Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/23/2010 11 Panhandlers Regulations - Public Hearing• • • BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. I I For Meeting of March 23, 2010 ITEM TITLE: A public hearing relating to the enhanced regulation of panhandlers within the city of Yakima. SUBMITTED BY: Cynthia Martinez, Senior Assistant City Attorney CONTACT PERSONITELEPHONE: Cynthia Martinez, 509 - 575 -6033 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The number and visibility of panhandlers within the city of Yakima appears to be increasing and has been the topic of comment by citizens. In response, the Yakima City Council requested police reports and records pertaining to aggressive panhandling. When a lack of reports was apparent, it was suggested that citizens may not be reporting incidents of aggressive panhandling for a variety of reasons. The Yakima City Council passed a motion to hold a public hearing and invite citizens to be heard on the issue and to document the perceived problem. At the public hearing, the Council will be listening to the testimony to determine if the panhandling activity is affecting a substantial City Interest. The right to beg has been recognized by the Courts as a First Amendment Right and any attempt to regulate begging in a traditional public forum is subject to the most stringent court review. Legislation may not be based solely on public annoyance. If a problem is sufficiently documented at the hearing, the Council may direct the City Legal Department to draft an ordinance to address the problem. Resolution Ordinance Contract Other(Specify) (Contract Mail to (name and address): Phone: Funding Source APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council Policy Issue. BOARD /COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: This issue has been considered by the full Council. COUNCIL ACTION: is • C= ®1F YAUMWA LEGAL DEPART X0SouffiM xdSRree�Y&dm4wa4&0m 98901 TO: • • ►/ SUBJ ffi9P5 6W Fax @DP75 160 MEMORANDUM March 17, 2010 Honorable Mayor Micah Cawley and the Yakima City Council Cynthia I. Martinez, Assistant City Attorney Public Hearing Concerning Panhandling The public hearing concerning panhandling within the. City of Yakima is, . scheduled during the next business meeting on March 23, 2010. Council Members may be able to assist in creating a complete record by asking pointed questions of those who testify. Remember that a municipality may not restrict panhandling based solely on mere speculation of harm, public intolerance, or annoyance to citizens. I imagine that almost every citizen in the City of Yakima is annoyed by the panhandling and you may hear testimony that reflects this general opinion. However, there may be others who have experienced moments of real fear or who have altered their course of action as a result of a panhandler's behavior (for example: choosing not to get out of their car, or not to go into a particular business). These fears do .need to be based in reason. Council members may be able to illicit relevant testimony by- asking the person testifying to expand or explain why they were afraid or why they altered their course of action as a result of the panhandler. It will also be useful to know where. the panhandling that is the subject of the testimony took place and at what hour. Should a number of citizens testify, patterns in the testimony may be apparent and Council could provide direction once the hearing has been closed. Regardless, I will examine the complaints to determine whether the described panhandling is affecting a significant government interest, and if so, whether a narrowly tailored ordinance may be drafted to address the problem. Attached is Yakima Municipal Code addressing aggressive panhandling for your reference. 'Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 530 (1980); Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 382 U.S. 87, 91 (1965); Coates v. Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611', 615 (1971). Memo re Panhandling Hearing March 18, 2010 Page 2 _ Yakima Municipal Code 6.75.020 Pedestrian or vehicular interference. A. A person is guilty of pedestrian or vehicular interference if, in a public place in the city of Yakima, he or she intentionally: 1. Obstructs pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 2. Aggressively begs. B. Among the circumstances to be considered in determining whether a person intends to aggressively beg are whether that person: 1. Touches the person solicited; 2. Follows the person solicited; 3. Directs profane or abusive language toward the person solicited; 4. Uses violent or threatening gestures toward the person solicited; or 5. Persists in begging after the person solicited has given a negative response. C., The following definitions apply to subsection A of this section: 1. "Obstructs pedestrian or vehicular traffic" means to walk, stand, sit, lie or place an object in such a manner as to block passage by another person or vehicle to such an extent that evasive action is necessary, to avoid physical contact. Innocent acts which unintentionally and inadvertently block traffic or cause others to take evasive action; acts authorized as an exercise of one's Constitutional right to picket or to legally protest; and acts authorized by permit issued pursuant to this code shall not constitute an obstruction or interference with pedestrian or vehicular traffic. 2. "Aggressively beg" means to beg with the intent to intimidate another person into giving money or goods. 3. "Intimidate" means to engage in conduct which would make a reasonable person fearful or feel compelled. 4. "Beg" means to ask for money or goods as a charity, whether by words, bodily .gestures, signs, or other means. 