophy follows the 12 -step process, successfully used in Alcoholics Anonymous.
Rev. 6/25/08 2 Valley Social Services
SPOKANE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PROGRAM (SNAP) SNAP provides energy assistance from
November through the following January.
♦ Assistance is need -based and subject to available funding, which fluctuates through the winter
season.
♦ Applicants are eligible once per year
SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Public Health Nurses & lrt Steps Maternity programs
♦ General field public health nurses visit parents and children aged 0 -3 in their homes
♦ Provide information about health, growth and development, and community resources
Women, Infants & Children program (WIC)
♦ Eligible pregnant and breastfeeding women, infants, and children up to age 5 receive nutrition
services, including:
✓ Nutrition evaluation, education and counseling
✓ Breastfeeding tips and support
✓ Help finding health care and other social services
✓ Free food checks to purchase healthy foods, promoting health, growth and development
THEATER ARTS FOR CHILDREN (TAC)
♦ Theater Arts for Children promotes and strives to provide the greatest opportunity possible for all
ages to participate and enjoy the benefits of live theater through the hands -on experience in the
entire theater process.
♦ Participation is open to anyone, from children 3 -103, to be involved with acting, stage production
and lighting.
♦ No experience required, will work along those with more experience.
♦ The TAC theatre contains 150 seats.
VALLEYFEST
♦ A free community event where children and families come together to celebrate the Valley
community, ValleyFest will be held this year at Mirabeau Park, Sept 19th, 20th and 21".
♦ Valleyfest's day starts with a Fun Run followed by a Pancake Breakfast.
♦ The Valleyfest Parade is on Friday and includes community floats and local school bands.
♦ Valleyfest also includes entertainment specifically designed for and performed by children. All of
these activities are provided at no cost to Valleyfest participants.
Valleyfest also makes space available during the festival for non - profit organizations located in the
Spokane Valley to promote their operations and host booths with activities for children. In
addition, businesses serving the area promote their services and provide activities for children and
their families.
WSU NURSING
♦ Students from the WSU College of Nursing provide periodic screenings and educational instruction
on a walk -in basis. They also provide flu shots during the Fall season.
♦ Although the schedule and topics change, they generally are available on Wednesday afternoons
to mimic the food bank and clothing bank schedules.
♦ For the first quarter of 2008, they provided instruction /screenings on diabetic nutrition,
monitoring blood pressure and glucose, foot massage, adult immunization, exercise and
monitoring your medications.
♦ They also assist with Wednesday cooking classes to provide education for specific health concerns
such as obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes.
Rev. 6/25/08 3 Valley Social Services
f/ 9
HOME SOCIETY
The mission of the Children's Home Society is to develop healthy children, create strong families, build
engaged communities, and speak and advocate for children. Services include:
Adoption Resource Center
♦ Promotes the health and well -being of those whose lives have been touched by adoption. The
ARC offers pre- and post- adoption counseling, specializing in adoptive or foster families with later -
placed children. The ARC also provides information, support, counseling, advocacy, search
assistance, and education for triad members (adopted persons, birth parents, adoptive parents) and
professionals working in the adoption field.
Child and Family Counseling
♦ CHSW professionals offer counseling services in multiple settings to children and families who face
a variety of challenges. Counseling can help families build on their strengths, address challenges
and improve family relationships. CHSW is a Licensed Community Mental Health Agency,
providing counseling, case management and supportive services to families in Spokane County.
Spokane Family Resource Center
♦ This community -based family support center offers a wide variety of activities and services for
families. By providing information, education and support, as well as links to other available
community resources, the Center seeks to promote the self - sufficiency and well -being of families.
Parents As Teachers
♦ PAT is a curriculum- focused birth to three - year -old program designed to develop school readiness
and family support. Parents receive information regarding their child's social, emotional,
intellectual, language and motor development. They learn ways and techniques to encourage the
positive growth and development of their child.
Relatives Raising Relatives
♦ Today many grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc., find themselves unexpectedly raising grandchildren,
nieces, nephews, etc. This program provides education, support and information for these families,
whose children have often experienced significant losses.
The Nurturing Program
♦ The Nurturing Program is an interactive family enrichment program. The goal of the program is to
provide caregivers and children the tools they need to create and sustain a nurturing home life
thereby reducing the risk of further out -of -home placement and increasing family management.
HU-17ON SETTLEMENT
♦ Provides residential care for children, ages 5 -18 but a child may remain through high school
graduation.
♦ The referral age is 5 -14 and family groups are welcome.
♦ Referrals may come from parents, grandparents, other family members, DSHS, case mangers
and /or custodial parents.
Walsh and Associates is dedicated to assisting people with developmental disabilities to achieve the
highest practical fulfillment of lifelong ambitions and dreams. Services to clients include:
✓ Residential Services
Offer 24 -hour supervision and assistance to individuals who have significant cognitive,
medical or behavioral needs. Residential services emphasize positive supports and a belief
in helping individuals live as independently as possible.
✓ Day Program Services
The Community Access Program offers individuals the opportunity to integrate into the
various activities and events of their local community. This may include grocery shopping
and other daily tasks, or, it may include participation in recreational and social events such
as city council meetings, local sporting events, camping, or even personal vacations.
✓ Employment Services
The Employment Programs offer individuals unique opportunities to earn wages and gain
valuable on- the -job experiences. Services consist of job searches, interview preparation, as
well as job coaching.
Rev. 6/25/08 4 Valley Social Services
Information from Corporal Mark Nygren, June 26, 2008:
On 6/11/08 1 and other deputies responded to 15735 E Broadway on a Persons
Bothering call. Complaint was of transients behind the liquor store and Fashion
Bug digging in the garbage, drinking alcohol, and urinating in public.
Other deputies contacted 2 transient types behind the store. One was so
intoxicated that he had soiled himself and medics were called for a medical
evaluation. He was eventually transported to Detox.
I contacted 2 transient types out front of the business.
The first one was truly a transient. He was very intoxicated. I found out he has
felony arrest warrants out of Florida that were not extraditable. I eventually let
him go without any enforcement action as there was no law violation I was able
to determine had occurred that I could enforce.
The other subject was a transient type, but was not a transient. He is a white
male named "Charlie ". Charlie is a convicted felon with an extremely long arrest
record. Charlie had four outstanding warrants; a felony, 2 misdemeanors, and a
felony DOC Escape warrant. Charlie is a self- admitted life long alcoholic.
Charlie initially lied to me about his name to avoid being arrested. I confirmed his
identity using local and state law enforcement databases. Enroute to jail,
Charlie told me some interesting things about his life and his "profession ".
Charlie is NOT a transient. He lives in Spokane at the Red Lion Motor Inn.
Sometimes he lives with his wife, who has a house in the west central area.
Charlie is a professional panhandler. He has a solicitors license through
Spokane city, and calls his business "Cardboard Expressions ".
Charlie takes the STA bus out to the Spokane Valley to panhandle. Charlie said
he initially went to the valley knowing he has warrants, trying to "hide out ". He
figured the cops on the valley are less familiar with him than the Spokane cops
and he could lie about who he is.
But, Charlie says he likes the valley much better because:
1) No rules - There are too many rules in Spokane and the Spokane cops
enforce them.
2) More lucrative - People in the valley are more generous than people in
Spokane. Charlie said he averages 30 to 40 dollars an hour panhandling in
the valley. He said, "all the pretty women in their 30s and 40s give me 20 dollar
bills ". The most lucrative spots are by Wal -Mart and the Valley mall.
While booking Charlie, I talked to a SPD Officer about transients. He told me the
Spokane Police Department administration is telling officers to crack down on
transients and to tell them to go "east of Havana" to panhandle.
(this was a single officer's off hand remark)
..
June 26, 2008, from Corporal Mark Nygren
Chief VanLeuven requested a list of possible tools for law enforcement to combat the
panhandling problem. Chief VanLeuven also gave me a packet of materials to look at.
I wish to make a point regarding the first 2 articles regarding the "Criminalization of
Homelessness" and "Illegal to be Homeless ".
THE MAJORITY OF PANHANDLING CONTACTS WE MAKE IN THE SPOKANE
VALLEY ARE WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT HOMELESS.
These panhandlers are intentionally misleading people to believe they are homeless,
stranded, etc. While they may be alcoholics, have mental or physical disabilities, or any
other number of problems and /or reasons they choose to panhandle, most are NOT
homeless.
I have spoken with a number of deputies and developed a list of potential tools for law
enforcement to use to deal with the panhandling issue.
Tools
1. Criminalize Panhandling
This would bean all out ban. It would probably be the most effective tool.
2. Regulate Panhandling
Similar to the city of Spokane, require a license to panhandle. With regulations,
certain activites could be prohibited, certain locations be prohibited, certain times be
prohibited.
3. Criminalize Public Intoxication .
Currently there is not a statute against being drunk in a public place. The vast
majority of panhandlers we encounter are drunk. The drunk ones are also more likely to
be aggressive and cause other problems. While this would not address all panhandling
situations, it is a collateral attack on the problem.
