> City delays decision on zones for begging
>
> By Gwyneth K. Shaw
> of The Sentinel Staff
> Published in The Orlando Sentinel on July 18, 2000
>
> Saying they needed more time to consider it, Orlando City Council members
> Monday
> stepped back from a hotly contested proposal to control panhandlers downtown.
>
> After nearly three hours of debate, council members said too many
> unanswered questions remain about the idea, which would restrict
> panhandling and other types of solicitation to small "exempt zones"downtown.
>
> The idea was equally contentious last week, when the council unanimously
> approved the proposal. But as questions mounted Monday, members were
> reluctant to make the decision final.
>
> "I don`t think we as a council have been given other choices to look at,"
> council member Don Ammerman said. "To come at this with a [vote] the second
> time we`ve heard this, I don`t think it`s a thorough approach. I think
> we`re rushing into something that has major implications."
>
> The council decided it would reconsider the plan Aug. 21. In the meantime,
> officials will meet with residents and business owners in the Thornton Park
> area, which may or may not be in the no-solicitation zone. Another public
> hearing will be before the Downtown Development Board later this month.
>
> Complaints about the proposal ranged from simple confusion about where
> panhandlers will be allowed to protests from beggars, who said the law
> would discriminate and masks the real problem.
>
> "The one thing that has not been addressed is the root problem at the core
> of this: homelessness," said James Wade, who has regularly panhandled at
> Church Street and Garland Avenue for the past year. "If the homelessness
> problem were addressed, you wouldn`t need this law."
>
> Others worried about the difficulty of enforcing a law that forces beggars,
> those handing out fliers and people raising money for charity into a small
> number of zones, some as small as 3 feet by 15 feet.
>
> If Orlando police can`t deal with aggressive panhandlers now, some asked,
> how can they be expected to patrol the zones, which are strewn across
> downtown and the area around TD Waterhouse Centre, West Church Street and
> Lake Eola?
>
> Whether the issues can be solved by the city in the next month remains to
> be seen. But Orlando Mayor Glenda Hood was firm on one thing: The council
> will take a vote.
>
> "I just want to assure everybody that we are going to address the issue,"
> she said. "This is not something that we are going to give up on. We`re not
> going to come back here and say, `It`s too complicated.`"
>
> Hood brought up the issue only a month ago as part of a multifaceted
> approach to complaints from downtown business owners. The council did
> approve Monday another part of that plan: a six-month moratorium on new
> body-piercing salons and tattoo parlors. The decision was made over loud
> protests from shop owners, who fear the temporary ban is the first step
> toward driving them out of business.
>
> The panhandling issue is at the top of the list for most downtown business
> owners. They say a handful of aggressive beggars are creating an atmosphere
> of fear that will make it hard to realize a revived, upscale downtown that
> Hood and others dream about.
>
> But many at Monday`s meeting worried that the proposed law would create
> bigger problems.
>
> "Do you really want to have the homeless and mentally ill in groups
> downtown, with 29 different zones?" asked landlord David van Gelder, who
> also decried the lack of opportunity for public comment, particularly
> because all the hearings have been during business hours.
>
> "How are we as the public supposed to comment on something that hasn`t even
> been finalized?" he asked.
>
> The loudest cries -- and much of the confusion -- came from people who live
> and own businesses on East Washington Street, where property values and
> commercial opportunities are booming. Exasperated, they wondered whether
> opting out of the no-panhandling zone would result in beggars from Orange
> and Magnolia Avenues working their way to Thornton Park`s outdoor cafes.
>
> "This [exempt zone] situation is bad for all of downtown. You`re creating a
> bad law," said Carol Madison Sheaffer, who represented a number of business
> owners. "'We`re damned if we support this; we`re damned if we want to be
> X`d out."
>
> The council unanimously agreed to put off the decision. Despite some
> members` misgivings about some of the law`s points, the fundamental points
> seem unlikely to change.
>
> "I don`t think any of us can sit here and say this is the end-all, be-all,"
> Hood said. "What we do know is we have to do something."
