►
From YouTube: Safe Communities Committee Meeting - March 4, 2020
Description
This is the Charlotte City Council Safe Communities Committee meeting for March 4, 2020. Thanks for joining us.
A
A
B
C
E
A
A
D
B
B
C
Okay,
well
good
afternoon,
chairman
Ellison
and
council
member
Johnson
today
we're
going
to
have
a
presentation
on
the
challenges
that
the
city
is
experiencing
regarding
panhandling
and
aggressive
panhandling.
So
we
have
deputy
chief
Voorhees
who's
going
to
come
here
and
talk
to
us
about
this
topic.
So
you
want
to
come
up
to
one
of
the
mics.
E
I,
don't
have
a
lot
this
morning,
but
to
say
a
little
bit
about
panhandling.
It
occurs
in
all
parts
of
the
city,
it's
a
constitutionally
protected
by
the
First
Amendment,
but
we
have
been
seeing
more
and
more
calls
related
to
loitering
for
money.
It's
been
up
three
percent
in
2019
over
2018
with
5476
calls.
Sometimes
we
may
take
enforcement
action
by
citation
or
arrest
or
verbal
warning
and
many
times
if
we
do
take
action
like
that,
those
cases
are
dismissed
or
if
they
are
arrested.
E
They're
released
without
a
bond
chief
Putney
would
like
the
committee
to
look
at
a
few
things
and
you
have
a
handout
and
you
had
a
slide.
There
meet
with
community
members,
impacted
to
gain
a
full
understanding
of
the
issue
to
work
with
service
partners,
on
identifying
opportunities
to
impact
panhandling
and
develop
concrete
guidelines
for
enforcement
of
the
ordinance
I.
E
E
We
work
with
a
lot
of
partners
and
and
do
some
homeless
outreach.
We
do
a
lot
of
that
with
our.
We
have
an
officer
assigned
that
works
with
those
folks.
We
do
point
in
time
counts
with
our
partners,
Urban,
Ministries
and
others,
but
we've
just
seen
a
lot
of
increasing
numbers
of
complaints
that
come
through
both
in
the
Emerald
system,
as
well
as
emails.
I
get
a
lot.
I've
got
patrol
and
folks
reach
out
from
anywhere
from
the
University
Division,
the
Westover
division
and
all
over
the
city.
E
So
it's
an
issue
that
that
it's
hard
to
there's
no
there's
no
definitive
way
to
handle
aggressive
panhandling
that
really
solves
the
problem.
So
it's
kind
of
a
global
issue
with
lots
of
lots
of
areas
where
we
need
a
lot
of
help
and
I
think
we're
just
looking
for
some
guidance
in
terms
of
the
ordinance,
maybe
they'll
relook
at
that
and
see
where
the
city
wants
us
to
go
with
how
we
handle
the
issue.
B
Non
aggressive,
panhandling,
the
bottom
right
of
the
sheet
I
think
we
all
call
the
court
ruling.
That
said
that
this
is
free
speech,
but
is
this
ordinance
that
we
currently
have
in
place
not
even
enforceable
when
the
when
the
action
becomes
aggressive?
Certainly
when
it
becomes
violent,
I
presume
that
we
can
enforce
that,
but
where
legally,
has
the
line
been
drawn
between
what's
aggressive
and
thereby
enforceable
and
not,
or
does
it
literally
have
to
become
physical?
It.
E
Doesn't
have
to
become
physical,
it
can
be
a
communicating
threat
or
some
type
of
action
where
somebody
may
get
in
front
of
you
feel
like
you're,
not
free
to
leave
while
they're
aggressively
their
actions,
and
it's
really
behavior
based.
So
it
just
depends,
but
obviously
we're
not.
The
police
aren't
there
at
all
times
to
witness
these
things
and
because
it
would
be
most
of
those
crimes
or
misdemeanors
if
they
occur
outside
of
our
presence.
B
How
how
close
are
we
coordinating
with
the
Center
City
partners?
What
are
we
calling
a
darn
shirt
folks,
the
aren't
the
Uptown
ambassadors
are,
we
have
they've
been
empowered
to
try
I
mean?
Certainly
we
don't
want
them
non
law
enforcement.
We
don't
want
them
intervening
in
a
violent
or
aggressive
situation,
but
if
they've
been
trained
and
empowered
to
try
to
help
connect
folks
experiencing
homelessness
in
Uptown
to
services
as
well.
Yes,.
B
B
G
E
G
I
never
want
to
see
a
homeless
person.