4. Criminalize Open Container (of Alcohol)
Open container is currently an infraction. To make it a criminal offense would
give deputies a greater range of enforcement options.
(Open container used to be a misdemeanor under RCW. It was changed to an
infraction about 5 years ago or so. I think that originally open container was a
misdemeanor under SVMC, and at some point it was changed to an infraction to mirror
RCW.)
5. Make it Illegal (infraction) to give anything to a panhandler
This would address the supply side of the equation. A deputy would still be
required to observe the violation to act on it.
6. Make it illegal for convenience stores to sell 24 oz. beers
This is the favored choice of transients, especially those in the Sullivan / 1 -90
area. Deputies on numerous occasions watch panhandlers get money at a freeway off
ramp, then walk to the nearest convenience store and buy a 24 oz. bottle of beer.
7. Strengthen the current Aggressive Begging statute SVMC 8.25.020
Many panhandling problems are caused by panhandlers violating traffic
ordinances, like stepping into the street, panhandling from the center median. The
definition of Aggressive Begging could be changed so that if the panhandler commits
any violation of the traffic laws or obstructs traffic in any way, or accepts anything of
value from anyone located in a vehicle, it is (by definition) Aggressive Begging.
8. Use the Public Nuisance Law (RCW 9.66 adopted as SVMC 8.25.050)
This was recommended by Joe Schultz at the last Panhandling Committee
meeting. I have never used this law in my 20 years of law enforcement but can't say
exactly why and am not sure of any case law issues. After taking a look at it, it does
have some interesting advantages.
a) by RCW, it "is a crime against the order and economy of the state ". This
makes the STATE, or in our case the CITY the victim, so a victim willing to press
charges would not be required.
b) Public Nuisance is a very broad statute which encompasses a number of
issues associated with panhandling and transients.
(see pertinent parts of the statue below)
To be effective, and to officially make the Spokane Valley the "victim ", I think a
resolution by the city council stating how certain activities under Public Nuisance
adversely affect the city would be needed or desired. Then, within the confines of that
resolution, deputies could enforce the Public Nuisance law against the activities the city
council has resolved.
9.66. 010 - Public Nuisance
A public nuisance is a crime against the order and economy of the state. Every place
(1) Wherein any fighting between people or animals or birds shall be conducted; or,
(2) Wherein any intoxicating liquors are kept for unlawful use, sale or distribution; or,
(3) Where vagrants resort and
Every act unlawfully done and every omission to perform a duty, which act or omission
(1) Shall annoy, injure or endanger the safety, health, comfort, or repose of any considerable
number of persons; or,
(2) Shall offend public decency, or,
(3) Shall unlawfully interfere with, befoul, obstruct, or tend to obstruct, or render dangerous for
passage, a lake, navigable river, bay, stream, canal or basin, or a public park, square, street, alley,
highway, or municipal transit vehicle or station; or,
(4) Shall in any way render a considerable number of persons insecure in life or the use of
property,
Shall be a public nuisance.
9.66.030 - Maintaining or permitting nuisance.
Every person who shall commit or maintain a public nuisance, for which no special punishment is
prescribed, or who shall willfully omit or refuse to perform any legal duty relating to the removal of such
nuisance, and every person who shall let, or permit to be used, any building or boat, or portion thereof,
knowing that it is intended to be, or is being used, for committing or maintaining any such nuisance, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor.
1
A DREAM DENIED:
THE CRIMINALIZATION OF HOMELESSNESS IN U.S. CITIES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The housing and homelessness crisis in the United States has worsened in 2005, with many cities reporting an
increase in demands for emergency shelter. In 2005, 71 percent of the 24 cities surveyed by the U.S. Conference of
Mayors reported a 6 percent increase in requests for emergency shelter._ Even while the requests for emergency
shelter have increased, cities do not have adequate shelter space to meet the need. In the 24 cities surveyed in the
U.S. Conference of Mayors Hunger and Homelessness Homelessness Survey for 2005, an average of 14 percent of
overall
emergency shelter requests went unmet, with 32 percent of shelter requests by homeless families unmet. The lack of
available shelter space — a situation made worse by the Gulf Coast hurricanes - leaves many homeless persons with
no choice but to struggle to survive on the streets of our cities.
Over the course of the year, 3.5 million Americans experience homelessness._ The number of people living on the
streets threatens to grow as thousands of people are now homeless as a result of Hurricane Katrina. According to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, as of late November, approximately 50,000 hurricane evacuees remained
in hotels and motels awaiting alternative housing options.
An unfortunate trend in cities around the country over the past 25 years has been to turn to the criminal justice
system to respond to people living in public spaces. This trend includes measures that target homeless persons by
making it illegal to perform life - sustaining activities in public. These measures prohibit activities such as
sleeping/camping, eating, sitting, and begging in public spaces, usually including criminal penalties for violation, of
these laws.
This report is the National Coalition for the Homeless' (NCH) fourth report on the criminalization of homelessness
and the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty's (NLCHP) eighth report on the topic._ The report
documents the top 20 worst offenders of 2005, as well as initiatives in some cities that are more constructive
approaches to the issue of people living in public spaces. The report includes the results of a survey of laws and
practices in 224 cities around the country, as well as a survey of lawsuits from various jurisdictions in which those
measures have been challenged.
Types of Criminalization Measures
The criminalization of homelessness takes many forms, including:
• Legislation that makes it illegal to sleep, sit, or store personal belongings in public spaces
in cities where people are forced to live in public spaces;
• Selective enforcement of more neutral laws, such as loitering or open container laws,
against homeless persons;
• Sweeps of city areas where homeless persons are living to drive them out of the area,
frequently resulting in the destruction of those persons' personal property, including
important personal documents and medication; and
• Laws that punish people for begging or panhandling to move poor or homeless persons
out of a city or downtown area.
Criminalization Measures Have Increased
r
City ordinances frequently serve as a prominent tool to criminalize homelessness. Of the 224
cities surveyed for our report:
28% prohibit "camping" in particular public places in the city and 16% had city -wide
prohibitions on "camping."
• 27% prohibit sitting/lying in certain public places.
• 39% prohibit loitering in particular public areas and 16% prohibit loitering city -wide.
• 43% prohibit begging in particular public places; 45% prohibit aggressive panhandling
and 21 % have city -wide prohibitions on begging.
The trend of criminalizing homelessness appears to be growing. Of the 67 cities surveyed in
both NCH and NLCHP's last joint report in 2002 and in this report:
• There is a 12% increase laws prohibiting begging in certain public places and an 18%
increase in laws that prohibit aggressive panhandling.
• There is a 14% increase in laws prohibiting sitting or lying in certain public spaces.
• There is a 3% increase in laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, or vagrancy laws.
Another trend documented in the report is increased city efforts to target homeless persons
indirectly by placing restrictions on providers serving food to poor and homeless persons in
public spaces.
While cities are cracking down on homeless persons living in public spaces, according to the
latest U.S. Conference of Mayors Hunger and Homelessness report, cities do not have adequate
shelter to meet the need:
• 71% of the 24 cities surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors reported a 6% increase
in requests for emergency shelter.
16% of overall emergency shelter requests went unmet and 32% of emergency shelter
requests by homeless families went unmet in cities surveyed.
The Meanest Cities
Although some of the report's top 20 meanest cities have made some efforts to address
homelessness in their communities, the punitive practices highlighted in the report impede
progress in solving the problem. The top 20 meanest cities were chosen based on the number of
anti- homeless laws in the city, the enforcement of those laws and severities of penalties, the
general political climate toward homeless people in the city, local advocate support for the
meanest designation, the city's history of criminalization measures, and the existence of pending
or recently enacted criminalization legislation in the city. Over the past year, the practices in the
following top 5 meanest cities stand out as some of the worst examples of inhumane city
treatment of homeless and poor people:
#1 Sarasota, FL. After two successive Sarasota anti - lodging laws were overturned as
unconstitutional by state courts, Sarasota passed a third law banning lodging outdoors. This
latest version appears to be explicitly aimed at homeless persons. One of the elements necessary
for arrest under the law is that the person "has no other place to live."
#2 Lawrence, KS. After a group of downtown Lawrence business leaders urged the city to cut
social services and pass ordinances to target homeless persons, the city passed three "civility"
ordinances, including an aggressive panhandling law, a law prohibiting trespass on rooftops, and
a law limiting sleeping or sitting on city sidewalks.
#3 Little Rock, AR. Homeless persons have reported being kicked out of bus stations in Little
Rock, even when they had valid bus tickets. Two homeless men reported that officers of the
Little Rock Police Department, in separate incidents, had kicked them out of the Little Rock Bus
Station, even after showing the police their tickets. In other instances, homeless persons have
been told that they could not wait at the bus station "because you are homeless."
