[Durham INC] roadside solicitation

[RW Pickle]

It's not legal in the County because the County Commissioners made it so.
And now it's time for our City Council to do the same. I already know that
they will not deal with this issue because of private emails to me. It's
just not politically correct I guess... But when the health and safety of
the public is an issue, who cares if it's politically correct? Doesn't
public safety come first?

Anyone that knows me knows that my reasons for wanting to ban roadside
solicitation in the City are not because I want to deprive substance
abusers and mentally ill people from standing in medians. These folks have
unparalleled access in our community to get help if they wanted it. The
"Circle of Care" program our County offer sees to this as well as any
number of well know programs and services in our community. As I told the
Commissioners when they dealt with this issue, for me (this is the example
I used), it's the Mother in the mini van (behind the car that stops
without apparent reason) while she is hauling her son to soccer practice,
her daughter to ballet, with a video playing to entertain the kids and her
cell phone ringing while she is trying to eat something so she can even
keep going. When she slams into the rear of the person who stops to give
these folks a dollar and seriously injures herself or her kids, the blood
of this innocent party is on the hands of those who allow this
solicitation to happen in the first place. Regardless if it is by permit
or not. Had they not been there it would have never happened...

For those who don't know, anyone, regardless if they are homeless, have
one leg or live in Pittsboro, can go down to City Hall and fill out an
application, pay $25, get their rule book and start working the corners of
Durham City. It's just that easy. No screening, no background checks;
nothing. And a great number of these folks along our streets don't even
live in Durham. At Garrett Road, I see a church from Pittsboro there
regularly soliciting for funds.

I do a lot to help disadvantaged folks in our society. In our City, saving
their life by getting them out of the middle of the road with speeding
cars all around seems fairly simple. We quit permitting it and enact an
ordinance like the County did. It's not like the County Commissioners
didn't care about these folks. They did. They cared enough about the
Mother who would injure herself and her kids when the flow of traffic
unexpectedly came to an abrupt stop because someone wanted to hand these
solicitors a dollar or some change. They didn't want the blood of these
innocent folks on their hands for allowing such a negligent act to
continue [of allowing folks with substance issues and mental illness
(according to others in the "care" community that spoke that night) to be
in busy traffic patterns]. We could do the same thing in the City and
perhaps save some lives. Doesn't that make sense? We're not going to be
able to change the behavior of the public, stopping in traffic to hand
these folks something. But we can get these folks out of traffic so no one
is in harms way. Why wouldn't our leadership in the City do something we
CAN do instead of allowing this practice to continue? Do they think if
vehicles hit enough of them that eventually the problem will go away?

I feel certain that the voters of our City will overwhelmingly decide that
they want this practice stopped if given that chance (to vote on it). I
would think our leaders would know this as well and take action (as the
County did). It's a public safety issue that must be dealt with. It's like
they just don't care... Is a $25 permit worth the life of even one person?