5. "Public place" means an area generally visible to public view and includes, but is not limited to, alleys, bridges, buildings, driveways, parking lots, parks, plazas, .sidewalks and-streets open to the general public, and doorways and entrances to buildings or dwellings accessible to the public and the grounds enclosing them. (Ord. 98 -3 § 59 (part), 1998). u ,cal News I Some speak out against Seattle council plan to crack down on panhandling ..: Page 1 of 2 Thursday, March 18, 2010 - Page updated at 08:44 AM Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personal use,. must be obtained from The Seattle Times. Call 206-464-3113 -or e-mail resale @seatt /etimes. com with your request. Some, speak out on panhandling By Emily Heffter Seattle Times staff reporter against Seattle council plan to crack down Kate Marrone said her husband was on his way to work when a panhandler in Belltown punched him in the face. Despite that, Marrone testified Wednesday against a proposed new Seattle city ordinance to crack down on aggressive solicitation. She told Seattle City Council members that a new ordinance making certain intimidating behavior a criminal infraction fosters fear of poor people and wouldn't have - helped her husband: She joined nearly two hours of testimony on both sides of Councilmember Tim Burgess' proposal before the • Public Safety and Education Committee. The ordinance, which may come up for a council committee vote April 7, sparked debate about panhandlers' civil rights and whether downtown really has�a problem with aggressive panhandling. Downtown business - community members, who largely support Burgess' proposal, said tourists and locals avoid downtown because they are afraid of and intimidated by people asking for money. Many people who testified against the ordinance said it's poverty that makes people uncomfortable and the city should spend more money helping the poor and homeless instead. "Just stop and allow yourself to actually imagine if we could actually help homeless people instead of trying to fight homeless people," said Shy Wit, who is homeless and stays in Tent City IV. Tim Harris, the executive director of the Real Change newspaper, said the proposed ordinance would erode free speech and attempts to hide its "real motive" to "clamp down on panhandling" through "squishy, open -to- interpretation terminology." Burgess' ordinance would include panhandlers and people soliciting for signatures or selling things on the sidewalk. The ordinance would make it a criminal offense to solicit someone using a cash machine or parking pay station. It also bars intimidating behavior, such as following people or using abusive language. "I deal with thousands of customers and people a year, and the fear and intimidation that is felt is real," said Alan Booth, who manages Tom Douglas' restaurants downtown. http: / /seattletimes.nwsource. com /cgi- bin /PrintStory.pl ?document _ id =20113 7295 3 &zsectio... 3/18/2010' ,)cal News I Some speak out against Seattle council plan to crack down on panhandling I ... Page 2 of 2 Booth said the city should seek a solution that balances the "tolerance that we've always had in this city" for people who are struggling with the rights of people to enjoy Pike Place Market and other parts of downtown without feeling intimidated. Burgess' proposal has the support of the Downtown Seattle Association, the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, some advocates for the poor, and from the police. It is part of a package that includes putting more cops on the street and creating more housing. Interim Police Chief John Diaz said Wednesday that dealing specifically with aggressive panhandling will give people a "greater sense of safety. "` Council members at Wednesday's meeting expressed some skepticism about the proposal. Councilmember Bruce. Harrell said he's never been aggressively panhandled. "I didn't know if there's a crisis around the ATM machines and I just didn't get the memo on that. I didn't experience that," he said. "What may be intimidating to one person ... may not be intimidating to another person," said Councilmember Nick Licata.. "Where do you draw the line ?" Seattle Times staff reporter Steve Miletich contributed to this report. Emily Heffter 206 - 464 -8246 or eheffterta')seattletimes.com Copyright ©.The Seattle Times Company r� u http: / /seattletimes.nwsource. com/egi- bin/PrintStory.pl ?document _ id = 20113 7295 3 &zsectio... 3/18/2010 t Gourmet Mexican Cooking 1.11 East Yakima Avenue P O Box 1567 Yakima, WA 98907 (509) 453 -1644 www.santiagos.org email: ,tacos @ santiagos.org- I i March 23, 2010 PANHANDLING - - Public Hearing CITY OF YAKIMA MAP 9)2 Ulu A OFFICE OF CITY MANAG City Staff--& Council Members Panhandlers have rights but so does everyone else! When the rights of one violate the -rights of others,, that's wrong and must be-addressed A panhandler.may think nothing -of approaching: your car "valet- style ", but your first thoughts are of danger even_ being car jacked . -Of the'Paiihandlers that I've confronted, most are _stammers with obvious signs of alcohol /substance abuse. Their activity tarnishes our community, bestowing, fear and harm businesses by scaring off .customers. , From a recent newscast on this activity, "Panhandler = Hungry $1.007 was identified as a regular customer at the liquor store buying Patron tequila at $54.95.a bottle. He pays with, his panhandled cash your money! Must.be a.liquid diet. For years, downtown Yakima was perceived as "unsafe" Panhandlers caused this safety issue. The City, addressed- panhandling and achieved positive results of ridding this public nuisance The investments of Downtown Revital.iiation re- established the safe environment.to walk our sidewalks Last weekend, a