>
> Posted Jul 17 2000 10:50PM
>
> __________________________________
>
> Orlando image is put to a vote
>
> By Gwyneth K. Shaw
> of The Sentinel Staff
>
> Published in The Orlando Sentinel on July 17, 2000
>
> "The Orlando government tends to pander to the business interests.
> And that means that things that would tend to put off the
> revenue-producing visitors to downtown are things we don`t want to
> see."
>
> --Alan Lunin, American Civil Liberties Union
>
> The talk these days at Orlando City Hall is about beggars and tattoos,
> but the overall target is much bigger.
>
> If the City Council votes as expected today, panhandlers and body-art
> shops will be the latest facet of downtown life to come under city
> regulation. They are the current focus in the effort to push out
> "unsavory" elements and clear the way for the blossoming of an upscale
> downtown area that will attract shoppers, diners and new residents.
>
> Along the way, Orlando has banned kids younger than 18 from being
> downtown after midnight, turned out the lights on all-night rave parties
> and even proposed mounting video cameras on street corners to keep an
> electronic eye on what`s going on.
>
> City officials and business owners say all the decisions are based on the
> need to make people feel safe downtown.
>
> But critics say the policies are more about psychological comfort than
> actual safety.
>
> "The Orlando government tends to pander to the business interests. And
> that means that things that would tend to put off the revenue-producing
> visitors to downtown are things we don`t want to see," said Alan Lunin,
> head of the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, who
> said it`s something of a national trend.
>
> "There`s a lot less of a willingness to allow people to, for lack of a better
> term, do your own thing," he said. "We now don`t want people to do
> their own thing when it makes the rest of us uncomfortable."
>
> The city wants to replace its 3-year-old practice of compelling
> panhandlers to register at the Orlando police station by making the
> downtown area a solicitation-free area. Beggars and others asking for
> money, as well as those handing out fliers for bars or events, would have
> to go elsewhere -- they would be restricted to a series of "exempt
> zones," scattered throughout the entertainment district.
>
> City workers began marking the zones -- which will be voted on today
> by the council -- with blue tape late last week. Most are small and are in
> front of government buildings or blank walls, to keep beggars away
> from storefronts or picture windows.
>
> Orlando is far from unique in its desire to keep a lid on its homeless
> population. But just as with the registration requirement, the exempt
> zones are an untested experiment, said Michael Stoops, civil rights
> coordinator for the National Coalition for the Homeless in Washington,
> D.C. And just like the 1997 law, this one probably won`t work, he said.
>
> "To me, I think really what they`re trying to do, and they would admit if
> they were honest, is they want to get anybody who looks like they`re
> homeless out of the downtown area, to keep them on the Orange
> Blossom Trail," Stoops said. "That`s their motivation. To me, it would
> be more important if they were really serious about addressing
> homelessness. I`ve never gotten the sense in Orlando that there`s ever
> been any kind of outreach to those not in the shelters."
>
> The proposed six-month moratorium on new body-piercing salons and
> tattoo parlors -- which will be effective citywide -- drew vehement
> opposition at last week`s meeting from body artists and shop owners.
> They accused council members of trying to run them out simply
> because they find piercing and tattooing in bad taste, and argued that the
> market will phase out the shops if downtown succeeds in its efforts to
> reinvent itself as an upscale area.
>
> Council members replied that they want the six-month moratorium only
> to look at the reasons why body-art salons have become more prevalent
> downtown, and emphasized that they`re not trying to stifle existing
> businesses. Six shops are in the downtown district.
>
> Craig Ustler, a developer who is president of the Downtown Orlando
> Foundation, an association of younger professionals focused on
> downtown`s future, said the city has to help push the market in that
> direction. Just as the city offered economic incentives to those willing to
> build apartments downtown, he said, officials need to cultivate
> businesses that cater to those new residents.
>
> "I think if you leave everything up to the market, it`s almost like you ask
> yourself why are bars not allowed next door to churches?" Ustler said.
> "There comes a reasonable time when government has to intervene . . . If
> a customer is telling a restaurant that something`s bad, you take it off the
> menu."
>
> Hotel developer Skip Dalton agrees, saying the success of residential
> development downtown hinges on such intervention. Dalton is building
> an Embassy Suites that`s scheduled to open this fall.
