Changes to Sylva panhandling ordinance fail
Downtown Sylva. File photo
After multiple rounds of public opposition to proposed changes to Sylva’s panhandling ordinance, the board decided to dismiss the changes and leave the ordinance as it is written.
“I personally don’t see the benefit to bring these changes to this ordinance,” said Sylva Commissioner Jonathan Brown. “I don’t think it looks good on our town.”
The panhandling ordinance, also known as a solicitation ordinance, is a set of regulations within Chapter 30 of the Town of Sylva Code of Ordinances that concerns streets and sidewalks.
The issue has been a topic of interest for the town for almost two years now. The board first considered a proposal to address panhandling in November 2022 but ultimately decided against it after a majority of the board and several members of the public spoke out in opposition to the measure.
However, after Mayor Johnny Phillips was elected in November 2023, he brought the topic of panhandling back before the board in January and directed staff to create a draft ordinance for review.
“For some reason Mayor Phillips has this vendetta against people on the street asking for money,” Ben Guiney said during the public hearing on the issue at the Sept. 12 meeting. “It was the first thing, the most important thing when you got elected. Why?”
Related Items
WCU student art showcase
Jackson, Macon, Swain reach FRL agreement
Up Moses Creek: A Head of Streaming Hair
Friends of Panthertown volunteer appreciation party
That ordinance passed by split vote in February with Waldrop and then-Commissioner Natalie Newman opposing the measure. A few months later, Newman resigned her position on the town board and told Blue Ridge Public Radio, “we recently had the vote on panhandling where to me it really felt like we were attacking our unhoused population in this town.”
The revisions to the ordinance that were under consideration would have made it unlawful — in addition to what is already prohibited — for any person to solicit or beg within 20 feet of the edge of the pavement or top of the curb of U.S. Highway Business 23, which would have included Main and Mill streets, Highway 107 and Grindstaff Cove Road. The proposal referred to these three areas as “high traffic zones.”
The proposed revisions also would have prohibited “standing, sitting or lying upon highways or streets prohibited,” and said that no person shall “willfully stand, sit, or lie upon the highway or street in such a manner as to impede the regular flow of traffic.” Violation of this section was listed as a class two misdemeanor.
The proposed changes to the penalty portion of the ordinance would have allowed the chief of police to dismiss the violation and fine if the person “provides proof of a good faith effort to obtain assistance to address any underlying factors related to unemployment, homelessness, mental health, or substance abuse that might relate to the person’s ability to comply with the local ordinance.”
But ultimately, the Sylva Town Board chose not to approve the changes it had proposed to the ordinance.
The board held a public hearing on the proposed changes during its Sept. 12 meeting. Although a public hearing was not required in this instance to make changes to the ordinance, the board agreed to hold a hearing after Commissioner Brad Waldrop requested one during the Aug. 8 meeting.
“At the last meeting, we discovered that we may not be required to have a public hearing about this, but I think we should have a public hearing since we’re talking about a substantive change to the ordinance,” Waldrop said at the time. “Typically, we do have public hearings for ordinances, and I believe this is a rather substantive change and we should have a public hearing.”
Four people came to speak in opposition to the changes during the public hearing on Sept. 12, with several others having voiced their opposition during the board’s Aug. 14 meeting.
Luther Jones said that while he supported the passage of the original ordinance to address panhandling in Sylva, he could not support these proposed changes.
“It doesn’t solve the problem, it pushes the people to the outside of the town so that we don’t see them,” Jones said. “Hiding the problem doesn’t make it go away. We need to be helping people.”
Jones and other speakers also had concerns about giving the power to enforce or dismiss a violation to the ordinance to the chief of police and town manager.
“The police and town manager do not have judicial powers,” said Jones. “I don’t think it’s legal.”
Guiney said that the town should aim to address the roots of the problem that lead people to beg for money, rather than focusing on the act itself, which he doesn’t see as a major issue for the town.
“It’s one thing to try and address issues and solve problems for the town, it’s a whole other thing to start to go after people, after citizens after folks and make folks that have a hard life, make their life even harder,” Guiney said. “This is not that big of a problem and there are much bigger problems this town could address.”
With Waldrop absent at the Sept. 12 meeting, it was Brown that led the board in its decision not to pass the proposed changes.
“I think the heart behind the board is to serve this town, to make the town as welcoming as possible, and have laws that protect and serve. And this ordinance, the ordinance we have in place, is sufficient,” Brown told the board. “That’s the conclusion I’ve come to after talking to a lot of people, stakeholders, constituents and I would encourage our board to either put this off or consider leaving the ordinance as is.”
Following Brown’s assertion, Phillips asked for a motion. Commissioner Mark Jones made a motion to deny revision to the solicitation ordinance, which passed unanimously.
