It seems like every urban area has had a big uptick in panhandlers and complaints about it. Following is an email I recently sent to a citizen who had expressed concerns about the upsurge in panhandling in Covington:
Dear Sean:
Thanks for your note. I don’t know if anyone else has responded to you or not. I have been extremely busy these last few days, hence the delay in responding to you. I appreciate your concerns and share them. Some time back, I brought this up before the Council for discussion and possible legislation. The results of that were primarily to start some public education about not giving money to these folks. I brought it up again recently and the Council agreed to open the discussion again. I did so based on my own observations that the problem has grown and the attempt by a Seattle City Council Member to create an updated law there to address their growing problem. I actually spoke to that Council Member about his legislation.
The problem has been made worse, to some extent, by high unemployment. There are some folks that can’t find jobs that are reduced to begging. These situations are tragic. However, long experience and studies have proven time and time again, that the bulk of panhandlers are drug addicts, alcoholics and a large number, in addition, have severe mental problems. None of these folks can hold a job in any case. Many with extensive mental problems should be institutionalized for their own protection. Unfortunately, the State Legislature in the 1970’s created a “Model Mental Health Act” that freed many thousands of these folks from institutions onto the streets. This was done with the prodding of organizations like the ACLU and others who felt that these folks Constitutional Rights had been preempted. Now, some likely were, but my experience, particularly as a police office in the late 70’s and early 80’s, was that this was a tragic decision. A whole class of individuals that were in a safe environment were now living under bridges and in woods and were in very poor health and were very often victims of crime and needless death. The real reason this occurred was that it was a massive budget cut needed at the time. This was not the right reason to release most of these victims!
Fast forward to today. The rights of panhandlers have received additional support from court decisions in that panhandling is a First Amendment Right of Freedom of Speech. Therefore, we cannot simply ban it as it would be a very serious abridgement of that Constitutional Right. We can, however, strengthen our Ordinances by banning aggressive panhandling, such as Seattle is attempting to do, and create some zones where it cannot occur, such as places where it creates unsafe traffic conditions and near cash machines, for example. These are things that I want to encourage our Council to consider and adopt. As we develop this further, it would be very helpful for citizens such as yourself, to speak at Council meetings about your concerns and support change. It is important that speakers realize that it IS a Constitutional Right and move past that and not blame the Council for it. We cannot change this. We need constructive ideas.
I have seen other cities adopt these laws and have them be effective. I think there are two very important components that we should consider, in addition to enforcement actions. The first is an expanded public campaign to tell people to not give these folks money. Most typically, it goes for drugs and alcohol. Even much of the food given is disposed of as they cannot eat 10 hamburgers a day. Giving money, as almost every person who has ever served in any capacity as a mental health or crisis counselor, homeless shelter advocate or other social service advisor will tell you, is the worst thing that can be done. A much better thing to do is to work with local businesses, such as through the Chamber of Commerce, and set up “script” programs. People, who want to help, purchase “script” or a coupon that has a value only worth food, clothing, personal toiletries, or housing with the sponsoring businesses. These provide the necessities of life without promoting the addiction of the panhandler and actually help the local businesses.
Now, as proof of the fact that most of the panhandlers want cash to support addictive behaviors, a businessman in Seattle actually did purchase similar coupons and handed them out. As last count, almost none of them were ever redeemed. The problem was that there were too many other people handing out cash and were still supporting the problem. In Covington, I think we are a good size to actually address this in a uniform fashion.
This brings me to the second course of action. This would be an expanded public relations effort that would include informative signs in our panhandling areas requesting people to NOT give things to panhandlers, but to direct them to the sources of the “script” to purchase to give out. We could enlist many local organizations to help get the word out and to help direct the effort. What tends to happen is that those who really need the help get it and use it. The addicts tend to move on to another area that doesn’t have such a program. People need to realize that they cannot help everyone. Helping addicts stay in the addiction is simply not right. Helping those who need help and will use it in a safe manner is the right thing to do.
So, I hope my lengthy answer gives you some direction. I trust you can see that my motives are not to “punish” panhandlers. It is to actually create a process to help those that want help. Those that do not, and are more likely to commit criminal acts, will get the message and move away. I need constructive public support to make changes. These things really only work well if it is a grassroots effort where many people come on board to actually carry the water, so to speak. Please get involved and encourage others to get involved. Thanks for your time!
Best Wishes,
You must be logged in to post a comment.