>
> "I think you`ve got to make people feel basically safe in their
> surroundings and in order to be safe in their surroundings, I think
> government has a responsibility to let people know, we have presence
> here," Dalton said. "In order to be safe in their surroundings, they have
> to think, now I`m going to be free from unwarranted, unrelenting
> harassment. I think it`s a step in the right direction to see if we can`t
> strike a balance between and urban environment and a feeling of
> security."
>
> Stoops, however, said any sense of safety created by the penning of
> street beggars is, at best, a false sense.
>
> "A lot of people don`t know what to do or think when they are
> approached by a homeless person," he said. "Again, it`s that comfort
> level: People feel guilty; they feel embarrassed; they feel afraid. But it`s
> a good reminder that not everybody is doing well.
>
> "Panhandlers are a constant reminder that for some people, life is not so
> good."
>
> Posted Jul 16 2000 10:40PM
>
> Downtown crackdown
>
> Orlando's efforts to regulate panhandlers and body
> artists aren`t the city`s first stab at keeping things in
> line downtown. They`re just the latest in a crusade to
> make downtown more upscale -- and less about
> partying.
>
> Among the highlights:
>
> Party`s over: In 1995, the city enacts a downtown
> curfew, forcing those younger than 18 to go home at midnight.
>
> Last call: In an effort to curb all-night rave parties,
> in 1997 the city decides clubs must close at 3 a.m.
> Officials saw the parties -- which gained Orlando an
> international reputation for DJs -- as a potential danger
> because of drug use.
>
> Say cheese: In another controversial move, later in
> 1997 the city decides panhandlers are required to
> obtain a license -- complete with a photo -- from the city or face a fine.
>
> We`re watching: The city announced in 1999 that it
> hopes to install video cameras downtown to keep
> tabs on the streets, working on the theory that the
> "extra eyes" will help thwart or deter crime. The city has
> applied for a federal grant, but the cameras have not
> yet been put in place.
>
> Sit and stay: Scrapping the panhandling-license
> idea, the City Council moved last week to make
> downtown a "solicitation-free area,"
> allowing panhandlers to work only in small exempt
> zones. A final vote is scheduled for today.
>
> Tattoo taboo: Saying body-piercing salons and
> tattoo parlors have become too numerous, the City
> Council voted last week to ban new shops for at least
> six months while they consider whether to
> change the city`s policies. A final vote is also
> expected today.
>
> __________________________________________
>
> Don't like it? Push it aside
> mailto:dhinton at orlandoweekly.com
>
> William Dean Hinton
>
> Published 7/12/00
>
> Fresh off her June 1 swearing-in, Mayor Glenda Hood was ready to set the
> tone for her third term in office. Addressing the City Council from the
> floor of the council chambers at the June 12 meeting, she announced the
> city had "image issues" she wanted the council to begin tackling.
>
> Among the complaints brought forth by "business folk" and downtown church
> congregations was "the solicitation issue," she said. Nightclub employees
> were handing out unwanted fliers to downtown visitors, who dropped them on
> the ground, and panhandlers were bothering tourists for spare change.
>
> Then there was the "proliferation" of tattoo shops -- six of them downtown,
> and 30 throughout the city, somehow holding back Orlando's emergence as the
> "Class A" city many civic leaders think it should be. At the very least,
> she said, no upscale restaurants or retail would want to locate downtown
> with tattoo parlors as their neighbor.
>
> Her solution: Push panhandlers out by imposing a no-solicitation zone that
> would restrict beggars and leafleters to demarcated areas outside of
> downtown. Furthermore, she wanted to stop the spread of tattoo shops by
> imposing a six-month moratorium on their approval, during which the city
> could study whether the shops were concentrated too closely together or had
> "negative health effects" on residents.
>
> This week a unanimous City Council agreed, giving tentative approval to
> both measures. (Neither would take effect until after a second vote,
> scheduled for Monday, July 17.)
>
> Civil libertarians accused the city of taking easy target practice.
