Kansas City and Street Performers. Take II
 After the recent dust up over the panhandling ordinance, a friend of mine forwarded an email he received from a City Councilman's legislative assistant. My friend had suggested that there are many successful ordinances out there that restrict aggressive panhandling and leave the street performers alone. The legislative assistant had responded asking him to "send these ordinances" and they would "take a look at them." "Do they not have Google at City Hall?" was his question to me.I've seen quotes in the newspaper and heard sound bites regarding Kansas City's ordinance. "We have to worry about constitutionality." "We have to word this very carefully to make sure it accomplishes what we want." I guess I'm part of that lazy MTV/Internet/Gen X bunch that's always looking for the easy way. As I've asked so many times on this blog, why reinvent the wheel? Surely there has to be at least one US city (Chicago) that has already dealt with this and come up with an ordinance (Indianapolis) that has withstood challenges based on 1st Amendment rights? Some quick Google searches and "model panhandling ordinance" brought me to the Center for the Community Interest website. There I found, of all things, a model panhandling ordinance! Now I don't know a lot about the CCI and I'm wary of anything I read on the internet, but if I can find something like this in a few seconds, it begs the question. Maybe they don't have Google at City Hall? That's something I intend to remedy if elected! |
posted by Mark at 9:45 AM
Comments on "Kansas City and Street Performers. Take II"
-
Stacey K said ... (12:07 PM) :
-
the wife said ... (2:28 PM) :
-
Michelled said ... (10:28 AM) :
post a commentI do think they worded it very carefully to accomplish exactly what they want. A big outdoor mall that's just the same as most indoor malls. They (the management group who drafted this) want to retain as much control over who does what at their mall, treating it as private property. As you pointed out, there are alternative methods dealing with the problems that have worked in other cities. Why Google, when they already know what they want?
I agree with stacey k - too often our elected officials are simply puppets for the people who financed their campaigns. Why are citizens so unwilling to "follow the money" since it's about the most accurate test of who's interest a candidate will represent.
For me, everything comes back to BSL (breed specific legislation)...this panhandling law situation is exactly the same and seems to be the status quo with everything these these days. Like Stacey said, they're doing what they want to do, not what's right/effective/fair. As with BSL, it only takes an hour of googling to find out the truth.
I also agree with Mark, one of the pluses to being behind the times is that you can just copy what successful cities have already done.
I'm probably in the minority that I don't see panhandleing to even be a problem in this city - well, at least in public areas. I live in mid-town and get folks stopping by my house. My poor neighbor lived between Section 8 housing and a liquor store and would get several people A DAY in the warmer weather - yeah, they moved. I somehow doubt the anti-panhandling law will get enforced with as much zeal in mid-town as it does on the Plaza.