#4 Atlanta, GA. Amid waves of public protest and testimony opposing the Mayor's proposed
comprehensive ban on panhandling, the City Council passed the anti- panhandling ordinance in
August 2005. In the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Atlanta stood firm in its resolve
to criminalize panhandlers. A Katrina evacuee who was sleeping in his car with his family after
seeking refuge in Atlanta was arrested for panhandling at a mall in the affluent Buckhead
neighborhood, even after he showed the police his Louisiana driver's license, car tag, and
registration as proof that he was a Katrina evacuee. In addition, during the first week in
December, the Atlanta Zoning Review Board approved a ban on supportive housing inside the
city limits.
#5 Las Vegas, NV. Even as the city shelters are overcrowded and the city's Crisis Intervention
Center recently closed due to lack of funding, the city continues to target homeless persons living
outside. The police conduct habitual sweeps of encampments which lead to extended jail time
for repeat misdemeanor offenders. In order to keep homeless individuals out of future parks, the
city considered privatizing the parks, enabling owners to kick out unwanted people. Mayor
Oscar Goodman fervently supported the idea, saying, "I don't want them there. They're not
going to be there. I'm not going to let it happen. They think I'm mean now; wait until the
homeless try to go over there."
Criminalization Measures Are Bad Policy and Violate Constitutional Rights
These practices that criminalize homelessness do nothing to address the underlying causes of
homelessness. Instead, they exacerbate the problem. They frequently move people away from
services. When homeless persons are arrested and charged under these measures, they develop a
criminal record, making it more difficult to obtain employment or housing. Further,
criminalization measures are not cost efficient. In a nine -city survey of supportive housing and
jail costs, jail costs were on average two to three times the cost of supportive housing._
Criminalization measures also raise constitutional questions and many of them violate the civil
rights of homeless persons. Courts have found certain criminalization measures unconstitutional:
• For example, when a city passes a law that places too many restrictions on begging, free
speech concerns are raised as courts have found begging to be protected speech under the
First Amendment.
• When a city destroys homeless persons' belongings or conducts unreasonable searches or
seizures of homeless persons, courts have found such actions violate the Fourth
Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
• Courts have found that a law that is applied to criminally punish a homeless person for
necessary life activities in public, like sleeping, violates that person's Eighth Amendment
right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment if the person has nowhere else to
perform the activity.
• Laws that do not give people sufficient notice of prohibited conduct or allow for arbitrary
enforcement by law enforcement officials can be unconstitutionally vague. Courts have
found loitering and vagrancy laws unconstitutionally vague.
In addition to violating U.S. law, criminalization measures can violate international human rights
law. The United States has signed international human rights agreements, many of which
prohibit, actions that target homeless people living in public spaces.
Constructive Alternatives to Criminalization
While many cities engage in practices that exacerbate the problem of homelessness by pursuing
criminalization measures, more constructive approaches do exist in some cities around the
country. The following examples. can serve as more constructive approaches to homelessness:
Broward County, FL. The Taskforce for Ending Homelessness, Inc., a not - for - profit
agency that provides outreach, education, and advocacy services for the homeless
population in Broward County, has partnered with the Ft. Lauderdale police department
to create an outreach team made up of police officers and a civilian outreach worker who
is formerly homeless. In its five years of operation, the Homeless Outreach Team has
had over 23,000 contacts with homeless individuals and has placed 11,384 people in
shelters. Estimates suggest that there are at least 2,400 fewer arrests each year as a result
of the Homeless Outreach Team.
• Pasadena, CA. The Pasadena Police Department and the Los Angeles Department of
Health have partnered to form the Homeless Outreach Psychiatric Evaluation (HOPE)
Team. The program created three teams of mental health and law enforcement officials
to provide compassionate assistance to persons in need of mental health assessment and
services.
• Ohio. In Ohio, the three largest cities, Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati, fund teams
of trained workers to go out under the bridges and visit the encampments near the rivers
to assist those outside the service system. The critical component to the success of these
programs is that they do not put a lot of restrictions on the assistance that they are
offering and offer help at non - traditional hours when other services are closed, providing
a vital link between mainstream services and a population that resists congregate living.
• Washington, DC. The downtown business community in Washington, D.C., created a
day center for homeless people who may not have anywhere to go during the day when
shelters are closed. Through the Downtown D.C. Business Improvement District,
business owners fund this day center that can serve up to 260 people per day, with indoor
seating, laundry, showers, and a morning meal.
San Diego, CA. In 1989, a public defender from San Diego created the nation's first
Homeless Court Program, which is a special monthly Superior Court session held at local
shelters for homeless defendants to resolve outstanding misdemeanor criminal cases.
Homeless courts expand access to the judicial system and assist homeless defendants by
addressing outstanding warrants and criminal offenses to remove barriers to benefits,
treatment, housing, and employment.
Recommendations
Instead of criminalizing homelessness, city governments, business groups, and law enforcement
officials should work with homeless people, providers, and advocates for solutions to prevent
and end homelessness.
Cities should dedicate more resources to more affordable housing, shelters, and homeless
services. To address street homelessness, cities should adopt or dedicate more resources to
outreach programs, such as the ones highlighted in this report. Further, cities and states can set
up programs to help homeless individuals apply for federal benefits to which they are entitled but
may not be receiving, such as Supplemental Security Income benefits for disabled individuals,
food stamps, or the earned income tax credit.
Business groups can play a positive role in helping to address the issue of homelessness. Instead
of advocating for criminalization measures, business groups can put resources to solutions to
homelessness, such as the Downtown D.C. Business Improvement District's day center.
The federal government can also play a role in encouraging cities to pursue more constructive
approaches to homelessness. Federal funding for homeless and poverty programs should be
conditioned on local government agreement not to punish homeless persons for conduct related
to their status.
As criminalization measures move people away from services, make it more difficult for people
to move out of homelessness, and cost more due to incarceration and law enforcement costs than
more constructive approaches, cities would be wise to seek constructive alternatives to
criminalization. When cities work with homeless persons and advocates toward solutions to
homelessness, instead of punishing those who are homeless or poor, everyone can benefit.
US. Conference of Mayors, A Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness in America's Cities:
A 24 -City Survey 5 (Dec. 2005).
.11
M
Id.
Martha Burt et al., Helyinz America's Homeless49 -50 (The Urban Institute Press, 2001).
Federal Emergency Management Agency, YEMA Extends Deadline for Evacuees, " Nov. 22,
2005, at http ://www.fema.gov /news /newrelease -Printfema ?id= 20818.
National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH) and National Law Center on Homelessness &
Poverty (NLCHP), Illegal to be Homeless: The Criminalization of Homelessness in the United
States (2002); NCH, Illegal to be Homeless: The Criminalization of Homelessness in the United
States. (2003); NCH, Illegal to be Homeless: The Criminalization of Homelessness in the United
States (2004).
NLCHP, Go Directly to Jail: A report analyzing local anti- homeless ordinances (1991) (nine
cities); The Right to Remain Nowhere: A report on anti - homeless laws and litigation in 16 U.S.
cities (1993); No Homeless People Allowed: A report on anti - homeless laws, litigation and
alternatives in 49 US cities (1994); Mean Sweeps: A report on anti - homeless laws, litigation
and alternatives in SO U.S. cities (1996); Out of Sight, Out of Mind? A report on anti - homeless
laws, litigation and alternatives in SO U.S. Cities; NCH and NLCHP, Illegal to Be Homeless:
The criminalization of homelessness in the U.S. (2002); Punishing Poverty: The Criminalization
of Homelessness, Litigation, and Recommendations for Solutions (2003).
See Lewin Group, "Costs of Serving Homeless Individuals in Nine Cities: Chart Book, " (2004)
available at http • / /documents. csh. orQ/documentslkelcsh 1ewin2004. PDF.
HOME I FULL REPORT (pdf) Acknowledgments I Executive Summary 11. Trends in the
Criminalization of Homelessness II. Criminalization Measures Violate Constitutional Rights
III Criminalization Measures Violate Human Rights Norms I IV. Constructive Alternatives to
Criminalization I V. T op 20 Meanest Cities I VI. Meanest Cities' Narratives I VII. Other Cities'
Narratives I VIII. CASES: Challenges to Restrictions on Sleeping, Camping, Sitting or Storing
Property in Public Place [FEDERAL] S( TATE] I Challenges to Anti - Begging, Anti - Soliciting
and Anti - Peddling Laws Challenges to Vagrancy, Loitering and Curfew Laws I Challenges to
Restrictions on Feedings Miscellaneous I IX. Prohibited Conduct Chart I X. APPENDIX:Survey
Questions I Sample Know Your Rights Card I Sources for City Narratives
I. (A) Introduction
This report, "Illegal to Be Homeless: The Criminalization of Homelessness in the United States,"
is the third annual report since 2002. This study documents the widespread trend of violations of
the basic human rights of people experiencing homelessness in 179 communities in 48 states,
Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Through the passage of possibly unconstitutional
laws, the "selective enforcement" of existing laws, arbitrary police practices, and discriminatory
public regulations, people experiencing homelessness face overwhelming hardships in addition
to their daily struggle for survival. Instead of spending precious public resources and funding to
address the significant lack of affordable housing in this country, local governments in urban,
suburban, and rural areas divert these funds to local Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and
to policing, which often penalize the very people this money could help. In addition to
continuing the documentation of this trend, this report emphasizes the connections between the
creation of a public environment of intolerance and the increasing danger of living on the streets
that results from this attitude.
