Friday, November 16, 2012

The NewsLeader reported on the BOS vote on the Panhandling issue and once again we have interesting material. Looking at the comments in the NewsLeader comment section it seems many of the locals have seen the same people at the corners from day to day and in fact many of these "Panhandlers" are doing pretty good for themselves.......
 
 
Augusta County panhandling restrictions don't pass
newsleader.com
VERONA — People can panhandling pretty much as they have been in Augusta County after a proposed ordinance to limit aggressive solicitations went begging at the county Board of Supervisors Wednesday night.
The change would have prohibited aggressive solicitations and asking for money in most public places, near banks, ATMs and on private property without permission. Chairman Tracy Pyles Jr. thought the county would have gone against the flow of federal case law by adopting the restrictions. “All over the place, the federal courts are saying, you’re violating the Constitution by doing this,” Pyles said.
Supervisors rejected the proposal by a 3-4 vote, after a 15-minute public hearing. One citizen spoke in favor and two opposed. Supervisors David Beyeler, David Karaffa and Jeffrey Moore voted for the measure.
Supervisor Michael Shull said he couldn’t support the proposal because he was taught that people should be good Samaritans. Beverley Manor Supervisors David Karaffa supported the change for safety. The community provides many resources for those who are down and out, Karaffa said prior to the vote. “There are plenty of ways that our community embraces those who are in need,” he said.
“This is like using a canon to kill a cricket,” one said. People can always just say no. What about the Liberty tax guy in front of the . “He looks pretty aggressive to me,” the resident said. The proposed ordinance would have defined aggressive as touching someone, blocking their free movement, approaching them in a way that appears threatening.
Carwashes couldn’t have signs too close to the streets, but it wouldn’t have affect things like bake sales, which wouldn’t ask for funds in an aggressive manner, Morgan said

4 comments:

  1. The four voting against this should spend their weekends cleaning up the huge amount of trash these folks leave at the intersections they work. This wasnt about decency, it was about combating blatant fraud and illegal activities being masked by "needing help".

    Especially with the two females that often stand at the 250/81 area different days of the week. They can be seen getting into different vehicles throughout the day only to be brought back within the hour.

    Or the guy whos wife/girlfriend drops him off in the morning then fills up the Escalade at Sheets before going on her merry way until later that afternoon when she returns to pick him up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The issue I see is that it encourages some to continue this practice instead of getting the help they need to become a contribution to society. Just like extending unemployment benefits to 99 weeks you really are not helping that person but extending the time before they have to find work. Studies say those who run out will usually find a job within 2 weeks when they have to. Also consider what this makes our area look like to visitors to the county let alone the safety issue....

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Board could pass an ordinance to require a panhandling license for anyone begging more then "X" amount of days in a calendar year and then collect a set amount of "tax" for each day spent begging over that set amount. This would allow for those just passing through to beg in peace while putting the clamp down on those who want to make it a career.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I doubt very highly that they would claim all of their income but this would be a good way to discourage this activity. If they really do need help it is available at food banks, social services, and area churches. Let's help those who need it but let's not excuse laziness or the easy way out while the rest of us pay.....

    ReplyDelete