An End to Panhandling?

In numerous instances, the Bible says that the poor will always be with us; what the Bible didn't tell us is they would mainly congregate near the entrances to restaurants on E. 4th and W. 6th Streets, aggressively rattling ragged paper cups in our faces as we attempt to egress our favorite dining establishments. Aggressive begging does have a way of knocking a bit of the sheen off the ambiance and charm of a night out.

My brother, who recently moved back to Cleveland from Jamaica after 25 years, was springing for dinner at Pickwick & Frolic, and after the third time of being panhandled he became a bit annoyed. You need to know that he's so tight that when he farts only dogs can hear him, so the forth panhandler didn't even get the words out of his mouth before being told, "No way, no how!" They really know how to handle panhandlers in Jamaica, and together we came up with what we feel could be a real solution to the problem.

Now, before I'm accused of turning hard-hearted towards the downtrodden, let me state unequivocally that the continuing shame of our nation -- the richest the world has ever known -- is how shabbily we treat the have-nots of our society. Our failure to erect effective social safety nets for the less fortunate among is a continuing source of embarrassment for us on the world stage... and hopefully that is something a new administration in Washington will move swiftly to address come January. The ultimate goal, of course, is to quit producing so many broken people.

Now, with that said, we still have the immediate problem of panhandlers lowering the quality of life in downtown Cleveland, just as in virtually every other city across the country. Many solutions have been put forth -- some innovative and caring, others just downright mean-spirited -- such as having the police put them in a cruiser and drive them to the far edges of town, knowing they'll have to walk back. Numerous cities have tried other non-effective methods of addressing the panhandling problem... with equally little success.

Among the more humane solutions currently being tried are the signs around downtown asking people to refrain from giving where it won't do any good. The theory is, if you want to help, donate to one of the many organizations that deliver services to homeless populations — don’t give to the panhandlers. There's one such sign sitting on the corner of E. 4th and Prospect, and the panhandlers stand in front of it, blocking it from view as they ply their trade. This effort at "passive deterrence" seems to be having little effect on the panhandlers. How about using "active deterrence" instead?

In an effort to make the area more secure and user-friendly, the Downtown Cleveland Alliance has deployed "ambassadors" on bicycles and foot. In addition to keeping the downtown area spruced up, their presence is reassuring. I'm suggesting a similar program, but focused directly on panhandlers.

It's well-established that panhandlers have the right to solicit money from passerby; what I'm suggesting (knowing that the ACLU, the Homeless Coalition, and probably the police union will howl in indignation) is that two-man teams, in some type of recognizable quasi-uniforms or garb, be "assigned" to each panhandler. Their job would be to intervene every time the panhandler sticks his cup in someone’s face and say, "Please, don't encourage this behavior by giving this person anything." One of the team members could hand out printed information detailing the services available to all homeless persons in Greater Cleveland.

If panhandlers have a First Amendment "right" to beg, we also have the same First Amendment "right" to ask people not to give.

The panhandler is playing on the sympathy (or fear) of the person they're attempting to put the bite on... they say they are hungry, but there are soup kitchens set up to feed them and beds available for them at night. No, they are panhandling to get high, pure and simple. What's seriously lacking in this country is comprehensive addiction and mental health services, but giving money to panhandlers is not going to put those programs in place.

The theory is, if someone intervenes and makes the citizen feel secure and comfortable in saying "no" and not giving anything to the panhandler, most -- not all, but most -- people will quit giving... and once people quit giving, it's a sure bet the panhandlers will eventually stop asking. If the panhandler moves to another location, the team assigned to him moves right along with him.

Is there a risk of confrontation? Certainly, but confrontation is already occurring whenever an over-aggressive panhandler puts the bite on some fearful citizen. The effort would have to be coordinated with the Cleveland Police Department when initially instituted, and certainly there will be some resistance and rough spots to get over, but the reward of vastly improving the quality of life downtown would be worth the effort.

The teams would be trained to deal with the panhandler(s) in the most professional, courteous and respectful manner... while still doing their job. If the panhandler still becomes confrontational or acts out violently the police can quickly be summonsed. Over a relatively short period of time the panhandlers (who, by nature take the path of least resistance, that's why they’re panhandling in the first place) will soon find another hustle.

Has the problem been solved once the panhandler disappears? No, it's only being moved to another area of town, but the quality of life in downtown Cleveland will have been improved dramatically. The sin would be to quit trying to find real, long term solutions to the problems of the homeless just because they are out of our sight.

Again, are there some logistical and other issues that would have to be worked through? Of course. But there is an effective and low-cost way of implementing the program — I've done the math and thought through most of the impediments.

However, this being Cleveland, where new and innovative ideas are usually strangled in their infancy, I doubt if anyone will be interested enough to at least explore the idea and perhaps test it for a trial period. We'd rather wait until some other city proves that it works for a decade or so and then try it.

The fact is, we're a city of followers, not leaders.

From Cool Cleveland contributor Mansfield B. Frazier mansfieldfATgmail.com
(:divend:)