This report is an annual summary of continuous investigation with evidence that criminalization
is not only a local issue that is duplicated nationwide, but is also a national concern that demands
a federal response. We have asserted and continue to assert that a pattern and practice of civil
rights violations and unconstitutional behaviors by local government authorities, including the
police and other city agencies, exists in many cities around the country. These practices exact
enormous economic, social, political and individual costs and do nothing to prevent and end
homelessness that plagues individuals nationwide.
With the unemployment rate still near its highest point in a decade, and with even deeper cuts in
funding for social services and housing supports than we anticipated, the immediate future for
the increasing number of people experiencing homelessness is desperate. For those people forced
to live in public spaces without access to shelter, public restrooms, and places to store their
belongings, life continues to be disastrous. Sympathy for homeless people depends in large
measure on understanding the economic causes of homelessness and the oppressive conditions of
living without a private space. Legislating against the behavior and circumstances of people who
have no place to go is a giant step backward in the effort to end homelessness.
It is important to note that a number of city governments continue to violate the civil rights of
homeless persons. A main goal of this report is to document these policies and show that, while
many of the laws criminalizing homelessness are new, and many of the cities are cited for the
first time, nevertheless a number of cities cited here have been among the worst cities for civil
rights violations since data began being collected. The spread of the pattern and practice of using
incarceration and harassment as an apparent attempt to "deter" people from being homeless must
be met by a combination of tactics and organized efforts.
(B) A Working Definition of Criminalization
A
Class discrimination is still legal and acceptable in the United States. There is no protected status
for those who are economically oppressed or excluded, much less those who are homeless,
although homeless people are very often the targets of discrimination. On the contrary, the
growing body of laws passed by local governments criminalizes activities necessary to survival
on the streets. Because people without homes often have no option but to perform necessary
functions in public, they are vulnerable to judgment, harassment and arrest for committing
"nuisance" violations in public. For these people, economic or housing status effectively
becomes the cause of their incarceration under "quality of life" ordinances. Instead of providing
affordable housing and livable wages, our communities choose to protect themselves from
visible homelessness under the guise of assumed threats to public safety.
Criminalization is the process of legislating penalties for the performance of life - sustaining
functions in public. It also refers to the selective enforcement of existing ordinances. Both
practices are intended to harass and arrest homeless people. Laws against obstruction of
sidewalks and public ways such as sitting or lying in public spaces are largely enforced against
homeless people. This report focuses on both kinds of criminalization.
Police in many cities commonly conduct "sweeps" in downtown areas before large political,
religious, athletic or entertainment events. Police routinely stop people they suspect are
homeless, ask for identification and run warrant checks. There have been many reports of police
urging homeless people to leave town or face arrest if they are stopped again.
The underlying assumption behind these actions is that homelessness is a "public safety" issue.
Therefore, cities attempt to eliminate visible homelessness through enforcing "quality of life"
ordinances, which seek to improve the "quality of life" of housed and higher - income individuals
by removing from sight those people who look poor and homeless. Arrest and incarceration has
become an expedited way of removing individuals from sight. Unfortunately, many people
justify criminalization as a "benevolent" means of coercing individuals into treatment and other
services that are not voluntarily available.
Desperately- needed voluntary services are diverted into the correction's system, which in some
communities have actually become part of the Continuum of Care; the explanation for the
diversion is to provide an "alternative" to hard time. The growing tendency to "track" homeless
people and their use of services is an insidious means of controlling the actual quantification of
need. This tracking system also classifies some people as "service resistant" or not really
homeless; the system excludes others as criminals.
(C) The Income/Employment Crisis
According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, there is no state or local jurisdiction
in this country where a person who works a minimum -wage job can afford housing at HUD's
Fair Market Rents. The continuing decline in real value of minimum wage income, as well as the
dramatic reduction of income supports like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), without the subsequent availability of public housing
units, creates and increases homelessness.
Forty-two percent (42 %) of homeless people, nationwide, work. However, the income they earn
is not sufficient for accessing safe, affordable and appropriate housing. In many cities the
majority of available emergency housing or shelter costs at least $7 per night. Labor Pools
become the trap for homeless people who must pay for their shelter and take whatever income-
producing work is available. Making the transition from labor pool to living wage employment is
the only way into permanent, reliable housing.
For women and families who live on TANF benefits (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) and
must work for their monthly allowance, housing in the private market at 30% of income is
impossible to find.
(D) The Health Care Crisis
Access to health care for individuals experiencing homelessness is limited and difficult to obtain.
Homeless people with chronic illnesses often do not continue receiving treatment or medication
in jail. Incarceration also poses deeper health care dangers. With incarceration comes an
increased risk of contracting chronic illnesses or serious health problems such as tuberculosis
and hepatitis.
Because of the limited availability of mental health care facilities, many individuals with mental
health problems live on the streets or are incarcerated in jails where they are unlikely to receive
the treatment they need. Due to the lack of long -term residential care services and the number of
people with mental health problems living on the streets, police officers often assume the role of
determining the need for treatment. Following the model Memphis has developed, some cities
are training special units to specifically deal with people with mental health problems. These
programs seem to be successful, but not without sufficient housing and supportive services.
In many cities residential treatment and recovery for addictions are not readily available. As a
result, cities often jail substance abusers. The cost of jail time far exceeds the money spent for
residential treatment with supportive housing.
(E) The Lack of Emergency Housing and Services
Most communities in this country lack enough shelter beds for the number of homeless people.
Many shelters charge between $5.00 and $10.00 per night for a bed or even a mat on the floor.
An overwhelming majority of communities lack sufficient social services to meet the needs of all
their low'income/homeless individuals and families. And the recent economic recession has
caused major cutbacks in funding to non - profit and service organizations. Already shelters
operate above capacity and some have had to close for lack of funds. Thousands of people across
the country need shelter and cannot get it. According to the 2003 U.S. Conference of Mayors
Report, requests for emergency shelter increased by 13% over the previous year, with requests
from homeless families with children increasing by 15 %. Of the number of people requesting
emergency shelter, 30% of homeless people and 33% of homeless families were turned away.
Every year hundreds of people die from exposure or from illnesses associated with long -term
exposure.
(F) Political Rationale for Criminalization
Criminalizing the life - sustaining acts of people experiencing homelessness without offering legal
alternatives is supported by conservative think tanks like the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
(CJLF), www.cjl£org, and the Center for the Community Interest (CCI), formerly the American
Alliance for Rights and Responsibilities , www.communityinterest.org. These think tanks apply
the rules of private ownership to public space. These groups advocate anti- homeless policies
under the guise of preserving the "common good."
The CJLF has especially targeted "begging" under the justification that whatever is good for
private development is good for all urban residents. In addition, the CCI publishes anti -
panhandling guides and defines itself as "a leading advocate for urban quality-of-life and safe -
streets measures" that work "to get guns out of schools, gangs off of street corners, drug dealers
out of housing projects, porn shops out of neighborhoods, aggressive panhandlers out of ATM
lobbies and put mentally ill substance abusers into treatment and off the streets."
Bans on aggressive panhandling are viewed as a means of severely restricting panhandling
without violating a person's freedom of speech. Laws or ordinances that include the language
"aggressive" panhandling or solicitation are common. Most aggressive panhandling laws restrict
locations where panhandling is permitted and the way in which individuals ask for money or
goods.
Public spaces like streets, sidewalks, and parks are by definition "common property" and may be
used by anyone. Private property owners are often able to persuade city officials to limit the use
of public space and establish Business Improvement Districts, or BIDS. These areas exclude
people with no access to private property from public property. The CJLF and the COI's
recommendations for regulating public space limit the use of common property and seek to
justify exclusion by calling homeless people criminals and threats to public safety.
I. Background
The National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH), established in 1982, is the oldest national
homelessness advocacy organization. NCH is comprised of local and statewide advocates,
representatives of homeless coalitions, service providers, faith -based organizations, grassroots
activists and people experiencing homelessness. This year's report continues documenting local
discriminatory practices which have frequently been challenged and modified, but continue to re-
emerge, often in more aggressive forms. When litigated, "quality of life" laws have sometimes
been determined unconstitutional in both state, and federal court. As these laws and practices
continue to be used as sources to reduce the visibility of homelessness, advocates must
consistently confront them.
III. Methodology
This report is the product of the National Homeless Civil Rights Organizing Project (NHCROP)
of NCH, an ongoing effort to establish systematic data collection and coordination of efforts to
protect the rights of homeless people. As a result, this report is the most comprehensive and up-
to -date attempt to document the discrimination against and criminalization of people
experiencing homelessness.
