Opinion ID: 2266381
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Panhandling Control Act of 1993

Text: In 1993, the Council of the District of Columbia considered enactment of some measure that would address growing problems related to the homeless as well as panhandlers who are in fact not homeless, but instead are confidence operators, who prey on the elderly and tourists who are uncertain about the genuine needs of the panhandler. See Council of the District of Columbia, Report of the Committee on the Judiciary on Bill 10-72, the Panhandling Control Act of 1993, May 12, 1993, at 2. The Judiciary Committee report on the panhandling bill described its purpose and effect as follows: The purpose . . . is to make aggressive panhandling a criminal offense when the panhandler causes or attempts to cause an individual reasonably to fear that they would be the subject of offensive physical contact. The bill makes it a criminal offense intentionally to obstruct traffic and parking or the free passage of persons in public places including the doorways and entrances of public or private buildings for the purpose of panhandling. Lastly, the bill creates zones in public streets and public transportation stations and stops as well as around automatic teller machines where asking, begging, or soliciting alms is prohibited. Id. at 3-4. After extensive consideration, the Council passed the bill; it was duly enacted and approved as D.C. Law 10-54, effective November 17, 1993. [3] The Act prohibits different kinds of conduct, including aggressive panhandling. [4] See D.C.Code, §§ 22-3311 et seq. Mr. Williams, Mr. Taylor and Mr. McFarlin all were charged ultimately with violation of § 3(b) of the Act, D.C.Code § 22-3312(b), although Mr. Williams initially was charged under § 3(a). Section 3(b) specifies that No person may ask, beg, or solicit alms in any public transportation vehicle; or at any bus, train, or subway station or stop. Section 2(2) of the Act, D.C.Code § 22-3311(2), provides that `ask, beg, or solicit alms' includes the spoken, written, or printed word or such other act conducted for the purpose of obtaining an immediate donation of money or thing of value. Section 4 of the Act, D.C.Code § 22-3313, states that [a]cts authorized as an exercise of a person's constitutional right to picket, protest, or speak, and acts authorized by a permit issued by the District of Columbia government shall not constitute unlawful activity under this chapter. Also pertinent to our analysis is the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Regulation Concerning The Use By Others Of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Property. Section 100.10 of the Regulation concerns free speech activities, defined in § 100.7(h) of the Regulation as the organized exercise of rights and privileges which deal with political, religious, or social matters and are non-commercial. Section 100.10 provides that: Free speech activities are permitted in the free-areaabove ground of metro stations. All free speech activities are to take place at a distance greater than fifteen (15) feet from any escalator, stairwell, fare gate, mezzanine gate, kiosk, or fare card machine. In no instances are any free speech activities to take place in the paid or platform areas of the station, or in the underground portions of stations. No free speech activities may interfere with the pedestrian traffic flow in the usual egress and ingress to the station proper or to the fare gate. Id. at 20-21.