Nicholls holds final ‘talk’ with residents
They ask about panhandlers, migrant emergency, annexation and Far West buy
Yuma residents brought up panhandlers, the mayor’s emergency declaration in response to the migrants being released in Yuma last spring, the potential annexation of Mesa del Sol and purchase of Far West Water and Sewer Co., among other issues, to Mayor Doug Nicholls on Thursday.
For the latest “Community Conversation with the Mayor,” the last in this series, Nicholls invited residents living east of Avenue 4E to the Yuma Readiness Center to talk with him about their concerns in an informal setting.
A woman expressed her concerns with homelessness and panhandling in Yuma and asked if the city has any regulations to discourage panhandling. The mayor agreed that the city has seen a “dramatic increase” with these issues and noted that it’s a topic that has been discussed in his office. He said officials want to set up public meetings to see what can be done about it.
As for city regulations, Nicholls said, the courts have knocked them down, ruling that freedom of speech gives panhandlers the right to ask for money in public rights-of-way.
Some in attendance pointed out that panhandling has become a business. A woman suggested, if the city can’t cite panhandlers, that the city should fine those who give them money. Several attendees noted that some cities in California and Oregon have adopted ordinances that call for fining drivers who stop to give money because they are creating unsafe conditions. A woman said that giving money can cause accidents and encourage panhandlers to keep doing it.
The mayor said his office would look at those ordinances, but noted that the council doesn’t like to create new laws “readily.” However, he added, it’s a solution he had never thought of before.
Another attendee interjected that it’s not right to criminalize humanitarian aid. The mayor said it’s not about not helping but helping those who truly need the help in the best way possible. The real issue, Nicholls added, are the people who aren’t homeless but have gotten into the “business” of panhandling.
“I don’t believe in singleshot solutions,” Nicholls said, noting that he wants “holistic solutions” and he’s not opposed to the suggested ordinance as long as more is done to help those who truly need the assistance.
EMERGENCY DECLARATION
An attendee asked what became of the state of emergency declaration made by the mayor in April in response to a “humanitarian crisis” caused by the “mass release of migrant families from federal detention into the City of Yuma without provisions of adequate food, water, shelter and medical care,” which could cause “injury, damage and suffering to persons and property” in the city, county or state.
Nicholls explained that funds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency came to the community through United Way. The agency reimburses an agency or municipality that puts money toward housing, feeding or clothing migrants. Local organizations that spent money during the humanitarian crisis applied to collect funds, but he didn’t know if they had yet been reimbursed.
One woman said she personally did not like that the declaration implied that the new migrants would be a threat to life and property in Yuma. Nicholls pointed out that in three months more than 5,200 migrants seeking asylum passed through the Yuma shelter system. Most were families with young children, and they arrived to the country through international crime organizations.
With hundreds of migrants a day being released into the community, the local nonprofits became overwhelmed. The potential threat came from the migrants not having housing or a place to get food and resources. They had to feed, clothe and protect their families somehow, Nicholls said. The community set up a shelter system so the community wouldn’t have to worry about people trying to steal food or trespassing.
By putting together a shelter system, the community was able to meet the needs of the families and help them get to where they were going quicker while not creating a public concern for the community.
FAR WEST WATER AND SEWER
A woman asked about the status of the city’s potential purchase of Far West Sewer and Water. Nicholls answered that the council hasn’t decided one way or another.
“We’re doing our due diligence,” he said.
The city is studying what it will take to bring the company’s infrastructure up to the city’s standards and how to fund the improvements.
An attendee asked if the city could do something about the smell. “Not yet. If we decide to purchase, if we come to a deal, that would be one of those things that we can look into,” Nicholls replied, noting that a properly operated plant does not emit foul smells.
He also noted that the city does not have authority over Far West, nor does Yuma County. It only answers to the state. The woman said state officials have come to Yuma but that “nothing” has been done. Nicholls offered to get the woman the contact numbers to reach state officials.
Asked about the proposed annexation of Mesa del Sol, Nicholls explained that for that to happen, it would need to be approved by 50% of land owners and 50% of valuation, plus one.
The woman asked if the annexation vote would happen during the summer, when many winter residents are gone. Nicholls replied that he’s not interested in forcing annexation. Either way, he noted, the city needs to contact all homeowners, wherever they may be, for their thumbs up or down.
SMART CITY CAMERAS
An attendee asked about the “smart city” devices that will be installed on all city streetlights. She asked whether they would be in all neighborhoods. The devices will have the ability to record video and audio, which officials have touted as a useful tool for investigating crimes and monitoring public safety incidents.
Nicholls explained that the devices are not set up to pick up regular conversation. Rather, it will listen for acoustic triggers, such as gunshots, at which point it will alert dispatchers to a potential problem in the area. The mayor noted that it is illegal to track a person without a court order or warrant.
The woman asked whether a resident can opt out. No, Nicholls said, pointing out that the devices will be in public access areas and facing up and down streets. The cameras facing homes will be removed.
“It doesn’t mean that they can’t see your front yard. I don’t want to mislead, but if you’re in your front yard, you’re visible to the street anyway. There’s no privacy, like in your backyard,” he said.