Will Somebody PLEASE think of the Non-Profits…

Since I started talking with other Arcatans about this panhandling ordinance, I wasn’t completely shocked that many people weren’t even aware of its existence, let alone what it was proposing. And then there were those who did know about the ordinance, but their knowledge didn’t go beyond the aggressive panhandling part. But when I started talking about how these blanket restriction zones would affect not just street folk, but anyone trying to raise money, that was enough to change people’s views or make them skeptical at least.

Unfortunately, all the rampant, and at times disrespectful, panhandling by mainly transients has done a good job of tarnishing the image of the entire homeless community. For those supporting the ordinance, especially non-business owners, just one bad experience was enough to make even the most kind-hearted person wish all the panhandlers would just disappear, or die off (the varying level of hatred is astounding). So in other words, the homeless and transient community have little credibility, little to offer in political power resisting this, and, unfortunately, the few earned it for the rest.

So what to do? Clearly this ordinance is far-reaching, and the city council members knows this. They know that the Girl Scouts (I use them frequently because the council has) and other non-profit organizations engaged in on-the-street fundraising activity will be affected by this, yet they, excluding Shane Brinton, still support it. Why? Why punish organizations that are working to make a real difference in the community?

There is no reason to punish these organizations. They should not be swept into this giant panhandling net and forced to avoid the most lucrative locations for raising funds because of the maliciousness of a few. It is not only ridiculous, it is unconstitutional. Regardless of what court has upheld what panhandling ordinance in whatever city, speech is still being restricted, and as we all know, for various reasons, the courts are not always the most rational in their decisions.

Then people I talked to have said, probably accurately, that the police are not going to bust up an organization’s fundraising effort in these areas. No, they will only target the homeless — and that is the problem. No cop in their right mind is going to ticket a Girl Scout for raising money, and it’s that selective enforcement that could potentially thrust the city into a costly lawsuit where the ordinance would probably get overturned due to discrimination. Time, Place, and Manner restrictions have to be enforced broadly, not selectively. Those restrictions have to apply to all people participating in the form of restricted speech.

Look, there are a million ways to address panhandling, from releasing the law enforcement dogs on them to tackling the roots of the problem. But what is clear is that this particular ordinance, in its current form, is not a good ordinance, for addressing the panhandling issue here and for the collateral damage is will very well cause for local non-profits and organizations. If you won’t oppose this ordinance for the homeless and poor, then oppose it for that reason, and demand the city council do better than this.

——————————————————————————————————————-

Want to tell the council how you feel, but don’t have the time to write a letter or go to the meeting? Click here to check out a template letter that can either be printed out, signed, and given to the council, or copy and pasted then emailed to the council members. You can also use the letter to craft your own.