You
know
lose
everything
that
they
have,
but
it
is
a
complaint
that
I
receive
from
the
from
the
neighbors
or
from
the
residents
that
you
know
there's
a
median
right
there
in
in
my
district
and
there's
always
stuff
there
just
and
we
know
that
it's
from
panhandler
so
and
then,
if
you
talk
about
the
root
cause
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
know
it's
a
big
problem
is
when
people
are
released
from
prison
or
or
jail
and
they're
homeless.
D
B
F
So
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
what
we
being
asked
to
do
so
my
understanding
is
the
orders
that
stands
right
now
is
unconstitutional,
so
we
would
the
the
action
be
to
remove
the
ordinance
from
the
books,
because
I
do
know
that
this
is
being
used.
Reference
to
this
ordinance
was
brought
to
the
community's
attention
about
signs
in
Uptown
that
have
been
place
by
a
cm.
Pd
partner,
I
think
it's
real
change.
Now.
F
That's
cited
that
unconstitutional
portion
of
the
coordinates.
Now
there
was
a
lot
of
concerns
that
you
know
they
were
getting
money
from
us
from
the
city
to
do
that.
Are
we
stopping
that
and
again
just
clarity
around
what
we
are
going
to
do
with
this
bad
ordinance
that
we
have
won
our
books
right
now?
So.
E
My
understanding
is
the
signs
that
were
put
out
where
were
removed.
There
may
be
one
that's
still
out
there
somewhere.
The
ordinance
itself
is
not
unconstitutional.
What
I
think
the
Fourth
Circuit
said
was
that
panhandling
is
free
speech.
Yeah
aggressive
panhandling
is
what
our
ordinance
tries
to
address
and
that's
what
we're
wanting
to
revisit
and
make
sure
that
it
is
something
that
we
can
use
as
a
tool
and
then
also
perhaps
down
the
line.
Look
for
some
type
of
broader
involvement
to
address
aggressive
panhandling.
What.
F
B
I
think
that
I
mean
that's
this
issue,
obviously
highly
charged
in
most
but
I.
Think
for
one.
It
doesn't
do
any
good
for
us
to
find
or
arrest
and
create
a
revolving
door
at
the
jail
I
with
folks
who
already
don't
have
that's
not
going
to
solve
the
problems.
I
will
point
out
that
real
change
program
actually
was
in
partnership
with
many
of
the
best
organizations
in
our
community
that
are
addressing
the
issues
around
homelessness,
ie,
the
mid
shelter,
urban
ministries
and
others.
B
So
that
was
not
something
that
was
done
in
an
attempt
to
be
punitive
I.
Don't
think
it
was
just
because
I
and
obviously
there's
great
disagreement
about
this.
So
this
is
kind
of
a
highly-charged
statement,
but
that
giving
people
money
as
you
walk
down
the
street
or
giving
people
money
that
you're
at
a
stoplight
is
actually
probably
not
the
best
way
to
help
them.
B
It's
well-intentioned
efforts,
probably,
but
maybe
not
the
best
way,
to
get
at
the
root
of
the
problem,
but
I,
agree.
I,
don't
think
any
of
us
want
this
to
be
punitive,
but
I,
echo
councilmember,
Winston's
question
in
that
the
charge
from
chief
Putney
to
this
committee
to
me
outlines
three
things
that
I
think
see.
Mpd
and
the
city
as
a
whole
is
already
kind
of
doing
on
an
ongoing
basis.
So
I
guess
my
question
would
be
the
same
as
his.
What
what
are
we
being
asked
to
can
a
policy
change?
B
E
Just
to
look
at
the
actual
policy
that
we
have
the
city
ordinance
1515
go
through
that
and
determine
at
what
level
do
you
want
to
see
CMP
DS
involvement
in
enforcement
and
and
also
what
the
expectations
are
for
outcomes
there?
Because
again,
if
we,
if
we
did
had
to
resort
to
any
enforcement
issues,
it's
not
doesn't
stop
there.
You
know
it's
it's
more
broad
than
that.
E
Sometimes
honestly,
when
we
talk
homelessness,
arresting
might
be
the
right
thing
for
some
person
who
doesn't
want
services
doesn't
doesn't
when
we
offer
them
at
the
time
when
he's
doing
here,
she's
doing
something
wrong,
putting
them
in
the
jail
where
they
have
some
resources
in
the
jail
for
either
mental
health
or
other
issues.
That
might
be
the
best
outcome
for
that
individual
is.
E
It
depends
we
don't
determine
fines
or
anything
related
to
bonds
and
whatnot,
but
I.
Just
my
point
is
that
their
services
in
the
jail
their
services
outside
of
the
jail
and
we
try
to
find
I
think
the
best
solution
for
those
individuals.
Each
of
them
have
their
own
issues.
