Ward 1:  The applicable ordinances are not "irrelevant."  The "out the window of cars in the driving lane" ordinance has helped Springfield reduce panhandling.  I acknwledged that.  I also acknowledged that the same ordinance would reduce the "traffic corner" panhandling in Eugene.  I have no idea how it would "stand up" to Consititutional review, but, if adopted in Eugene, I'm guessing we'd soon find out.  

The issue with pedestrian panhadling is entirely different.  It has been found constitutionally protected so long as it's not "aggressive" panhandling.  The Springfield ordinance addesses "aggressive" panhandling, using the term "accost."  I rather doubt that a "respectful", "polite" panhandler in Springfield would be successfully prosecuted under the Springfield Ordinance.  

Meanwhile, downtown Eugene is, in every sense of the word, a "mess."  The Council and City Manager/staff are working to address the issue.  It's not easy and I wish them luck.   Regards, Gary Crum