The qualitative information from each city is reported in the form of descriptive narratives.
These narratives serve as a record of evidence testifying to the criminalization of people
experiencing homelessness in almost every city surveyed, as well as the status of struggles and
conflicts in those communities. Anecdotal evidence and experience, as well as available statistics
were collected, evaluated and form the basis for policy analysis and recommendations for
combating the erosion of civil and human rights in this country.
In addition, the city codes for the majority of the cities were examined and summarized in a chart
comparing patterns of criminalization across the nation. In most cases city code information was
available .electronically, generally on databases. However, in those circumstances where it was
impossible to obtain an electronic document, copies were directed to city clerks' and attorneys'
offices, who then provided the information. Different classifications of various ordinances are
dependent upon the wording of the ordinance itself.
IV. Problem Statement /Consequences of Criminalization
(A) Economic Consequences
As the country fails to provide money for housing, and as essential funds are cut from social
services, the amount of money spent to jail people for "quality of life" crimes increases.
The legal challenges resulting from criminalizing homelessness have proven costly for both
homeless people and for those who prosecute them. Judgments against offending jurisdictions
are not sufficient payment for the loss of freedom, jobs while incarcerated, shelter spaces and for
the difficulty in finding employment once you have a "record."
Although anti- homeless ordinances violate HUD's Consolidated Plan and should jeopardize any
offending jurisdiction's access to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME
Investment Partnership Program (HOME), and McKinneyNento federal funds, few charges are
brought against those cities because non -profit organizations risk their own funding if they
complain. Moreover, local ordinances that discriminate against and criminalize the lives of
homeless people often violate local, state, and federal constitutions, thus exposing city
governments and police departments to civil liability. Ordinances that criminalize homeless
people simply perpetuate the problems of homelessness.
It is more expensive to detain a person in jail than to house and offer services. According to the
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty 2003 report, Punishing Poverty: The
Criminalization of Homelessness, Litigation, and Recommendations for Solutions, the cost of
providing jail, excluding the cost of the police resources used in the arrest, exceeds $40 per day.
Some sources say the daily cost is as much as $140. In comparison, the average cost of providing
counseling, housing, food, and transportation for one day is approximately $30.
In most cities there is a desperate lack of emergency and permanent housing and support. Funds
that might be used to fund programs addressing the needs of homeless people are diverted to the
criminal justice system.
(B) Social Consequences
Criminalization masks the social exclusion of homeless people under the guise of public safety
concerns. When cities warn tourists and residents not to give money to panhandlers, they create
the fear of homeless individuals that leads to further discrimination. This criminalization then
helps to legitimize that fear.
Persons arrested or incarcerated for "quality of life" offenses may lose access to employment,
families and friends. This loss also impacts employers who lose faith in hiring homeless people
because "they don't show up," or because they have "records."
Once incarcerated, these homeless individuals face overcrowding, violence, abuse, or disease.
The conditions in turn contribute to additional social costs when the person is released and
interacts again with society.
Cities might be more successful developing programs intended to reduce homelessness if the
level of animosity among police, service providers, and homeless persons was reduced. With a
focus on training, police might deal more effectively and efficiently with conflicts that arise,
without violating the civil rights of homeless people.
(C) Political Consequences
Laws criminalizing the circumstances of poverty, as well as sanctioned or unsanctioned actions
committed by law enforcement officials, may violate both state constitutions and the U.S.
Constitution. For example, laws prohibiting or limiting panhandling and begging may violate the
First Amendment. The seizure or destruction of homeless peoples' property may violate the
Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. Laws prohibiting sleep
and other necessary activities in public spaces may violate the Eighth Amendment, which
prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. In addition, discriminatory enforcement of such laws
may constitute a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, which assures equal protection under
the law.
(D) Individual Consequences
The criminalization of homelessness makes the struggle to survive on the streets even more
difficult, depressing, demoralizing, and frightening, especially as the criminal justice system can
itself act as a major barrier to individual efforts to escape homelessness. Regardless of the
number of ordinances passed, homeless people still must eat, sleep, and survive in public
because often no alternative is available to them.
Once homeless people have been arrested for "quality of life" violations, their criminal records
grow, and as a result they may be excluded from jobs and housing. Anyone incarcerated at least
30 days loses Social Security benefits during incarceration. Also, if an individual receiving
benefits is found to have an outstanding warrant, she or he can be denied benefits. The Social
Security Administration has gone so far as to grant agencies an "incentive" of $400 per person
found to be in violation. In addition, when homeless persons do not follow through with the
process of criminal justice, such as failing to pay traffic tickets or not appearing in court,
warrants are issued for their arrest and they may be subjected to further charges and/or jail time.
Money used to pay fines might otherwise be used for housing or other needs. Finally, it may be
difficult for homeless people to maintain the mandated relationship with parole officers or with
community service organizations.
Many homeless people lose all their possessions, even difficult -to- obtain IDs, when they are
arrested. In addition, police harassment causes homeless people to miss appointments and /or
interviews, reinforcing their status as second -class citizens. Homeless persons who are employed
at the time of arrest and who are held in jail may lose their current jobs. Even when people are
only given citations and are not arrested, the police may use the threat of arrest to intimidate
individuals without housing. Thus, there are many hidden effects of these policies.
Policies of criminalization defeat their own goals of removing homeless people from public
visibility because they simply create further barriers for survival and undermine individual
efforts to escape homelessness. Such policies keep more people on the streets and increase
problems related to homelessness. When individuals are released from jail, they are still
homeless, and they have even more barriers and obstacles to overcome than before.
(E) Security Guards and the Homeless Community
A few cities in the United States have reached legal agreements with their municipalities to put
an end to police harassment of homeless people. A growing problem in the United States is the
rise in private security forces that wear uniforms and mistreat homeless people. In a few cities,
including Cleveland, Ohio, these security guards are often off -duty Cleveland Police officers.
These privately -paid security officers are allowed to wear the uniform of the municipal police
force, and have close contact with the police. They have the ability to detain homeless people
and, subsequently, have them arrested. When they are off -duty, these officers do not always
abide by consent decrees, legal settlements, or even the law with regard to panhandlers or the
rights of homeless people. People who spend a large number of hours of the day on the streets
report frequent and systematic abuse by private security guards in the downtowns of our urban
environments.
There are a growing number of reports of increased tensions between homeless people and
security guards from around the United States, ranging from Business Improvement District
security in Atlanta, Georgia and Columbus, Ohio with their "Downtown Ambassadors." These
guards patrol the streets and intervene when they see infractions of Yquality of lifel: laws. In
Reno, Nevada, conflicts arise between the downtown casinos and homeless people. Fort Worth,
Texas, has made a significant effort to curtail panhandling, and has drafted neighborhood
associations into the fight.
In many communities, security guards are indistinguishable from municipal police officers.
Often, they wear the same or similar uniforms, carry guns, and threaten arrest. It may be
impossible for homeless people to distinguish between an on -duty municipal police officer and
an off -duty security guard, and to negotiate the legal landscape enforced by these guards.
For example, in Cleveland, despite an agreement with the Police Department since 1999 not to
"arrest, or threaten to arrest or detain, any individuals, including homeless individuals for
performing innocent, harmless, inoffensive acts such as sleeping, eating, lying, or sitting in or on
public property," homeless people are still being harassed by security guards, who are, typically,
off -duty police. These individuals are known to keep their CPD uniforms on, while working as
security guards for private businesses. This is especially a problem in the urban core where
finding access to transportation, food, and a place where one can rest without being harassed
becomes a difficult task.
These security guards, who patrol private buildings in their uniforms, have been engaged in
harassment against homeless individuals that they encounter on public sidewalks and around the
private businesses they are to guard. Phoenix, Arizona, has combined police and security
outreach into one unit.
The security guards, especially since the events of 2001, play a greater role in both numbers and
visibility in most American cities. Despite efforts to focus funding and attention on those who
live on the streets, the number of homeless people has increased in most American cities. The
security guards are employed to secure buildings and businesses, but they often become much
more. Security guards provide the illusion of security to a fearful population. They are used to
assure cash registers do not stop ringing because of a perceived unsafe environment. Security
guards are highly visible, and many buildings pay a premium for the guards to look like law
enforcement officers. Unfortunately, they have a much different mandate that is essentially a
profit motive, with little responsibility to serve the public good, as well as less accountability
than on -duty officers.
Although security guards may be highly trained and respectful law enforcement officers during
the day, they are paid to keep a certain appearance within a building. Homeless people are
viewed as a threat to public safety. Media distortions, fear of the unknown, and misguided
information often turn homeless people into the scapegoats for problems downtown. People who
choose not to access the shelters, when shelters exist, are blamed for high crime rates, the flight
of wealthy pedestrians and residents from the city, and the closing of businesses. Security guards
are often told in no uncertain terms to move homeless people out of sight at all costs. They
ignore the freedom to ask for money or the freedom to be left alone. V. Model Programs
Cities have turned to the criminal justice system for housing, treatment, and even as a means of
"disappearing" homeless people.