Randy Pickle

> Hhhmmm. I agree that those two are quite different, Julie.
>
> Which one would apply if the City of Durham issues Permits to those who
> wish to solicit?
> And in addition to the license, require them to wear vests, and establish
> other rules like not being allowed to walk more than a certain distance
> away
>  from the milk crate used as a chair.
>
> It would seem to me that "we" {as in the City of Durham} are doing more
> than just ignoring the practice, we are actively engaged in permitting it.
>
> It's NOT legal in the County, but almost all of the examples are inside
> the
>  City limits, where it IS legal.
> I believe we operate that way because many in our caring  community think
> we are helping these individuals when we pass them a dollar.
>
> Education is the key to any change, and that will require the citizens to
> listen to the experts, which are the non-profits who deal with these
> individuals  on a daily basis.
>
> Bill  Anderson
>
>
> In a message dated 3/18/2011 11:13:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> freespirit0623 at earthlink.net writes:
>
>
> The  attachment came through as a .dat file, which I can’t  open.
> I am  interested to hear the answer to this question posed by Randy:   why
> would anyone let these folks continue to do something like this?
> Including
>  whether anyone is actually letting them do it, or is not stopping them,
> which  is different.  For you to “let” someone do something, you need
> to
> actively give permission. To not stop them, you just need to ignore the
> practice.
>
> Julie  Omohundro
> Durham, North  Carolina
> _freespirit0623 at earthlink.net_ (mailto:freespirit0623 at earthlink.net)
>
>
> From:  inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On
> Behalf  Of TheOcean1 at aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 11:46  AM
> To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC]  roadside solicitation
>
>
> Randy,
>
>
>
> Of  course INC has taken on this issue, and the proof is  attached.
>
>
>
> That  brochure is the result of over a year's worth of bouncing it between
> all the  organizations that are listed as it's supporters. Basically it's
> a
> product of  INC & the three main charities that address the problem of
> homelessness.  (Although it was pointed out that many of the panhandlers
> are NOT
> homeless)
>
>
>
> The  conclusion, in a nutshell, was that dollars given to these individual
> do more  harm than good, and that Durham is a very generous community that
> should  make their contributions in cash {and time} to the organizations
> that
>  provide services, rather than directly to panhandlers. Giving food is
> encouraged, just not cash.
>
>
>
> As to  laws, the vests will do little to protect the individuals while you
> run them  over, but we have laws on our books that would cause 95% of
> these
> folks to get  a citation.
>
> It  might seem cruel, but if they get citations instead of dollars, they
> will seek  the help they really need instead of being out there tomorrow,
> and
> the next  day. It's no quality of life, nor a path to one. What I learned
> during  that couple years it took to produce that brochure, was that our
> contributions  were what kept those guys glued to those  intersections.
>
>
>
> The  law states that they may not walk more than 15 feet or something,
> from
> their  "litter". "Litter" is defined as (and I'm doing this from memory)
> things like  the bucket or milk carton they were sitting on, or their
> signs
> which they  store in the bushes.
>
>
>
>
> Bill  Anderson
>
>
>
>
>
> In a  message dated 3/17/2011 12:07:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> _randy at 27beverly.com_ (mailto:randy at 27beverly.com)   writes:
>
> Does  anyone have an idea why Durham City has yet to adopt an ordinance
> banning  roadside solicitation? The County did this more than a year ago.
>
> I am  wondering because their seems to be more and more of these folks and
> I  almost ran over one yesterday. Because he was in the median, I guess
> he
> thought he had the right of way even though I had a green light and  his
> crosswalk was telling him not to cross (it was orange). He got pissed  at
> me and yelled something as I turned in front of him as he was  crossing,
> but I had the green light and he had a don't cross sign. It's  time our
> City dealt with this issue in a manner that would make our  streets safer.
> Not just for the folks who drive on them, but for the  folks who stand out
> there as traffic whizzes by. If you believed the  Ministers, Substance
> Abuse Councilors, Psychiatrists and others that  spoke before the County
> Commissioners the night they dealt with this, why  would anyone let these
> folks continue to do something like this? It's the  folks in the traffic
> behind the accident just waiting for the place to  happen that will be the
> victims here.
>
> I am about ready to start a  petition drive to get the necessary
> signatures
> to put it on the ballot  and let the voters of Durham decide if our City
> Council doesn't have the  desire to deal with it. If you talk about this
> to
> the folks around you,  you'll see that getting these folks off the roads
> is
> a positive thought  and very few would say it was not a positive thing.
>
> Is the $25 fee  really such a great benefit to our tax base that innocent
> folks (who may  be mentally ill or on substances) may die because of our
> speeding traffic  and crowded streets? Not to mention the innocent folks
> who might be  injured avoiding this accident when someone wanted to stop
> and give them  a $1.00. Is that all any of this dangerous behavior is
> really worth to  the folks who make the rules?  In the dark; with their
> dogs; how bad  does it have to get before we put a stop to it? Does
> someone
> have to die  first?
>
> I don't believe INC has ever dealt with the issue and taken a  position.
> Perhaps with this email the ball will get  rolling...
>
> Randy Pickle
> 27  Beverly
>
> _______________________________________________
> Durham INC  Mailing List
> _list at durham-inc.org_ (mailto:list at durham-inc.org)
> _http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html_
> (http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html)
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Durham  INC Mailing  List
> list at durham-inc.org
> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Durham INC Mailing List
> list at durham-inc.org
> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>


====================================================================
This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this electronic  transmission in error, please notify
me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail (pickle at patriot.net)
immediately.
=====================================================================