ACLU urges Battle Creek to drop panhandling proposals
The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan on Monday sent a letter to Battle Creek administration and commissioners urging them to not move forward with potential proposals to regulate panhandling that "would not survive constitutional scrutiny."
"We write to express our concerns about the proposal to adopt an anti-begging ordinance in the city of Battle Creek," the letter said. "The proposed ordinance will violate the constitutional rights of people who are struggling to survive, will criminalize a great deal of speech other than panhandling, and will send a message that poor people are unwelcome in Battle Creek."
Downtown ban, citywide rules proposed for panhandling
The group's letter comes as city commissioners hold public discussions on panhandling, with a second workshop scheduled at 6 p.m. Tuesday at the Department of Public Works building, 150 S. Kendall St. Last week the commission heard from Deputy City Attorney Sunny Sahu, who presented an outline of possible regulation such as banning unlicensed financial solicitations at the downtown business district's public areas and creating loitering and aggressive begging laws throughout the city.
Possible rules to tackle panhandling have previously been discussed by city officials, but court rulings have found that bans on peaceful begging are unconstitutional.
In its letter, the ACLU cited several court cases that it said protects begging in public places and prohibits the city from restricting solicitation "because it makes some uncomfortable." The group also said any such ordinance would restrict non-panhandling speech, too.
"For example, if Battle Creek prohibits panhandler from requesting funds in the downtown area, then politicians and fundraisers similarly could not ask donors for money while in the restricted area," the letter said.
Instead, the ACLU said the city should enforce existing laws to address "the conduct underlying anti-panhandling concerns."
"We must ask ourselves if we want to live in a society where a fellow human being's plea for food or change is so repulsive and offensive that we are willing to throw them in jail, charge them exorbitant fines that we know they cannot afford, and prosecute them for the crime of being poor — all of which only make it harder for the person to seek sustainable employment and housing," the letter said.
"Whatever discomfort Battle Creek residents may feel when they are forced to witness poverty is inconsequential when measured against the brutal discomfort that our fellow citizens experience when they are forced to beg for every necessity and comfort that we take for granted."
Story continues below
The ACLU has challenged municipalities across the country on their begging bans. Earlier this month, the group's Missouri chapter filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Belton over its ordinance, and in October it won a challenge to panhandling rules in Grand Junction, Colo.
An aggressive panhandling proposal being considered by Michigan lawmakers also is opposed by ACLU.
Battle Creek City Attorney Jill Steele on Monday said her office is familiar with the cases that were cited by ACLU in its letter. Some have not been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, she said, which has jurisdiction over Michigan.
"We believe that we have addressed the concerns in the framework of what we have together," she said. "Although, at this point we have these concepts and kind of some plans, but it's really dependent on what we hear from the public at the workshop. We need to be sure that we're hearing just what problems are being encountered and how we might be able to address those."
You can read the full letter from the ACLU here:
Contact Jennifer Bowman at 269-966-0589 or jbowman@battlecreekenquirer.com. Follow her on Twitter: @jenn_bowman