This trend can only be reversed through the organizing of homeless people and concerned
advocates to hold policy makers and business owners accountable for their actions and policies.
Minneapolis, Philadelphia and Ft. Lauderdale are all spotlighted in this report for their positive
steps towards ending the criminalization of people experiencing homelessness.
(A) Minneapolis, Minnesota
The Public Safety and Regulatory Services Committee of the Minneapolis City Council ordered
the Community Advisory Board on Homelessness (CABH) to address building code issues and
homelessness. The result was the creation of a Decriminalization Task Force to "review all laws,
policies, and practices that have the effect of criminalizing homelessness, and reporting back to
the City and County with recommendations."
The Task Force sets the foundation for an increase in social services and assistance as a pathway
to ending the criminalization of homelessness in Minneapolis. The following recommendations
have been presented to the City Council for discussion and approval.
1) Ordinance changes. These include the repealing of an anti- camping ordinance and the
rewording of other ordinances such as trespassing, panhandling, loitering, shelter restrictions,
interference with traffic, and public urination.
2) Police Protocols. Training police to link homeless people to services will meet the needs of
homeless people while insuring the protection of their civil rights. Changes include the
requirement of a complaint before police presence, a notice to campers before eviction, referrals
to providers, and improvements in the handling of property belonging to those experiencing
homelessness.
3) Vagrancy Charges. Vagrancy laws are remnants of a previous era of law enforcement.
Minnesota's vagrancy statute should be repealed.
4) Public Testimony. Time should be allotted whereby public testimony is scheduled to allow
advocates and people who have or are currently experiencing homelessness to come forward and
speak to the City Council and Mayor on the issues stated above.
These four items are part of a serious effort to address some of the immediate issues homeless
people 'encounter on a daily basis. At the same time, CABH began dialogue between the City
Attorney's office, the Police Department, and the Civil Rights Department to deal with long -term
issues and create constructive alternatives to the criminalization of homelessness. The
Decriminalization Task Force will also conduct ongoing discussions to address the following:
1) City Attorney Policies and Programs. Geographic restrictions resulting in banishment in
certain areas should be halted and a less punitive approach should be taken towards people
experiencing homelessness.
2) Civilian Review Authority. In its role as a police watchdog body, the Civilian Review
Authority should work with homeless providers to make it easier for people experiencing
homelessness to report police misconduct.
3) Police Protocols. Mental health workers should respond to calls involving those experiencing
mental illness while 911 dispatchers should review procedures to see if more calls can be
directed to mental health workers.
4) Police Training and Instructions. All officers should be instructed to treat every resident, even
those experiencing homelessness, with respect. In addition, officers should undergo training on
services that are available to people experiencing homelessness. Officers would also be issued
resource cards to guide people to appropriate services.
5) Police Positions /Services. A police officer should be assigned to help homeless people who
are perpetrators or victims of crime and a mental health specialist position should be created to
provide training and services.
The action taken by CABH is a model proposal that all cities should take to address and solve the
criminalization of homelessness in cities across the nation.
(B) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
In contrast to many other cities across the nation, the City of Philadelphia has reportedly found
ways to reduce the number of homeless people in the city without infringing on the civil rights of
people experiencing homelessness. Instead of pushing the problem around the city,
marginalizing people, or busing individuals to jail or out of town, the city requires police officers
to contact a social worker who will respond within 20 minutes. For instance, homeless people
sleeping outside are referred to local shelter and transitional housing services rather than being
fined or arrested for camping or trespassing.
Through a combination of permanent housing, counseling services, dedicated workers, and
multiple 24 -hour shelters, Philadelphia has found a way to help the chronically homeless people
of the city. Responsibility for this progress is credited to Sister Mary Scullion, a nun who lives
and works with the people she dedicates her life to Help. Her constant pestering of local officials
resulting in the building of hundreds of housing units dedicated to help those with special needs.
While reports indicate Philadelphia has indeed removed nearly 75 percent of its chronically
homeless population from the streets, what this report intends to highlight is the City's method.
Although Philadelphia may have criminalized homeless people in the past, the City has decided
to solve the problem by providing homes instead of jail.
(C) Fort Lauderdale, Florida
An outreach program in cooperation with the police department and local services is comprised
of one formerly homeless individual and one police officer. After publicizing the pick -up point
through street contacts and service providers, the pair goes out each afternoon, where they assess
individuals one by one. Some individuals are sent to a shelter for the night, some are given bus
tickets to reunite with family, and others are enrolled in long -term programs. By helping
individuals get off the streets and into shelters, the impact of criminalization has been
significantly decreased. Other police officers in the community are also taking individuals to
shelters rather than jail. Police are currently conducting their own trainings, and educating
officers about homelessness.
VI. Conclusions and Recommendations
(A) Education and Communication
Monitoring and documenting arrests, citations, fines and harassment of homeless people allow
advocates to present evidence of violations of civil rights, costs of incarceration to the public,
and loss of opportunities for employment and housing for homeless people.
After being told by police officers, government officials, and business owners that they are
public nuisances, homeless people can only recognize their personal and collective power when
they see the impact of their efforts as a part of a national movement. Thus, the participation of
people experiencing homelessness in national and local struggles is vital.
In addition, local groups who have been tirelessly fighting the effects of criminalization must
communicate their struggles and victories with other groups, so all organizations can share
information with each other and with the public. Public information campaigns must be geared
toward:
1) alerting homeless and poor people that a new civil rights movement is building along with
informing them of new and subtle dangers that currently exist,
2) alerting service providers to the serious effects of these laws, especially before the process of
drafting law is in motion, and
3) alerting the general public that rights lost to any segment of our society are rights lost to all
members of our society.
(B) Organizing for Change
Those most affected by injustice must play a leading role in local monitoring projects and
collection of data, as well as collection of anecdotal evidence of activities to challenge local
abuses.
Organizing homeless people to take action begins with extensive outreach, in which the input
gathered directly from homeless people drives the working agenda. This outreach has four main
purposes:
1) to provide information to poor and homeless people about their rights;
2) to record civil rights abuses, including police interaction with homeless people, through
written and video documentation;
3) to provide information about opportunities for participation in the work force to affect change;
and
4) to gather ideas, insights and opinions about solutions to poverty and homelessness.
Combining outreach, advocacy, direct action, and litigation with policy and program design
produces permanent solutions to poverty and homelessness.
(C) Legal remedies
Homeless people and advocacy groups continue using the legal system to fight unconstitutional
ordinances that criminalize life - sustaining activities performed, necessarily, in public. It is
important to compile and share documentation of legal victories to strengthen our efforts.
The national maintenance of a database of ordinances and a cataloging of experiences is
necessary for sharing efforts and resources.
Broadening the campaign to request the U.S. Department of Justice investigate patterns and
practices of the civil rights violations of people experiencing homelessness, and including
homelessness as a protected class or status when monitoring violence, are imperative.
(D) Security Guards
1. Cities should make it illegal for their police officers to wear official police uniforms while
they are not on duty.
2. All security guards should be licensed by the local municipality with added scrutiny to those
carrying a firearm,. Homeless people should be easily able to file a complaint with the municipal
government concerning the actions of guards. A guard or official system should be required to
address these complaints in order to renew the license.
3. All security guards should wear identifying information including their city issued license
number.
4. All complaints delivered to the City should be forwarded to the management or the entity
hiring that guard.
5. Security guards in places that come into frequent contact with homeless people should be
required to receive awareness training, as well training on the laws that apply to homeless
people. Crisis intervention 'training for dealing nonviolently with mental illness conflicts is also
recommended.
(E) Policy Remedies
1. Support the Bringing America Home Act, H.R. 2897 -108th Congress, sponsored by U.S.
Representatives Julia Carson and John Conyers. This bill includes provisions and funding that
will end homelessness through additional housing, universal health coverage, universal livable
income, treatment on demand, and civil rights assurances.
The Civil Rights Provisions of the Bringing America Home Act include:
A. A requirement under the selection criteria for HUD McKinney -Vento that communities
receiving homeless assistance dollars must guarantee through formal certification they are not
criminalizing homelessness through laws, ordinances or policies.
B. A requirement that cities receiving Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and
HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds shall not pass ordinances that have a
disparate impact on homeless people or that punish homeless persons for carrying out life -
sustaining activities in public spaces when no alternative public spaces are available; or relating
to curfews for adolescents and that result in homeless youths being adjudicated as delinquent.
C. A requirement that cities receiving CDBG and HOME funds shall not pass zoning ordinances
and/or make zoning decisions have the effect of preventing the siting of facilities designed to
serve people in homeless situations or low - income people.
2. All people should be assured access to affordable housing, health care, with treatment on
demand, livable income, education and access to public and private accommodations, spaces,
and services, regardless of race, ethnicity, national origin, immigration status, age, gender,
religion, familial status, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, health status,
socioeconomic status, or housing status.
