Readers weigh in on Baltimore’s Squeegee Collaborative plan
Fining drivers is essential
Finally: a squeegee plan (“Baltimore will ban squeegeeing along six major corridors with mayor calling for equitable enforcement,” Nov. 10).
The proposed plan is a good start at resolving the issues surrounding the squeegee problem. The proposed targeting of key intersections limits the burden on law enforcement resources, and the discussion of guaranteed income gets to the heart of the issue driving panhandling generally. Two areas of the plan could use some refinement.
Issuing citations to panhandlers, with or without squeegees, can be an important way to track individuals who may need help. But punitive fines or community service are likely to have limited effectiveness, and harsh penalties for failure to comply are quickly disproportionate to the offense. The only participant in the transaction with something to lose is the driver, who can lose the use of their driver’s license for failure to pay a fine as an ultimate penalty. Fining drivers is essential to success.
Guaranteed income is naturally controversial. One important thing to remember here is that the population of squeegee panhandlers is biased toward school-aged children. Those children should be effectively paid to do their actual job, which is to go to school. As a matter of fact, all school-aged children should be eligible. A means test seems politically inevitable, and parents should receive the payments, at least for elementary school students.
Older panhandlers have different issues driving their need, and would require more nuanced solutions, but fining drivers and keeping kids in school are important details for any implementation.
— Greg Boss, Baltimore