Local beggars will not have to choose a new place to panhandle.
Not yet anyway.
On Monday night, City Council had an emergency vote on two ordinances.
One is for aggressive solicitation, the other for where someone can panhandle, restricting any sort of solicitation which would interfere with street traffic.
Protestors headed out to city council to show their disapproval against the ordinance many of them saying restrictions on asking for money is against freedom of speech, and could also prohibit charities who solicit, or even fire fighters who use to roadways to "Fill the Boot"
For the ordinances to go through it had to be a unanimous vote by the Council.
The Council voted 7-0 to address the issue of aggressive solicitation in the future.
They were only able to get five votes for solicitation affecting traffic.
The ordinances are posted below:
Ordinance 4363 - Emergency Ordinance to Prohibit Certain Forms of Aggressive Solicitation and Declaring an Emergency
The City of Grand Junction does not have a solicitation ordinance. Acts of solicitation, such as soliciting for money or other things of value have increased and may continue to do so because of the economic recession. City staff, with the advice and consent of the City Concil legislative committee, believes that it would be in the best interests of the community if an ordinance is enacted that regulates certain aggressive acts of solicitation.
COUNCIL VOTE - 7-0 to Revisit Ordinance in Future.
Ordinance 4364 - Emergency Ordinance to Prohibit Solicitation in City Medians and rights of Way and Declaring an Emergency
The City of Grand Junction foes not currently have a solicitation ordinance regulating interference or possible interference with traffic on streets, roads and highways within the City. Acts of solicitation in and around streets, roads and highways have increased and consent of the City Concil legislative committee, believes that it would be in the best interests of the community if an ordinance is enacted that regulates solicitation in City medians and rights-of-way.
COUNCIL VOTE - 5-2 For Ordinance. Not Enough Votes to Pass