Nathan Monk, a local advocate for the homeless, has concerns over the city of Pensacola considering stricter panhandling laws and only partially repealing the homeless ordinances passed in 2013.
“My biggest concern is from a Constitutional perspective,†Monk told Inweekly. “I think it is confusing how they have tried to target one particular type of supposed solicitation, but you see that happen a lot in our community. We see religious people coming downtown to evangelize and politicians standing on street corners. These activities aren’t being curbed. “
He said, “We really have to ask the question of what constitutes speech, even speech that is uncomfortable to us needs to be protected.â€
He said that other communities have had similar ordinances overturned in court. In other communities that have passed similar ordinances, because “there’s no begging exemption in the Constitution.â€
Monk added,†You have a right to ask the initial question (for money). Now when someone says no and you continue, that becomes harassment and we already have laws that protect against that.”
This winter Monk operated a shelter for women, children and small families battling the cold nights. He told Inweekly that he understood that all the homeless ordinances would be repealed, but that isn’t what is up for discussion tonight.
“My understanding from the meeting a month ago was that the ordinances would be put out for repeal, up on the chopping block,” said Monk. “What ended up finally making it to the Thursday meeting is a repeal of the bathroom ordinance, a repeal of the public defecation ordinance.”
He said, “The camping ordinance has been attached to the recommendations by Robert Marbut and the task force, with the intention of opening that up to a wider community discussion through a workshop. Then they plan on putting forward an expansion of the panhandling ordinance. “
Monk doesn’t understand the need to expand the panhandling laws. “The information that keeps coming back from City Hall is we’re not enforcing these ordinances, and they have never been used. Well, if they’ve never been used, why are we expanding an ordinance if they don’t even know how it would work.”