panhandler slipped into our bar and solicited my customers for money This was not'his first off' ense, •we have escorted him off the property, numerous times and, promptly did so 'again Last summer, we liad panhandlers leaning over our patio fence soliciting I do riot want.my customers to be accosted ever again It 'is bad for my business and all' of downtown Last month we had an individual come -for lunch He was of questionable character,. We,decide to give him'the benefit of the doubt. Afterordenng lunch, he ordered a. bar drink. He downed this drink and quickly "Dined & Dashed" Two hours.later, this same guy approached me in the parking lot. telling me that he was having a-bad day; and could I spare a few dollars f informed him that his day just took a turn for the worst and that I was calling 911 to have him arrested. He dug into his pockets pulling out lots of change and one dollar bills. He paid for his lunch to avoid.arrest. I'told him to vacate downtown and not to comeback or I would proceedwith legal trespass These are jiist afew of the many incidents that I'm currently experiencingwithAowntown panhandling And for those with sympathetic feelings towards these panhandlers. please step-up and invite them into your homes for shelter and to join you at your family dinner table You -will reverse your opinion real quick. I use to offer work -for food No one ever took my offer Santiago's is- sympathetic to the needy and has donated many meals to the -emergency shelters However., these panhandlers of topic are not the true "needy" they:are nothing but a public nuisance of business Iharrri and environmental safety concerns. - Recently, I:asked a city employee who had been active in addressing the,panhandler problem of the past. The reply, was, "Things are different now, I only do what I'm told to do" Wow,. Was I ever taken back by this negative attitude It truly shows another major downtown problem. a deflated moral of city staff to address ,city problems Our public safety. issue is•being.eomproimsed with the return of panhandling Failure tore-address will only cause this problem to grow We don't need public hearings and additional studies to-determine action. Yakima addtessed-.past problems vwith ,proven results. We only need to implement those measures - again.` Jar ✓ , I i March 23, 2010 PANHANDLING - - Public Hearing CITY OF YAKIMA MAP 9)2 Ulu A OFFICE OF CITY MANAG City Staff--& Council Members Panhandlers have rights but so does everyone else! When the rights of one violate the -rights of others,, that's wrong and must be-addressed A panhandler.may think nothing -of approaching: your car "valet- style ", but your first thoughts are of danger even_ being car jacked . -Of the'Paiihandlers that I've confronted, most are _stammers with obvious signs of alcohol /substance abuse. Their activity tarnishes our community, bestowing, fear and harm businesses by scaring off .customers. , From a recent newscast on this activity, "Panhandler = Hungry $1.007 was identified as a regular customer at the liquor store buying Patron tequila at $54.95.a bottle. He pays with, his panhandled cash your money! Must.be a.liquid diet. For years, downtown Yakima was perceived as "unsafe" Panhandlers caused this safety issue. The City, addressed- panhandling and achieved positive results of ridding this public nuisance The investments of Downtown Revital.iiation re- established the safe environment.to walk our sidewalks Last weekend, a panhandler slipped into our bar and solicited my customers for money This was not'his first off' ense, •we have escorted him off the property, numerous times and, promptly did so 'again Last summer, we liad panhandlers leaning over our patio fence soliciting I do riot want.my customers to be accosted ever again It 'is bad for my business and all' of downtown Last month we had an individual come -for lunch He was of questionable character,. We,decide to give him'the benefit of the doubt. Afterordenng lunch, he ordered a. bar drink. He downed this drink and quickly "Dined & Dashed" Two hours.later, this same guy approached me in the parking lot. telling me that he was having a-bad day; and could I spare a few dollars f informed him that his day just took a turn for the worst and that I was calling 911 to have him arrested. He dug into his pockets pulling out lots of change and one dollar bills. He paid for his lunch to avoid.arrest. I'told him to vacate downtown and not to comeback or I would proceedwith legal trespass These are jiist afew of the many incidents that I'm currently experiencingwithAowntown panhandling And for those with sympathetic feelings towards these panhandlers. please step-up and invite them into your homes for shelter and to join you at your family dinner table You -will reverse your opinion real quick. I use to offer work -for food No one ever took my offer Santiago's is- sympathetic to the needy and has donated many meals to the -emergency shelters However., these panhandlers of topic are not the true "needy" they:are nothing but a public nuisance of business Iharrri and environmental safety concerns. - Recently, I:asked a city employee who had been active in addressing the,panhandler problem of the past. The reply, was, "Things are different now, I only do what I'm told to do" Wow,. Was I ever taken back by this negative attitude It truly shows another major downtown problem. a deflated moral of city staff to address ,city problems Our public safety. issue is•being.eomproimsed with the return of panhandling Failure tore-address will only cause this problem to grow We don't need public hearings and additional studies to-determine action. Yakima addtessed-.past problems vwith ,proven results. We only need to implement those measures - again.` Jar ✓