Sometimes
it
may
be
to
you
know,
find
family
members
and
send
them
to
them
if
they'll
receive
them,
and
that
might
be
the
best
outcome
or
get
them
health
care
or
some
other
way
and.
B
Then
to
mr.
Johnson
find
out,
we've
got
people
Sugarcreek
in
central
there's,
different
folks
in
different
parts
of
town,
but
obviously
uptown.
That's
one
of
the
places
that
it's
most
visible
from
your
and
this
might
be
somewhat
anecdotal.
But
from
your
personal
experience,
is
it
the
same
30
people
that
you're
encountering
over
and
over
again
or
is
it
150
people
I
mean?
Is
it?
Is
it
a
really
concentrated
group
and
I
guess
to
me
that
would
potentially
change
how
we
would
address
the
issue
when.
E
We
do
I,
think
point
in
time,
counts,
I,
think
the
homeless
population
is
growing
in
terms
of
the
panhandling
issue
and
I
don't
mean
aggressive
panhandling,
but
people
who
typically
solicit
alms
at
intersections
and
things
like
that.
A
lot
of
them
stay
in
the
same
general
area
and
and
some
of
them.
We
know
because
you
may
drive
or
commute
that
way
every
day
and
you
see
the
same
people.
So
it's
it's
a
challenge
there
to
to
address
that.
B
As
you're
making,
those
and
I've
got
miss
Johnson
and
mr.
Winston
as
you're,
making
those
contacts
with
them.
Obviously
we're
working
hand-in-hand
with
with
the
service
providers
ie,
shelters
whatever,
but
when
you're
making
those
contacts
with
them.
Are
you
actually
going
out
with
someone
from
Urban
Ministries
and
maybe
making
that
contact
on
the
street
together?
Yes,.
E
At
times
we
have
an
officer
that
does
that
as
part
of
their
of
their
duties
and
when
they
go
out
to
do
do
all
those
type
of
proactive
things,
not
not
talking
typical
police
enforcement,
but
more
of
a
presence
to
address
folks
where
they
are,
and
we
try
to
bring
as
many
people
and
we've
done,
we've
been
very
successful
that
the
only
thing
we've
never
had
is
like
a
doctor
who
can
prescribe
medicine
at
the
scene.
It's
always
basically,
everybody
else
we
can
bring
out
is.
E
It
sure
we
offer
a
lot
of
things
they
can
go
to
Anu
via
for
treatment
or
depending
on
their
issues,
some
of
its
mental
health.
They
may
go
to
atrium
if
it's
off,
if
it
sounds
like
a
detox
situation,
maybe
a
new
V
is
the
right
place.
There's
other
services
there
in
that
in
that
area,
we
just
try
to
find
the
right
thing
for
the
neighbor
that
we're
dealing
with
so.
G
You
all
know
that
I'm
an
advocate
for
survivors
of
brain
injury,
and
there
are
studies
that
show
that
two
homeless
people
have
history
of
a
head
injury,
so
I.
Just
so
I
think
that
knowledge
and
asking
those
questions
you
have
veterans
that
are
coming
home.
Just
everyday
people
that
have
suffered
head
injuries,
so
getting
the
effective
treatment
might
break
that
cycle
because
when
they
go
to
jail,
we
have
to
think
of
the
re-entry
process.
You
know
getting
a
job
and
getting
a
housing
with
the
criminal
record.
G
F
F
H
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
think
this
issue
hit
home
for
me.
Probably
last
90
days,
spending
time
of
town
because
I
think
lived
in
my
community
I
was
far
from
it
in
North
Lake
model
and
so
I
I
Russell.
This
is
elected
official.
What
do
we
do?
Council?
Member
Johnson
point
you
have
some
who
just
does
not
have
the
means
and
incarcerate
them
does
not
make
the
situations
better.
I
have
encountered
to
the
Chairman
point:
churches
being
there
and
telling
us
hey.
H
We
can
remove
them
from
the
front
of
your
office,
and
so
there
is
a
community
who's.
Sensitive
to
this.
Mr.
chairman
I
would
recommend
I.
Think
our
next
step
is
that
look
at
this
from
a
whole
holistic
perspective
and
we
need
to
get
those
who
are
providers,
see
MPD.
Who
then
have
the
responsibility
and
the
House
Council
members
to
really
look
at
this
because
there's
about
homeless,
and
how
do
we
address
it
from
that
individual
and
some
do
need
mental
mental
assistance.
H
I
remember
once
I
get
one
more
I
get
the
Baris
I'm
o'clock:
hey
guys
showed
me
papers,
he
just
got
released
and
he
said
I
said,
but
you
know
I
could
tell
you
still
need
help.
