Conn. towns take different approaches to panhandling
Several municipalities in Connecticut have implemented policies restricting panhandling in their communities in what they say are public safety efforts, but courts and experts say some of the limitations violate the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that panhandling generally is legal and protected speech under the First Amendment. Some residents, however, have complained to officials and police about the nuisance of being approached by those begging for money, which has led a number of towns and cities to consider ways of controlling how people can help those in need and direct donations where they will be most effective.
Suggesting that people consider directing resources to nonprofits that could help those in need — which at least a few municipalities are attempting to do — is not a violation of the law, as long as there is not a formal ordinance restricting panhandling.
A unique approach in Southington is being considered to avoid First Amendment conflicts and comply with a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision. The case centered around municipalities imposing content-based restrictions on signage. Although it wasn’t specifically a panhandling case, it has become the benchmark for protecting the First Amendment through signs in public areas.
And the Town of Enfield is considering posting signs encouraging residents not to give money to panhandlers and instead donate to local charities. The signs alone are not a prohibition on panhandling, however.
Solutions, town officials from around the state say, are not easy. Fighting poverty itself is a complex battle with no simple answers, of course.
A different approach
Southington officials began working over the summer on a community response to panhandling that they describe as “moving from transactional to transformational.” The approach is explained in a brochure that the town will distribute to the public and local businesses this month, encouraging people to donate any money they might have considered giving a panhandler directly to a nonprofit organization instead.
Former Deputy Police Chief William Palmieri, who retired from his position in June but remains a member of administrative services for Southington’s department, said that members of the Town Council and town officials decided an ordinance or signs prohibiting panhandling isn’t in order at this time but, rather, the best way to handle the issue is with an educational approach.
The message the community wants to get across, he said, is that panhandlers who are truly in need require more resources than small amounts of money and their needs can be met more effectively through local social services agencies.
“We have an outstanding relationship with all community stakeholders in the area of providing support to people without homes or basic life needs such as food insecurity,” Palmieri said. “Janet Melon and her team from Southington Community Services and Donna Ayer’s team from Bread for Life do an outstanding job collectively for our community.”
The brochure has a complete list of local social service agencies to which people can donate, including the Tabernacle Church Giving Back Food Pantry, United Way of Southington Help Line, the food sharing project Plate It Forward Southington, and the Veterans Suicide and Crisis Line, among others.
As part of Southington’s educational campaign, the brochure defines panhandlers and says not all are homeless but may be in need of food and other critical services. “However, not all stories panhandlers use to solicit money are true,” the brochure states. “Some panhandlers come from outside the town of Southington or even outside the state of Connecticut; some panhandlers operate as part of organized, professional panhandling rings and maybe involved in human trafficking activity.”
For those who truly are needy, the brochure advises, the most important thing to provide is kindness and a smile. “Look them in the eyes and acknowledge them as a human being.”
Giving money to panhandlers will encourage more panhandling, the brochure states. “Offering cash may not help to solve the underlying reasons why someone panhandles.”
Enfield is considering a similar approach to reduce hand-outs and instead direct donations to organized programs like Enfield Food Shelf, Loaves & Fishes, Safe Harbor, local food pantries, church initiatives, and others who are working to improve the lives of those who are experiencing homelessness, substance misuse, and mental health issues.
The Town Council’s public safety subcommittee is reviewing the community’s response to panhandling, which Town Manager Ellen Zoppo-Sassu said has prompted a large number of complaints to elected officials and the police department.
“One option the committee is considering is reaching out to those who are being asked for the money, and advising them to instead redirect their generosity to nonprofits that are working within the community to provide critical services to those who need food and other basic help,” she said.
The public safety committee — which includes Town Council members Matt Despard, Lori Unghire, and Deputy Mayor Gina Cekala — is considering putting up signs with that message at business plazas and other areas of the town that experience a high volume of panhandling with permission from the property managers and business owners.
Enfield’s campaign, along with Southington’s, would work in conjunction with the police department’s assistance to people in need, whereby officers advise where they can seek help for various problems.
The goal, Zoppo-Sassu said, would be to reduce hand-outs and instead direct donations to organized programs. “If panhandling is not successful in key locations, it is the hope that the practice is discontinued, help is sought from organizations, and police can also use the signs as a talking point to offer options,” she said.
