A back and forth on the issues of panhandling in Fort Smith that started back in February may have been headed off by a vote of the Fort Smith City Board of Directors earlier in the month, with the “revised’ ordinance designed to ward off a pending lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.
But the “new” panhandling ordinance, which some have called “broad sweeping and ambiguous” may just be a stop gap in the efforts of the ACLU which filed a lawsuit on June 29 in response to the move by Fort Smith and Rogers to place restrictions on the street begging.
Inside Fort Smith spoke with a person on Tuesday afternoon set up in a grassy median area next to a major shopping center. The individual had a handmade, cardboard sign that said “Hungry - Please help!” It was the fourth time in two weeks the individual had been spotted, each time at a different location.
After a small donation and the promise of anonymity the individual agreed to an interview. We will call the person “Beth.”
When being told that there was photographic evidence of her being in four different locations in ten days with the same sign and story, “Beth” opened on the condition that we did not publish her picture. The picture with this story is a stock picture, and not one of “Beth”.
“Look…this I what I do,” said Beth. “I have three kids and no way to support them. My mother watches the kids while I come out and do this three or four days a week. I’m not proud of it. But I do what I can to get by.”
With a mother willing to watch her children, what about the prospects of getting an actual job?
“I can work in fast food and make $300 a week or I can do this for three or four hours a day and make two or three times that much in ten days,” said Beth. “I’m really not breaking any laws and no one is forced to give me money. ”
Beth doesn’t consider herself a professional panhandler although she says that is all she had done since mid - 2015. The ACLU lawsuit is the result of a “professional pan handler” challenging the right to be in the public right away, accosting drivers in the vehicles and asking for money.
The wide sweeping reforms set forth by the Fort Smith BOD in February resulted in the challenge in the courts by the ACLU. Fort Smith then tweaked their ordinance in July in an effort to make the problem of panhandling go away in a manner that would be legally justifiable.
The original ordinance from February addressed several issues in an effort to curtail panhandling, including when and where the activities could occur.
The text of the original ordinance was devoted to “making it illegal to panhandle someone who is at a bus stop, in public transportation, in a vehicle on the street, in proximity to a bank entrance, automated teller or a check-cashing business, within 150 feet of a street corner, intersection or highway interchange or on private property without permission; made it illegal to come within three feet of the person solicited, until that person has indicated that he or she wishes to make a donation, block the path of the person solicited along a sidewalk or street, follow a person who walks away from the panhandler, use profane or abusive language while soliciting or after a refusal, panhandle in a group or threaten a solicited person; and made false or misleading solicitation, such as lying about being homeless or having a disability.”
Panhandling activities before sunrise or after sunset would have also been prohibited.
The ACLU filed suit saying that the ordinance infringes on “freedom of speech”.
In the July meeting, city attorney Jerry Canfield presented a “repeal and replace” solution with less restrictive wording but admitted that the new ordinance might not stand up to a Constitutional challenge.
Rogers “fixed” their problem by replacing heir ordinance with one that merely bans walking up to a running car in traffic with exceptions for law enforcement agents, protesters, pedestrians crossing the street, emergency personnel, or individuals who are performing road or utility work.
Fort Smith’s new ordinance was let with some resistance because, as written, it could actually make it against the law for residents to just stroll through their neighborhood by walking in the street.
Melissa Woodall, a Fort Smith resident who addressed the BOD on the matter in July, was one of the one who voiced concerns about people walking in the street
.Canfield replied that there is no prohibition on walking on a shoulder, unless the pedestrian cannot get there without walking in an active roadway.
So you can walk on the shoulder, as long as you don’t cross the street to get to the shoulder. And seemingly, walking in the actual street may be a violation punishable by law.
“That was not the intention of the ordinance,” Canfield told city directors in the July meeting. “That would be at an officer’s discretion.”
Woodall said on Wednesday that both ordinances were unnecessary in the first place and the latest effort were just all out trying to avoid a lawsuit.
So far that ACLU has given no indication of withdrawing their legal challenge.
“It’s just another bad law that would result in selective enforcement and restrictions placed on people if they decided to follow the letter of the law,” said Woodall. “We need less, not more, of these kinds of laws.”
As for “Beth”? She says that until they arrest her and throw her in jail she is going to keep on providing for her family by being on the streets asking people for “donations”.
“God bless you,” Beth says as a woman hands her two dollars as Beth steps up to her car window at an intersection on a busy street then adds the singles to a wad of cash as the woman drives away.
“I didn’t even have to ask her,” said Beth with a smile. “How can it be illegal if people just want to give their money away?”
