The City of Tempe has been flirting with amendments to the city code designed to stomp down on “aggressive panhandling.” Since Tempe doesn’t have a very good or compassionate history with the treatment of homeless and street rats on their streets, I meet this sort of addition to city code with a great deal of skepticism when it comes to motives and ultimately its enforcement.

We shouldn’t forget the addition of “anti-sitting” laws to the city codes designed to criminalize sitting on the sidewalk–barring health concerns–after the City also changed the street layout to have less benches and seats (read: none.)

This sort of behavior from the council makes a grim precedent that ignores the reason why homeless people meet on Mill Avenue and adds to the danger of being without a place to stay at night.
Instead of a compassionate and thoughtful examination of why street rats line the red bricks, it looks like the City is continuing to kick them when they’re down. This from an article in the East Valley Tribune,

The City of Tempe stated in a request to the council that, “aggressive solicitation activities create a safety hazard and an increased potential for criminal activities.”

Multiple city council members stated that these changes will create a safer environment in high pedestrian and tourist areas such as the Mill Avenue District and throughout ASU’s Tempe campus.

The amendments would make it illegal to solicit within ten feet of or directly adjacent to the entrance of a business, as well as fifteen feet from any transit stop or taxi stand. This could mean more business for stores in areas where this is becoming more of a problem.

I may be mistaken, but aggressively interacting with anyone is already something that draws the attention of the police and it’s already illegal. The added element of “solicitation” seems like it’s just an addition slapped on top designed purely to target street rats.

The last paragraph explains the underlying reason why we’re seeing this legislation in the City Council: businesses are upset that homeless street rats appear on the streets and would-be Scottsdale customers looking for the white-picket-storefronts would steer elsewhere.

This next part really gave me a chuckle: several people interviewed about aggressive panhandling on Mill Avenue also speak to the situation of street preachers.

Besides panhandlers, Darling said she has seen many people being “badgered” by religious groups trying to spread their message not only on mill, but on campus as well.

“I don’t think it’s horrible,” Arizona State Criminology student Julie Martin said when asked about aggressive religious preachers. “People have the ability to proclaim that, and I think that is one of the basic rights of our country.”

Then again, Religious groups on Mill Ave and on ASU campus have been extremely aggressive in their proselytization.

It’s not uncommon that I park my cab and take the night in and run into these groups harassing people with their extremely loud speakers. Of course, the City of Tempe also recently passed a noise ordinance change that would quiet this excessive use of loudspeakers and bullhorns by religious groups.
As Martin above notices, while religious solicitation may be aggressive (and annoying) it’s covered at least by freedom of speech.

Street rats, however, won’t have these sort of protections. Nobody cares about them. Knowing how the Tempe police have targeted them in the past using similar legislation means that they’ll use the “aggressive” portion of the new codes to sweep them up even if they’re panhandling without aggression.
Even some of the commenters on the article aren’t so sure about this one.

I’m personally not sure where this will go and I don’t like the history of these sort of code changes shows–especially for Tempe.

Mill Ave may become a quieter place this week after the Tempe City Council authorized a program to ban amplified music/speech on the Ave and enforce permits for people who want to use it. The program is a pilot and will take effect shortly, and will last until December 2012.

The Tempe City Council recently authorized a pilot program to control noise in downtown Tempe and determine the impacts of various noise sources. Starting this week, no amplified sound or other excessive noise will be permitted without the issuance of a Special Events Permit within the public rights-of-way in the Mill Avenue District.

The city is selling the project to residents and Mill goers with some piss-poor rhetoric that they could have spun better if they’d only listened to the sorts of problems that people actually have with amplification on the Ave.

The problem hasn’t just been musicians, of course, it’s also been street preachers who bring their own amplification to shout at the masses (and some used to shout into bars and open air restaurants.) For a while there was a preacher named Shawn Holes whose sound setup was so abusively loud that it would have caused inner ear damage to people standing too close.

The boundaries for this area are College Avenue to Farmer Avenue, University Drive to the center of Town Lake (North.) Residential developments within this area include Hayden Square, Edgewater and Bridgeview at Hayden Ferry Lakeside, Orchid House, West 6, Regatta Pointe and others. About 1,500 people live in this area. At least another 1,000 people are expected to live in downtown Tempe in the near future as developments such as The Hub and Villas at Southbank open.

“This is the next step in the coexistence of an entertainment district and a residential area,” said Nancy Hormann, president of the Downtown Tempe Community.

Musicians are still welcome to play on Mill Avenue, but they need to perform acoustically.

And it’s true, there’s a few musicians, such as Papa Soul, who have sound systems set so loud that they’re painful to walk past on the sidewalk.

Residents of the nearby condominiums isn’t a good reason for an amplification ban. Why not simply implement thoughtful noise regulations that require people to get a cheap license to use amplification where they agree not to raise their equipment above a pre-set decibel level? Certainly the city could make a program to cheaply license, teach people how to use the equipment (or deliver a simple FAQ on a piece of paper) and then have the police spot check to determine if they’re in violation.

After all, having encountered the abrasively loud street preachers it’s obvious when a sound system is beyond an acceptable and healthy sound limit.

Of course, not everyone agrees with the assessment that the reason why the noise ordinance is being put in place. The claim is that people live too close to Mill Ave and noise is bothering them—which has always been a bit of a false canard. The drum circle was pushed out of a space backed up away from the Ave because developers constructed a condominium structure back there and residents began to complain, an event that still chafes at my sense of fair play.

“Complete non-sense. There are very few people who actually live within ear-shot of Mill, and those that do know full well that it’s the entertainment district and that some excess noise may happen on occasion,” MillAve4Life notes on the KPHO story. “Having been to Mill hundreds of times I can say, without a doubt, that even on the most extreme nights the ambient noise level is still less than an annoying motorcycle with short pipes. If they’re willing to go this route, why not limit the amount of excess light, surely that bothers the planes that routinely fly low and close to land at Sky Harbor International.”

Mill Ave Amplification Needs to be Toned Down Not Tuned Out

Looking at the total amount of abuse that directly affects passersby from musicians who do not check their sound levels and street preachers who care more about being heard far away than being understood has given me a reason to powerfully dislike the use of amplified speech on the Ave. However, I don’t think that “special events permits” are the way to go and I’m bothered that the law seems to only target musicians.

In fact, the press release about the resolution and all news seems to mention only musicians.

I expect that the noise ordinance covers all amplification including that of speech, otherwise its intended effect will be largely useless as buskers are only amid the worst offenders and do not represent all of them.

Simply getting a handle on how loud amplification can be would be superior to cutting out entirely. Especially because the noise ordinance will not affect businesses, even those who have open air venues with large speakers.

If I were a more cynical sort, I’d guess this ordinance is largely connected to businesses feeling like they’re not king of the hill or most dominant for cultural expression on Mill Ave. We’ve seen them behave this sort of way before at the cost of the actual visitors and people who patron the Ave on busy nights.