Zoppo-Sassu said she has seen such a program work in Bristol, where she lives and served as mayor from 2017 to 2021. The city took steps two years ago to curb panhandling with signs at strategic places throughout the city that encourage residents to donate money to nonprofits that help those in need instead of handing it out when asked.
Local ordinances
Vernon implemented an ordinance in 2016 that prohibits panhandling from sunset to sunrise on any street, sidewalk, public right-of-way, or other public property. Passively sitting or standing with a sign or other non-verbal indication that the person is seeking donations is allowed during daylight hours.
Vernon Police Chief John Kelley said his department gets calls most often about panhandlers on Reservoir Road and on Route 83 across from McDonald’s, as both locations have exits just off Interstate 84.
Those panhandlers do not violate Vernon’s ordinance, but others on private property, such as Tri-City Plaza and the Stop & Shop plaza on Route 30, do.
“The (U.S.) Supreme Court has ruled that standing with a sign asking for money is protected under the First Amendment,” Kelley said. “Where we have issues is if they are actually stepping into the road to accept a donation. That’s a specific provision in our ordinance that’s prohibited . ... When you step into the road, you’re potentially creating a hazard.”
Kelley said the purpose of Vernon’s ordinance is to keep panhandlers and the rest of the public safe.
Vernon police are not put in the position too often to have to issue infractions, he said, as panhandlers are likely to comply with the local law once they are made aware of it and the $99 fine it carries.
Officers let panhandlers know of the state hotline 211 that can provide assistance to those struggling, and have also provided food to some, Kelley said.
“I’ve known of officers that have bought these people lunch or dinner,” he said. “There is definitely a human factor. I think some of these people are truly down on their luck and they do need help.”
However, there are others where “this has almost become a job,” Kelley said. “We’ve heard stories of people being bused in from out of town to stand there for the day.”
The number of complaints Vernon police receive has declined significantly over the years, as there have been a total of 208 complaints since 2016, with only nine since January, he said.
South Windsor also enacted an ordinance in 2016 to address “aggressive or hazardous panhandling.” The local law prohibits panhandling on “hazardous roadways or roadway medians,” defined in the ordinance as the entirety of Route 5 in town, Buckland Road from Deming Street south to the Manchester town line, and Route 30 from Clark Street to Buckland Street.
South Windsor Town Manager Michael Mansicalco was not available to respond to requests seeking comment.
Hartford’s ordinance prohibits aggressive panhandling, such as following a person, blocking their path, or touching them, among other actions. The ordinance also bans solicitations on any public transit vehicle, or within 25 feet of a bus or train stop or ATM machine.
“No provision of this section shall be interpreted or construed to prohibit speech, expression, or conduct protected by the laws of the United States or the state,” the ordinance states. Violators face up to a $90 fine and a maximum of 30 days in jail.
Municipalities can learn best approaches to the issue
“I’ve known of officers that have bought these people lunch or dinner. There is definitely a human factor. I think some of these people are truly down on their luck and they do need help.”
VERNON POLICE CHIEF JOHN KELLEY
“The way to address panhandling is to address the underlying reasons why people panhandle in the first place — the lack of affordable housing in our communities — not to criminalize the act of our neighbors asking for help.”
ERIC TARS SENIOR POLICY DIRECTOR NATIONAL HOMELESSNESS LAW CENTER
by learning which measures have not worked. A few days after no-trespassing signs were installed in West Hartford at an intersection in the center of town, they were removed.
Police Chief Vernon Riddick, who made the decision to install the signs in May, said they were removed in order to not cause confusion to crossing pedestrians who might get stuck at the crosswalk landing that one of the signs faces.
Addressing homelessness, not panhandling
While municipalities have implemented restrictions on asking for donations from the public, courts have routinely overturned such laws.
“They are 100 percent unconstitutional,” said Eric Tars, senior policy director for the National Homelessness Law Center in Washington, D.C., citing a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision. “Every single court to review panhandling ordinances since that time has struck down the laws.”
Placing bans on panhandling, he said, leaves enforcement up to the discretion of individual police officers. For example, officers would have to determine whether a person is asking for money or for directions.
Regardless, “the (U.S.) Supreme Court has been clear that asking for donations is protected speech, and these are unlawful, unconstitutional restrictions on it,” Tars said.
“The way to address panhandling is to address the underlying reasons why people panhandle in the first place — the lack of affordable housing in our communities — not to criminalize the act of our neighbors asking for help,” Tars said.