To assure those rights, we recommend acceptance and reiteration of the following values and
principles:
a. Protected class designation for socioeconomic status;
b. The right to register and vote for homeless people;
c. Passage of "hate crimes" legislation using protected class status;
d. Immediate relief from harassment and arrest in every American city;
e. Immediate access to treatment on demand outside the criminal justice system;
f. Immediate access to treatment without first being incarcerated;
g. Immediate access to housing for all homeless people.
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling Page 1 of 6
Part III
rl
TABLE OF CONTENTS HOME
A Guide to Regulatim g Panhandling
by Kent S. Sclu idegger
Part III - Suggested Ordinance
SUGGESTED ORDINANCE
In the preceding parts of this booklet, we have discussed the reasons for regulating panhandling, the
legal background, and the outcomes of some specific cases. For those cities that wish to move forward
in this area, this part suggests specific language which has been drafted to avoid the problems of earlier
enactments, while still providing the tools to deal with the problem.
The first five sections of the suggested ordinance prohibit aggressive panhandling and fraudulent
solicitation, without an outright ban on panhandling. A cautious strategy would be to stop at that point.
A more aggressive strategy would be to adopt a permit system. Section six suggests language for cities
willing to devote the necessary resources for this approach.
§ 1. Definitions. "Panhandling," for the purpose of this chapter, is any solicitation made in person
requesting an immediate donation of money. Purchase of an item for an amount far exceeding its value,
under circumstances where a reasonable person would understand that the purchase is in substance a
donation, is a donation for the purpose of this chapter. Panhandling does not include passively standing
or sitting with a sign or other indication that one is seeking donations, without addressing any
solicitation to any specific person other than in response to an inquiry by that person.
• CONDAENT: This section defines panhandling but does not prohibit it. For the reasons stated
earlier,(? 3 ) the constitutionality of an outright ban is questionable. The definition treats individual
beggars and organized charities alike. The Salvation Army and similar solicitations are excluded
from the definition by the particularly nonthreatening manner m which they solicit and not by
their status as charities. '
§ 2. Time of Panhandling. Any person who panhandles after sunset or before sunrise is guilty of a
misdemeanor.
http: / /www.cjlf grg/publct mT=handhng/PIH.hbn
6/10/2008
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling
Page 2 of 6
. COMMENT: Nighttime is inherently more dangerous and more frightening. Panhandling at night
is therefore inherently more coercive. `
§ 3. Place of Panhandling. Any person who panhandles when the person solicited is in any of the
following places is guilty of a misdemeanor:
a) At any bus stop or train stop;
b) In any public transportation vehicle or facility;
c) In any vehicle on the street; or
d) On private property, unless the panhandler has permission from the owner or occupant.
• COMMENT: It is often said in defense of panhandling that the person solicited can simply say
"no" and walk away.(72) There are many instances where he cannot. Users of public transportation
are particularly vulnerable. Vehicles stuck in traffic or stopped at lights are also captive audiences.
In New York's Central Park, drivers must pay extortion money to aggressive panhandlers who
remember which cabs do not give and attack them.
This section also enables private property owners to keep panhandlers off their property. There are some
state court decisions which equate large shopping centers to public streets for the purpose of political
and religious advocacy, 73) but this line of cases has not yet been extended to panhandling.
§ 4. Manner of Panhandling. Any person who panhandles in any of the following manners is guilty of
a misdemeanor:
a) By coming within three feet of the person solicited, until that person has indicated that he does
wish to make a donation;
b) By blocking the path of the person solicited along a sidewalk or street,
c) By following a person who walks away from the panhandler,
d) By using profane or abusive language, either during the solicitation or following a refusal;
e) By Panhandling in a group of two or more persons; or
f) By any statement, gesture, or other communication which a reasonable person in the situation of
the person solicited would perceive to be a threat.
COMMENT: Aggressive panhandling is by far the worst kind. Any person who gives out of fear
of the panhandler rather than a genuine desire to donate has, in reality, been robbed. Professor
Kelling found that two- thirds of all riders of the New York subway have been intimidated into
giving.04) This is a staggering toll of victimization. It explains the great wave of public support
for Bernhardt Goetz, the "subway vigilante."
This section addresses some of the ways that a panhandler can impose subtle duress without using the
http://www-cjlforg/publctnsfflanlmdiing/Plll.htm 6/10/2008
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling Page 3 of 6
kind of overt force or threat which would support a prosecution for robbery.
§ 5. False or Misleading Solicitation.
a)_ Any person who knowingly makes any false or misleading representation in the course of
soliciting a donation is guilty of a misdemeanor. False or misleading representations
include, but are not limited to, the following:
1) Stating that the donation is needed to meet a specific need, when the solicitor
already has sufficient funds to meet that need and does not disclose that fact;
2) Stating that the donation is needed to meet a need which does not exist;.
3) Stating that the solicitor is from out of town and stranded, when that is not true;
4) Wearing a military uniform or other indication of military service, when the
solicitor is neither a present nor former member of the service indicated;
5) Wearing or displaying an indication of physical disability, when the solicitor does
not suffer the disability indicated;
6) Use of any makeup or device to simulate any deformity; or
7) Stating that the solicitor is homeless, when he is not.
. COMI IENT: A person who solicits money by misleading representations is attempting
the crime of theft by false pretenses. Such conduct is indisputably within the power of the
state to prohibit. An ordinance specifically tailored to fraudulent solicitation and listing
some of the more common ruses can simplify the task of police and prosecutors.
b) Any person who solicits a donation stating that the funds are needed for a specific
purpose and then spends the funds received for a different purpose is guilty of a
misdemeanor.
. COMMENT: This is probably the single most common fraud. This subdivision simplifies
prosecution by eliminating the requirement that the panhandler intends to spend the money
on something else at the time he receives it
c) This section establishes a single offense. Evidence which establishes beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant violated the section is sufficient for conviction
and need not establish which subdivision was violated
. COMMENT: A panhandler who solicits money for food and promptly buys drugs instead
has violated either subdivision (a)(1), if he had the drug money before soliciting, or (more
likely) subdivision (b), if he spent the food money on drugs. This problem is very similar to
the annoying old question of whether a thief committed larceny, embezzlement, or theft by
false pretenses.(7s) A unified statute is the answer. As long as the defendant is clearly guilty
of one, the distinctions between them are immaterial.(76)
http://Www.cjlforg/publctasNanlmdling/PIH.htm 1 6/10/2008
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling Page 4 of 6 1
§ 6. Permit Requirement.
a) No person shall panhandle on five or more days in a single calendar year without a
permit issued by the police department. A person who has been issued a permit shall keep it
on his person at all times while panhandling and show it to any peace officer upon request.
No person whose permit has been revoked shall panhandle for a period of two years
following the revocation. Any person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a
misdemeanor.
b) The police department shall issue the permit, without fee, to any eligible person who
presents himself at the central police station, states his true name, presents a photo
identification or signs a declaration under penalty of perjury that he has no such
identification; and permits himself to be photographed and fingerprinted.
c) A person is ineligible for a permit if and only if within the past five years he (1) has been
convicted of two or more violations of this chapter, (2) has had a permit revoked pursuant to
subdivisions (e) or (f) of this section, or (3) has been convicted of two or more offenses
under the law of any jurisdiction which involve aggressive or intimidating behavior while
panhandling or false or misleading representations while panhandling.
d) If the police department is unable to determine eligibility within 24 hours of the
application, the department shall issue, a permit good for 30 days and determine eligibility
for a regular permit before the temporary permit expires. The regular permit shall expire
three years from the date of issuance. Along with the permit, the police department shall
give the applicant a copy of this chapter.
e) Any person who makes any false or misleading representation while applying for a
permit under this section is guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction of violation of this
subdivision, the police department shall revoke any permit issued to the defendant under
this section.
f) If a permit is issued to a person under this section and that person subsequently commits and is
convicted of a violation of any provision of this chapter, the police department shall revoke the
permit.
•COMMENT: A large portion of the panhandling in many areas is done by a small number of
regulars who panhandle as an occupation. Cities routinely require permits to engage in
occupations, and the Supreme Court has stated quite expressly that once a speaker "undertakes the
collection of funds ... he enters a realm where a reasonable registration or identification
requirement may be imposed." (77-)
This example limits the permit requirements to the "regulars," defined as panhandling on five different
days in a year, for two reasons. First, it reduces the administrative burden on the police, limiting the
permit requirement to the group for which it is most needed. Second, it exempts that exceedingly rare
beggar whose story about being from out of town and stranded is actually true.
Charging a fee for the permit would raise serious constitutional questions.(78) We recommend that no
fee be charged.
Without a permit requirement, enforcement of the law against aggressive and fraudulent panhandling
http://www.cjlforg/publctns/Panhandling/PHI.htm 6/10/2008
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling
Page 5 of 6
would be difficult, if not impossible. After convicting a panhandler of a violation, he would be back on
the street after a light sentence, doing it again. With a permit system, a conviction of aggressive or
fraudulent panhandling leads to ineligibility or revocation of the permit. From that point, the police can
arrest that person for panhandling alone. Thus, the difficulty of proof to establish the substantive
violation need only be surmounted once or twice per panhandler.
