{"id":1117352,"date":"2023-08-26T04:05:29","date_gmt":"2023-08-26T08:05:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/uncategorized\/panhandling-ordinance-amendments-pass-first-council-vote-mountain-xpress\/"},"modified":"2023-08-26T04:05:29","modified_gmt":"2023-08-26T08:05:29","slug":"panhandling-ordinance-amendments-pass-first-council-vote-mountain-xpress","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/second-amendment\/panhandling-ordinance-amendments-pass-first-council-vote-mountain-xpress\/","title":{"rendered":"Panhandling ordinance amendments pass first Council vote &#8211; Mountain Xpress"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    City Council approved two technical amendments to Ashevilles    panhandling ordinance at its Aug. 22 meeting. The first    amendment added new language specifying that solicitors must be    at least 8 feet away from transit stops (such as bus stops or    busy medians) as well as individuals who have made a negative    response to their solicitation attempts. The second amendment    provided an exception to the existing ordinance that exempts    persons who are soliciting from family members and mutual    acquaintances.  <\/p>\n<p>    The vote was the first reading of the proposed change, drawing    26 speakers, which entailed two hours of public comment. It    passed 6-1, with Council member Kim Roney as the single    opposing vote.  <\/p>\n<p>    City Attorney Brad Branham said the technical amendments    were needed to remain compliant with existing federal laws and    were not intended to expand any existing regulations or    penalties.  <\/p>\n<p>    I feel really strongly that the 8-foot addition is an    expansion of the language that was not existing in the    ordinance before, Roney said in response to Branham.    Expanding this ordinance not only distracts from the very    important work we need to do to address the issue [of]    homelessness, but it still doesnt meet the issue and instead    creates new problems.  <\/p>\n<p>    That sentiment was echoed throughout public comment.    Asheville-based lawyer and activistBen    Scalesargued that the technical amendments expanded    the ordinance and created issues concerning its enforceability.  <\/p>\n<p>    These changes are more than just technical amendments, and    they will increase the burden on our already understaffed,    underpaid and definitely underappreciated police force, Scales    said. The 8-foot rule would not be admissible in court. There    will always be reasonable doubt as to whether a violation is    actually 8 feet.  <\/p>\n<p>    Several community members also expressed concern over the new    rules concerning family and mutual acquaintances, noting    potential ambiguities.  <\/p>\n<p>    Poverty breeds desperation, and the proposal in front of you    addresses the symptoms, not the cause, said public commenter    Eleanor Richards. To me, every poor person in this town    and elsewhere is a part of my family, so if I were to be    arrested for giving food or money to a homeless person, you    would be in violation of your own ordinance.  <\/p>\n<p>    While the majority of the speakers opposed the ordinance    changes, several speakers supported it, including members of    the Asheville Coalition for Public Safety.  <\/p>\n<p>    Sheila Surrett, a member of the organization, brought a    slideshow featuring images of homeless people downtown, sitting    on sidewalks, standing on medians and speaking with customers    at outdoor restaurants. Surrett asserted that panhandling has    torn up our tourism. She also stated that police officers    should be paid more to address the issues caused by some of the    homeless population.  <\/p>\n<p>    The citys panhandling laws were previously discussed during a    July 25, Environment and Safety Committee meeting. Council    members Maggie Ullman, Sandra Kilgore and    Sheneika Smith are part of the six-member committee. At    the meeting, members proposed additional, more substantive    amendments, including regulations around drivers giving money    and other resources to panhandlers.  <\/p>\n<p>    The additional amendments are still being discussed and will be    considered again by the committee on Tuesday, Sept. 26. City    Council is expected to address these additions during its    Tuesday, Oct. 10, meeting. Ullman said while its clear people    are divided on how to address the ordinance, they all agreed    that we need to band together to address root causes.  <\/p>\n<p>    She also requested that the proposal to restrict a drivers    ability to give to a panhandler be taken off the table.  <\/p>\n<p>    What Im deeply understanding through lots of conversations is    that charity is intensely personal and spiritual and religious    for many, Ullman said. And I dont see that the government    intervening in that individuals choice of charity is in our    best interest. I think it will harm more than help.  <\/p>\n<p>    Read the revised ordinance at avl.mx\/prxk.  <\/p>\n<p>    Council also received an update on the Complete Streets policy,    a long-term capital improvement project set to connect existing    bike lanes and greenways in the downtown area. As a part of the    proposed project, existing parking on main thoroughfares such    as Patton and Biltmore avenues would be removed to create space    for the new bike lanes.  <\/p>\n<p>    Jessica Morris, assistant director of transportation,    noted that this project was supported by the 2009 Downtown    Master Plan and the Complete Streets policy, passed in 2012.    While numerous public hearings on the topic have been held this    year, Smith noted that several community members personally    expressed concern over the proposal to remove parking spaces on    main roads.  <\/p>\n<p>    Even though we are not losing any handicapped lanes or spaces,    the loss of any parking could be a potential issue for those    who may be less mobile, Smith said. If we get rid of parking,    it would effectively exclude certain members of the community    from the area.  <\/p>\n<p>    Kilgore echoed this sentiment, noting that it would also    negatively affect businesses. A lot of people dont go    downtown because they say that there is no parking, Kilgore    said. How come we cant get a plan where these bicycle paths    connect on outer streets? What is the difference between me    parking in the parking garage and having to walk a couple of    blocks to get where I need to go and bikers using side streets    and parking there, and then just walking the same way we do?  <\/p>\n<p>    Ullman disagreed, noting the additional physical strain that    bikers face. As a daily bike commuter who is using my body,    physically its hard, Ullman said. If we want people to be    using these healthier options of mobility, ease of use and    connectivity are important.  <\/p>\n<p>    Given the standing disagreements, Council determined that a    work session would be needed before a vote is taken. While no    date has been set, it is expected to be discussed before the    next Council meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 12.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>View post:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/mountainx.com\/news\/panhandling-ordinance-amendments-pass-first-council-vote\/\" title=\"Panhandling ordinance amendments pass first Council vote - Mountain Xpress\" rel=\"noopener\">Panhandling ordinance amendments pass first Council vote - Mountain Xpress<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> City Council approved two technical amendments to Ashevilles panhandling ordinance at its Aug. 22 meeting.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/second-amendment\/panhandling-ordinance-amendments-pass-first-council-vote-mountain-xpress\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[193621],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1117352","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-second-amendment"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1117352"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1117352"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1117352\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1117352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1117352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1117352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}