Newport Council to Consider Panhandling and Soliciting Issue Again

It’s no secret that taking a walk along Broadway means a good chance of walking into a solicitation for money, a cigarette, or something else.

And it’s not much of a surprise to see someone standing along one of Newport’s busy onramps, offramps or intersections with a cardboard sign asking drivers for money.

For a city that prides itself on being home to Gilded Age mansions, world-class sailing and a bevy of tourism amenities, it’s no secret that Newport has also been grappling with the issue of panhandling and solicitation for years. And some say it has gotten worse.

In 2013, a resolution to address ”aggressive forms of solicitation, begging and/or panhandling in certain areas of Newport” failed in a 4-3 vote after concerns about the potential for constitutional rights violations. At the same time, council members who voted against the measure said they didn’t see hard evidence to support the assertion that aggressive panhandling is much of an issue.

A new City Council will give the issue another go next week.

A resolution sponsored by Councilors Kathryn E. Leonard, Marco T. Camacho and John F. Florez that, if passed, would “direct the [City Solicitor] to review any and all applicable law and determine a recommended ordinance or ordinances to not only protect such solicitors but also the public at large with due deference to the constitutional rights of persons to engage in soliciting activities.”

According to the resolution, “there have been safety concerns raised regarding people who solicit in certain high traffic areas of the roadways, highways and rights of way in the City of Newport.

“Certain actions are not properly regulated and endanger such solicitors or other persons using the roadways, highways and rights of way in the City of Newport.”

The new resolution includes language that appears to be an attempt to preemptively quash concerns about constitutional rights violations, which helped lead to the demise of the previous effort in 2013. That resolution, which borrowed language from an anti-panhandling ordinance in Providence, outlined eight specific ways one could be in violation, including using ”violent or threatening gestures,” following people, causing fear of bodily harm or touching people without their consent.

That proposal also included the possibility of fines, leading some to argue that the city would be hammering people with few resources and living on the street with onerous financial burderns.

Still, the issue remains. Police have continued to respond to incidents on Broadway and in other high traffic areas and many business owners on Broadway have for years been pleading with city leaders to do something short of forcing shelters and social service organizations out of the city.

“It failed, but that doesn’t mean the issue has dissipated in terms of business and residents,” Newport’s police chief said in 2013 after the failed vote.

Photo: Josh Begin