The sample ordinance requires two violations to be ineligible for a permit. While the old axiom holds
that ignorance of the law is no excuse, it would be unduly harsh to apply that principle here. The fast
violation provides fair warning. Once a permit is issued, however, the panhandler is given a copy of the
law and has actual notice. (A city should make some provision for illiterates and non - English speakers.)
From that point, one violation warrants a revocation.
The permitting process consists mainly of identification and a records check. Provisions must be made
for people who have no identification. (79) A false statement of identity or of not having identification is
a violation and a ground for revocation.
The main problem in implementing the permit system is resources. Where a city has already adopted
community -based policing and where it has an active and aroused downtown merchant community,
identifying the "regulars" should present little problem. There will still, however, be the administrative
burden of issuing the permits and prosecuting the violations. If the city is really committed to restoring
the people's right to use the streets and transportation facilities without fear of aggressive panhandlers,
the permit system offers the best chance of achieving that goal.
TO TOP OF PAGE
Notes
71. Part I. D., above. [Go Back]
72. See Heffron, note 4, 452 U. S., at 657, n. 1 (Brennan, J., dissenting in
part.) [Go Back]
73. Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center, 23 Cal. 3d 899, 592 P. 2d 341
(1979), affirmed in Phmeyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U. S. 74
(1980). [Go Back_.]
74. Young, note 25, at 149. [Go Back]
75. See LaFave, note 47, § 8.8(c). [Go Back]
76. See, e.g., People v. Nor Woods, 37 Cal. 2d 584, 586,233 P. 2d 397
(1951). [Go Back]
77. Thomas v. Collins, 323 U. S. 516, 540 (1945). [Go _.Back]
http://www.cjlforg/publctns/Panhandling/PIH.htm
6/10/2008
A Guide to Regulating Panhandling Page 6 of 6
78. See Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U. S. 105 (1943); Forsyth County v.
Nationalist Movement, 120 L. Ed. 2d 101, 112 S. Ct. 2395 (1992). [Go Back]
79. See Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U. S. 352 (1983). [Go,Back]
http://www.cjlforg/publctns/Panhandling/Piniltm 6/10/2008
0
r
y x
N
X LARGE
CHEESE P
ITEMS & I y
Not valid wi
i3' °l?1a93; �3 Il�� l m� �lr °ti��v'�
had a heart for giving. Empathetic to the
point of occasional heartbreak, she always
talked of having yard sales so we could
give all of the money to people who need-
ed it. We were at a stop light on Division
early last summer and Faith questioned
about the man holding the sign. Someone
in the car said most of the people holding
those signs were too lazy to find a job. To
which Faith responded, `I think stand-
ing there holding that sign while people
talk about how sad you are, is probably
one of the hardest jobs in the world. If
they are standing there, they must need
something.'
Understanding the reasons why people
need an outstretched hand should be
our only concern. Faith later asked me;
TX-
�tten b;V lonatbon Bishop ?
_
V i
fi� Vt s
a
"
a ' } L4
f� 4 !:
"Where can people go to get help and
where can people who want to help go ?"
Her questioning was very persistent and
included questions about making a web -
site. I had no solid answer except the usual
`shelter' type response.
2Hands is now in its sixth month of
operation and has been a portal for over
three thousand people needing assistance.
People have posted their need and have
been pulled up by now over 700 people
who have had a hand to give. 2Hands
now covers 97% of the United States
and has moved into Canada, Mexico and
Australia.
Out of the thousands of transactions
that have taken place on 2Hands, we
have received only 1 report of someone
with ill- intention. People have to fill
a
out an Assistance Request Form
or through the mail and we reviev
posting before it is made live on th,
Alternatively, people who want tc
have to fill out a form that we revie
fore releasing the information to thf
wanting to help.
Each story of someone assisted 1
other on the 2Hands site is a wor
piece of humanity in itself.
• From the single mbm in need of:
formula... people helped.
• For the family in need of firewo
the winter.... people helped.
• For the overweight woman look
get her life back by finding a job..
ple helped.
•'1he parents of a military man 1(
to fly to see him before he left for
people helped.
• An elderly woman about to ha
power turned off... people helped.
•'Ihe story of a woman who pos
assistance because she was about
her house after her abusive husba
her with their four children....
helped.
The stories go on and on with
hosting entire families for Christm
2Hands is growing everyday
about 150,000 hits a month. We
non -profit and our one and only d
to join those who have fallen witl
willing to help them up.
`''
CUP I
_ Hang 1 0
�d
N11D71 fJ 'H111UC8ENHEE�3:ARIGa,'yEN11-
ispel Tribe of Indians' Camas Center
for Community Wellness is open to the
public. The center provides many servic-
es unavailable elsewhere on the Reserva-
tion or neighboring communities. It was
built to meet the health and social needs
of tribal members and the surrounding
communities by providing quality ser-
vices to enhance the overall individual.
"'Ihe Center has been a dream of the
V, Lim
Tribe for years. It is an exciting oppor-
tunity for the health and wellness of our
people, as well as the entire community,
now and in the future." says Glen Nen-
ema, Chairman of Kalispel Tribe of In-
dians Business Council.
The Camas Center for Community
Wellness will provide a variety of servic-
es including a brand new medical cen-
ter with four exam rooms, lab services,
x -ray, dietician, physical therapist and
( (. )V1JAS t E"W"ER FO
1821 N. Leclerc Road
Usk, Washington, 99180
(509) 445 -7122
www.kalispeltribe.com
chiropractic care. The center will house
a dental clinic with three dental chairs;
an early learning center that will serve 85
children and convenient walk -in child
care will be available while guests use the
clinics or fitness center.
the fitness center will have state -of-
the -art equipment, a circuit training
room, a 33 -foot rock climbing wall and a
gymnasium that can seat up to 300 peo-
ple for events. The aquatic area boasts a
four lane 25 meter lap pool, a water slide,
two children's activity pools, a fourteen
person hot tub and locker rooms with
dry/wet sauna.
The teen room holds a computer lab,
pool table and a full kitchen cafe that can
accommodate up to 200 meals at a time.
Additionally there is 3200 square feet of
large meeting space that can be divided
into three sections for separate events.
Camas Path was founded in 2001, as a
community resource center providing an
array of programs addressing the intel-
lectual, emotional, physical, and cultural
needs of the individual through educa-
tional training, wellness programs, and
spirituality to tribal and non - tribal stu-
dents and community members.
The Camas Center for Community Well-
ness will be open to tribal members and
the entire community seven days a week,
Monday through Friday, 6 a.m. to 8p. m.,
Saturday 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Sunday 9
a.m. to 6 p.m.
R,AT
am
�t
IA. y,G�
SPARS CHOW MEW HELP
REAL CHANGE OCCORS THROUGH
SOCIAL SERVICES THAT ATTACK
THE IMOT OF THE PROBLEM
IF YOU 4AHT TO GIVE CIONGE
THAT CAN ACTUALLY WE A
WNGE. GIVE TO THE SOCIRZ
SERVICES THAT PROVIDE
FOOD. CLOTHING. SHELTER_
AND A WAY OFF THE STREETS.
VISIT OUR 'AUSITE TO LEARN
i VO4J CAN HELP
www. {w4i,ageFarFh4 #ttw #fAF- *Aa,org
y1
AMMAR
PARTFERM
ookm W- 779 -M*
i
SPARE
0
GIVE CHI NN T10 A PANHANDLER
AND THEY MAY NOT SPEM THAT
MONEY ON FOOD 09 SHELTER.
GIVE To Tim SO SERVWE
AGEMCIES Of, AMCNIRIAGE AND
YOU CAN m" PAT FOR:
IWERUNCY SHUTER KOs
26 Pimitims THiLT oFF-im mias
swmftl StAylet Ammis
10 ALCOHOL 6 PRUG. 11DI4R FWALMS
WAVTAL MULTE Wt#CltS
PUT mm CHANGE wmEmE m
CAN MAXE ONE.
ANGfORAvE
DOWWWN
2
l�►
���.R
T -
ii
i ,
r 19
SpOKANE
VALLEY
LwJ
I if 1. 1, IL to N
Tacoma, WA
A year ago, the city council in
Tacoma, Wash., passed a law that
bans panhaj0jj,ng a1
freew4y ramps or in
direr at
.1 ww
intersections,
law-
any way" hat's
officia .say the p&nhandle
d isa?eaalmost o ernight.
Anchorage, AK
"You do have a right to be on a corner,
ma sing an expessive stoma emenU but what
you donUjave the right to do i!4wgJ.k into
the roadway You don't have the right, as a
motist, t oe po�.�:e ir,t� way,"
Sullivan s ► "Then it becomes a safety
hazard."
- KTU U -TV Report