> "Panhandlers aren't taxpayers, and they aren't voters," says Alan Lunin,
> chairman of the Central Florida chapter of the ACLU. Indeed, the first
> council member to vote against this kind of measure, he says, would risked
> being ousted at the next election. "It [would] be an issue, and they'd
> probably lose," he says.
>
> Still, he conceded, there's legal precedent for a municipality to limit the
> number of tattoo parlors and curtail the free-speech activities of poor
> people.
>
> The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld decisions to place zones around abortion
> clinics so patients won't be hassled. And cities already create zones that
> direct placement of strip clubs and liquor stores. In addition, the courts
> could prove to be the city's ally, should a challenge be brought forth; the
> federal judicial system in Central Florida, as well as the 11th Circuit
> Court of Appeals that governs Florida and three other Southern states, is
> notoriously conservative. "It's not like the 9th Circuit Court in
> California," Lunin says. "That left-wing court wouldn't stand for this
> crap."
>
> But Howard Marks, a Winter Park civil-rights attorney, says the city still
> could have a tough time defending its eventual position. The Supreme Court,
> he says, has taken a negative view of restricting "content-based" speech
> such as regulating no-solicitation zones. The problem, he says, is that
> "the government starts differentiating between the content of people's
> speech." For example, "It's OK to be on the street for religious or
> political reasons -- they don't worry about that." But not if you're only
> asking for money.
>
> Marks is concerned that people appear to be overlooking the council's harsh
> treatment of human rights. Being faced with panhandlers, he says, "is the
> price we pay for being in a country that has a First Amendment. ... It's
> the price we pay for living in a democracy."
>
> "I promise we'll look at [the issues]," Lunin says. "The question is
> whether we'll take action."
>
> The constitutionality of the measures was barely mentioned in the council
> chambers. District 6 Commissioner Ernest Page came the closest when he
> said: "I agree with the efforts to clean up downtown. I just want some
> clarification here. Now, to what extent is this [tattoo-parlor
> proliferation] a problem downtown? How many of these business
> establishments do we have? I see we have some businessmen here. Would
> somebody address exactly how we are viewing them as affecting the public
> safety?"
>
> Council members failed to address the rights of businesses to operate even
> when confronted by a number of tattoo artists at the council's Monday
> meeting who wanted to know why council members felt they were at liberty to
> infringe upon the artists.
>
> Those artists didn't understand or agree with the city's position -- not
> even when they were assured the moratorium would guarantee less competition
> for clients. Perhaps that's because they'd already encountered an
> anti-tattoo atmosphere at City Hall. "I find them personally in bad taste,"
> District 5 Commissioner Daisy Lynum said at a council meeting last month.
> "You can't even go [downtown] and get a beer without walking into all the
> little kids with their bodies all covered with what I call self-injurious
> behaviors."
>
> Denise Sage, part owner of Inkredible Ink, told the council during its most
> recent debate: "What this is about is the right to free enterprise. I like
> tattoos. You do not, and that's your right. Just don't let your personal
> opinion impugn on what the right to free enterprise stands for -- that we,
> as Americans, are allowed to own a business."
>
> Council members responded that the city's position wasn't personal. The
> council was trying to bring the city's "nighttime vitality to daytime
> hours," said newly elected Commissioner Vicki Vargo.
>
> After the vote against them, artists felt patronized. "We presented our
> side only because we were allowed to," said Lance Norris, owner of Art
> Attack, another tattoo shop. The council had already decided the direction
> it wanted to take, he said.
>
> Debate over the no-solicitation zone, which city attorney Scott Gabrielson
> said appears to be unprecedented in America, was even more one-sided. No
> council member was willing to placate speakers opposed to the zone. That's
> because there weren't any.
>
> Most of the debate centered on where the exceptions to the zones -- the
> 3-feet by 15-feet areas where people would legally be allowed to beg or
> distribute fliers -- might be located. Residents and downtown businesses
> didn't want any exceptions to the ban; at least one speaker referred to the
> homeless as an "infestation of transients."
>
> In corralling them, however, the city did offer panhandlers small
> consolation; the photo ID permits they currently are required to wear would
> be eliminated if the new zones are put into place.