A back and forth on the issues of panhandling in Fort Smith that started back in February may have been headed off by a vote of the Fort Smith City Board of Directors earlier in the month, with the “revised’ ordinance designed to ward off a pending lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.
But the “new” panhandling ordinance, which some have called “broad sweeping and ambiguous” may just be a stop gap in the efforts of the ACLU which filed a lawsuit on June 29 in response to the move by Fort Smith and Rogers to place restrictions on the street begging.
Inside Fort Smith spoke with a person on Tuesday afternoon set up in a grassy median area next to a major shopping center. The individual had a handmade, cardboard sign that said “Hungry - Please help!” It was the fourth time in two weeks the individual had been spotted, each time at a different location.
After a small donation and the promise of anonymity the individual agreed to an interview. We will call the person “Beth”.
When being told that there was photographic evidence of her being in four different locations in ten days with the same sign and story, “Beth” opened on the condition that we did not publish her picture.
“Look…this I what I do,” said Beth. “I have three kids and no way to support them. My mother watches the kids while I come out and do this three or four days a week. I’m not proud of it. But I do what I can to get by.”
With a mother willing to watch her children, what about the prospects of getting an actual job?
“I can work in fast food and make $300 a week or I can do this for three or four hours a day and make two or three times that much,” said Beth. “I’m really not breaking any laws and no one is forced to give me money. ”
Beth doesn’t consider herself a professional panhandler although she says that is all she had done since mid - 2015. The ACLU lawsuit is the result of a “professional pan handler” challenging the right to be in the public right away, accosting drivers in the vehicles and asking for money.
The wide sweeping reforms set forth by the Fort Smith BOD in February resulted in the challenge in the courts by the ACLU. Fort Smith then tweaked their ordinance in July in an effort to make the problem of panhandling go away in a manner that would be legally justifiable.
The original ordinance from February addressed several issues in an effort to curtail panhandling, including when and where the activities could occur.
The text of the original ordinance was devoted to “making it illegal to panhandle someone who is at a bus stop, in public transportation, in a vehicle on the street, in proximity to a bank entrance, automated teller or a check-cashing business, within 150 feet of a street corner, intersection or highway interchange or on private property without permission; made it illegal to come within three feet of the person solicited, until that person has indicated that he or she wishes to make a donation, block the path of the person solicited along a sidewalk or street, follow a person who walks away from the panhandler, use profane or abusive language while soliciting or after a refusal, panhandle in a group or threaten a solicited person; and made false or misleading solicitation, such as lying about being homeless or having a disability.”
Panhandling activities before sunrise or after sunset would have also been prohibited.
The ACLU filed suit saying that the ordinance infringes on “freedom of speech”.
In the July meeting, city attorney Jerry Canfield presented a “repeal and replace” solution with less restrictive wording but admitted that the new ordinance might not stand up to a Constitutional challenge.
Rogers “fixed” their problem by replacing heir ordinance with one that merely bans walking up to a running car in traffic with exceptions for law enforcement agents, protesters, pedestrians crossing the street, emergency personnel, or individuals who are performing road or utility work.
Fort Smith’s new ordinance was let with some resistance because, as written, it could actually make it against the law for residents to just stroll through their neighborhood by walking in the street.
Melissa Woodall, a Fort Smith resident who addressed the BOD on the matter in July, was one of the one who voiced concerns about people walking in the street
.Canfield replied that there is no prohibition on walking on a shoulder, unless the pedestrian cannot get there without walking in an active roadway.
So you can walk on the shoulder, as long as you don’t cross the street to get to the shoulder. And seemingly, walking in the actual street may be a violation punishable by law.
“That was not the intention of the ordinance,” Canfield told city directors in the July meeting. “That would be at an officer’s discretion.”
Woodall said on Wednesday that both ordinances were unnecessary in the first place and the latest effort were just all out trying to avoid a lawsuit.
So far that ACLU has given no indication of withdrawing their legal challenge.
“It’s just another bad law that would result in selective enforcement and restrictions placed on people if they decided to follow the letter of the law,” said Woodall. “We need less, not more, of these kinds of laws.”
“I don’t have a problem with someone asking for money,” said Woodall. “People can chose not to give.”
As for “Beth”? She says that until they arrest her and throw her in jail she is going to keep on providing for her family by being on the streets asking people for “donations”.
“God bless you,” Beth says as a woman hands her two dollars as Beth steps up to her car window at an intersection on a busy street then adds the singles to a wad of cash as the woman drives away.
“I didn’t even have to ask her,” said Beth with a smile. “How can it be illegal if people just want to give their money away?”
