Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017 07-10 CCM Work Session07/10/17 -1- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/EDA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION JULY 10, 2017 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Tim Willson at 7:44 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers/Commissioners Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Police Chief Tim Gannon, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. DISCUSSION OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER BRANDING & IDENTITY CAMPAIGN This item was discussed at the July 10, 2017 Study Session. PANHANDLING REGULATIONS City Attorney Troy Gilchrist introduced the item and provided a brief history of legal issues relating to regulating panhandling. He noted there have been a lot of attempts to regulate panhandling, which is addressed in the handouts provided to the City Council/EDA for review. Attorney Gilchrist stated, unfortunately, he does not have any concrete answers at this point. He stated if the City Council/EDA wants to move forward, he would suggest they identify the concerns and then provide direction and he will work to address those specific issues. Attorney Gilchrist noted there is a long history of attempts to regulate activities related to soliciting, vagrancy, and panhandling and while there is not a uniform view amongst the courts, they have been afforded First Amendment protection, which raises the board in how they can be regulated. He stated some suits have been upheld by the Court to protect the public against crime without unnecessarily interfering with First Amendment freedoms. In addition, other challenges have been brought forward including equal protection, due process, and the language being over vague. Attorney Gilchrist advised that when a regulation impacts a constitutionally protected right, that regulation is subject to stricter scrutiny than other regulations depending on whether it is a 07/10/17 -2- content-based or content-neutral regulation. If content based, it will not be upheld unless it serves a compelling State interest that cannot be achieved by any less restrictive measure. Because of that, regulations subject to strict scrutiny are not upheld. He explained that prior to 2015, a regulation that considered content could be considered content-neutral if the government’s purpose was not based on disagreement with the message it conveyed. Mr. Boganey asked if prior to the Reed vs. Town of Gilbert decision, jurisdictions were able to treat some signage differently than other signs. Attorney Gilchrist stated that is correct and in the Reed vs. Town of Gilbert case, the court rejected the previous view of testing content- neutrality and held the ordinance, which varied its regulations based on what was printed on the sign, was on its face content-based and did not survive strict scrutiny. Attorney Gilchrist discussed the implications of the Reed vs. Town of Gilbert decision on other legal cases that were considered based on the Reed vs. Town of Gilbert decision. Attorney Gilchrist presented points to consider, noting if a regulation depends on or differentiates based on what is being communicated, it will likely be deemed a content-based regulation subject to strict scrutiny. The City would have greater latitude regulating the time, place, or manner of commercial speech and the focus should be on conduct versus communications. Another thing to consider is the practical issues regarding enforcement. Attorney Gilchrist reviewed the definition of loitering and stated he does not see that as a good mechanism in this case. With regard to applying vagrancy regulations, which focuses on persons with no visible means of support and live idly without employment, it is not a crime to be poor or a punishable offense. Attorney Gilchrist concluded that the City can apply licensing regulations but it must be content-neutral. Mr. Boganey stated an issue in other cities with licensing solicitors is that it precludes soliciting in a public right-of-way, a corner, or median. That is the kind of regulation that makes it impossible for a person to solicit money in a public place, which is prohibited in some ordinances. Attorney Gilchrist stated that would be challenged under the current regulatory scheme but if you look at it more broadly, Minnesota Statute 169.22 says no person shall stand on the roadway to solicit. Police Chief Tim Gannon stated the City already enforces that statute but narrowly defines “roadway” and the median does not qualify. Attorney Gilchrist stated that is a legitimate approach to this. Attorney Gilchrist addressed prohibition of aggressive panhandling and suggested the regulation be based on the conduct, not on what is being communicated. However, the City would need to assure the regulation is not overly broad or vague. Attorney Gilchrist stated another option is to post signage discouraging the activity. He advised that with offering jobs or alternatives to panhandling, the City would have to identify resources and partner with outside groups that can provide such assistance and ensure any expenditure of public funds for this purpose is authorized. Mayor/President Willson stated at the US Conference of Mayors, he learned about a Bloomington, Indiana, ordinance that is not content based and indicates any t ype of solicitation 07/10/17 -3- requires maintaining a three-foot distance (not intimidating). In that ordinance, soliciting is not allowed in the median for safety reasons and registering in the city is required. Mayor/President Willson stated that ordinance appears to be something to be looked at as it addresses solicitation and does not discriminate. He stated it is in that city’s municipal code but he does not know if it has been challenged or is being enforced. Mayor/President Willson encouraged Attorney Gilchrist to review that ordinance to determine whether it can be applicable in Brooklyn Center. He felt the regulation had to be more neutral and across-the-board and not solely address panhandling. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated Reed vs. Town of Gilbert is notable in that it clarified the content-based regulation as protected speech and therefore subject to scrutiny so almost everything written could be attacked on that basis. He stated he is also concerned with panhandling and the impact on the City’s image, noting St. Louis Park residents are asking why it is being allowed with a focus on their particular city. But, they are on the corner soliciting because people are giving them money. Mr. Boganey stated this presentation establishes the issues from a legal perspective. Now he would like to address the City Council’s/EDA’s perspective about panhandling, alternatives, and identify potential actions. Mayor/President Willson stated he wants the content to not include solicitation by panhandlers but to only address solicitation within the City to assure the courts are satisfied. Attorney Gilchrist stated the Mayor/President makes a good point but the conversation about concerns with solicitation can go forward as well as possible concerns, such as public safety and fraud. Mayor/President Willson noted that during some solicitation in the City, such as cleanup of tree limbs or roof damage following a storm, the solicitor backs off from the resident’s front door and maintains a distance. He noted if a solicitation occurs down a line of traffic, it can be within the three-foot distance, which some found to be intimidating as well as not safe. Mayor/President Willson asked Attorney Gilchrist to check on the status of the Bloomington, Indiana, solicitation ordinance to determine whether it has been enforced and/or challenged. Mr. Boganey presented an outline of questions relating to solicitation to provide clarity and gain consensus of the City Council/EDA. He asked what the City Council/EDA sees as the most important concern related to solicitation. Mayor/President Willson stated there is an image issue, noting solicitors within the City require registration to be sure they are bonded and insured. He found safety is an issue when soliciting within a public right-of-way as one individual was hit by a vehicle. He clarified the needs of panhandlers is not part of this discussion, though the need for affordable housing and food are recognized. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated the only reason she was interested in discussing this is pushback from the community and the person who was hit on Bass Lake Road. Otherwise, she does not see it as a significant issue, noting it is not singular to Brooklyn Center. She stated with this information, she feels it is not the best use of the City Council/EDA or 07/10/17 -4- leadership’s time. She stated if there is nothing against putting up some signs, she would not object to doing that. With regard to soliciting regulations, she is not confident it won’t end up being somewhat discriminatory (i.e., girl scouts, lemonade stands). Councilmember/ Commissioner Graves stated she does not want to over regulate due to one issue. Mayor/President Willson stated over the years, the City has seen where aggressive solicitation has occurred at gas stations so the City had to increase police patrols to address that concern. He stated he is fine if the City Council/EDA does not want to move forward with solicitation regulations but there have been resident comments expressing concern about solicitation. Councilmember/Commissioner Butler stated this is an issue for her because she lives near Brooklyn Boulevard and feels like she may hit someone when they are on the median. She stated she is less concerned about the City’s image as she sees solicitors everywhere, not just in Brooklyn Center. She stated it is an issue when shopping because sometimes shoppers are approached in the parking lot. In that case, she refers them to CEAP. Councilmember/ Commissioner Butler stated another issue is protecting businesses so customers do not go elsewhere to avoid solicitation in the parking lot. Mayor/President Willson stated those are good points and noted he has seen soliciting in many other cities and states so it appears a good solution has not been found. He stated Michigan put a program in place to offer a day job at $10 an hour but the solicitors said they could make more than that by soliciting for one hour. Mayor/President Willson stated another component is education that if residents don’t want to see this activity in Brooklyn Center, they should contribute their funds to an organization such as CEAP. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated she sees the positive in requiring licensing but also the negative and thinks the bigger components are with public education, safety, and image. She stated she opts for getting County and State approval for signage to educate people. Mr. Boganey stated the solicitation ordinance does serve a purpose but it is a different purpose as they are trying to sell you something or buy something. Folks soliciting by standing on the corner with a sign is different. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated he appreciates his colleague’s comments and clarification offered by Mr. Boganey that a solicitor license regulates people buying or selling an item. He felt it was a mistake to use soliciting as a backdoor means to regulate panhandling. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan noted the Police Department applies the State Statute by narrowly defining ‘roadway’ to avoid legal difficulties. He stated he is concerned with the City’s image and the safety issue with a broader domain of individuals that are distressed or have mental health issues and find this is a way to make money. He agreed with the observations of Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson about the need for public education. He found this is not the most significant issue but a mid-range issue as it impacts image. Mr. Boganey asked how significant of an issue is solicitation. It was noted that the City Council/EDA found it to be a significant issue. 07/10/17 -5- Mr. Boganey asked what should the policy objectives be regarding this type of solicitation, whether it should be eliminated, made safer, or minimized/discouraged. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson supported minimizing and discouraging, which will help with safety. She doubted it could be fully eliminated. Councilmembers/ Commissioners Ryan and Butler agreed. Mayor/President Willson stated he thinks it may be a Constitutional issue. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves supported minimizing or making it safe for the general public and traveling public. Mr. Boganey asked what options staff should explore and/or implement such as aggressive soliciting restrictions, safety focused restrictions, discouragement through public education, and/or reduction through providing options to solicitors. Police Chief Gannon reported that some panhandling has been construed as robbery because it was aggressive and the person giving the money felt intimidated. He stated if aggressive, it can go to disorderly conduct. However, aggressive solicitation is not often used because it is not successful in getting funds. With regard to public education to discourage solicitation, Mr. Boganey noted the City Council/EDA has mentioned signage and that an educational message could be posted to the City’s website. Mr. Boganey stated one business is interested in providing options to panhandlers to provide a ride to a job site, usually in conjunction with the local government or non-profit. He stated this has been used in other locations and the success has been varied. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated if the City would offer temporary employment (paid to clean up the parks, transit station, etc.), and if the solicitor refuses, it could be used in an education campaign that it is a good idea to stop giving them money. He felt this may have more leverage with public relations than drafting an ordinance that is challenged. Mr. Boganey stated this option (providing a job and ride to a job site) would have a large significance and big commitment of the City. Mayor/President Willson stated the City of Albuquerque spent $60,000 to support their program so if the City supported that option, it would have to be willing to spend tax dollars on it. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated Albuquerque has a benign climate so people congregate and can live on the street. He stated he would ask what level of resources is reasonable to address minimizing panhandling and increasing safety, noting the City hires young people to clean the parks so the job/ride to job site option would compete for those jobs. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated it will also be difficult to explain why it is in the general public interest to do so. Mayor/President Willson agreed and stated there are also costs with staff time. 07/10/17 -6- Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated while that is a cool idea, she thinks it would make more sense to give jobs to youth instead of adults who choose to not work. She stated her focus is how to make it safer and discourage with minimal investment, noting there will always be panhandlers and those who give them money. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson supported a minimal investment for education but not a large capital outlay to potentially ‘cure’ this issue. She stated she is concerned about the City’s image and safety and supports education of the public, but she does not support allocating taxpayer money to utilize our City’s personnel resources for this issue. Councilmember/Commissioner Butler stated she also supports not putting a lot of money and resources towards this issue as staff is already tight with time but she does support public education and increasing safety. The consensus of the City Council/EDA was to direct staff to address how to increase safety and public education. Mr. Boganey stated staff will proceed with that direction and return with a report. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Butler seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 8:59 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.