He
said
do
sir,
but
the
process
is
at
the
ten
days.
Somebody
doesn't
need
that
be
it.
They
put
me
on
the
street.
That's
a
psycho
policy
would
not
solve
not
by
City
Council
itself.
So
mr.
chair
might
recommend
we
got
to
get
everybody
at
the
table
to
address
this.
H
Cbd
I
could
tell
you
all
did
an
excellent
job,
because
we
made
about
seven
phone
calls
one
night.
It
was
very
bad
that
there
was
an
altercation
in
front
of
our
building
and
they
were
just
slamming
each
other
heads
on
on
the
sidewalk
below
and
everywhere
and
I.
Had
volunteers
in
the
building
economy
said
we're
not
going
home,
and
so
this
is
real
first
time
they
hit
me
that
it
was
very
prevalent
uptown.
So
I
think
we
did
it
look
at
this
from
a
holistic
perspective.
H
B
I'll
plant
the
seed
now
with
Kaltura's
as
well
that
I
know
in
this
calendar
year
we're
gonna
be
presented
with
an
opportunity
to
help
one
of
our
primary
service
providers
in
this
space,
expand
their
capacity
and
expand
their
their
bandwidth
to
help
more
people.
So
I
hope
that
will
keep
this
discussion
in
mind
when
that
paternity
is
presented
to
us,
because
I
think
to
your
point,
we
have
great
organizations,
but
we
need
to
help
them
scale.
That's
right
scale,
beyond
the
capacity
that
they
have
now
that
miss
Charles
were
you.
C
Maybe
think
about
what
would
be
our
pro
power
in
the
next
meeting?
Do
we
need
to
review
the
current
ordinance
or
maybe
come
I'm,
seeing
that
being
one
issue
that
we've
got
here
and
then
maybe
come
up
with
some
kind
of
a
framework
for
engaging
other
partners?
Maybe
come
up
with
the
planeman
I'd,
certainly
like
to
see
us
in
the.
B
Next
iteration
of
this
discussion
have
this
placing
Kelly
here
for
one,
but
then
maybe
maybe
our
kind
of
health
director,
whoever
we
think
are
the
right
folks,
maybe
even
if
they're
I,
don't
know
how
that
ambassador
programs
structured,
but
if
there's
a
kind
of
a
team
leader
for
that
ambassador
program
or
something
maybe
they
have
a
different
viewpoint
on
it.
There's
people
who
are
just
kind
of
walking
the
streets,
but
not
as
uniformed
officers,
I'm
sure
people
interact
with
with
someone
with
a
badge
differently
than
they
do.
B
Maybe
someone
with
just
an
arms
pull
along
so
I
think
all
those
perspectives
are
valuable.
Business
owners
as
well
I've
had
I'm
sure
we
all
have
I
had
one
in
particular
at
the
corner
of
Thomas
and
central
recently,
where
there's
been
a
lot
of
congregating
and
some
issues
there.
So
you
know
some
of
that
might
be
input.
We
want
to
seek
offline
before
the
meeting
and
it
can
be
defended.
B
G
And
that
one
way
to
get
things
done
effectively
is
it's
kind
of
stay
in
your
lane
and
let
the
experts
be
the
expert.
So
there
are
people
that
are
already
working
on
this
there's
a
continuum
of
care,
there's
homeless,
service
network.
So
if
we
make
sure
we
have
city
staff
and
I
know
that
the
city
facilitated
the
continuum
of
care
meetings
up
until
last
year.
Okay,
so
there's
several
city
staff,
that's
on
that
committee,
but
we
can
get
the
input
and
you
know
they
may
be
already
at
discussing
solutions.
G
So
we
can
just
take
you
know
the
baton
or
do
what
we
can
do
for
that.
So
there
are
people
that
are
doing
this
research,
the
county,
you
know,
but
to
work
with
those
they're
already
doing
it.
Instead
of
creating
a
whole
other
team
or
sub
community
and
asking
the
questions
that
have
already
been
answered.
So.
D
G
Say
work
with
those
who
are
already
doing
the
work
and
I
do
know
that
there
are
city
staff
that
had
been
a
part
of
the
continuum
of
care
for
a
long
time.
So
let's
just
work
with
the
people
that
are
already
doing
the
work.
Like
the
chair
said
there
are
organizations,
you
know
we
look
at
the
jump
start
and
the
amp
up
Charlotte,
there's
programs
that
we
can
assist
those
grassroots,
the
the
organizations
that
are
doing
the
work.
So
we
know
that
this
homelessness
is
a
huge
problem.
G
C
So
I
hear
staff,
maybe
present
research
and
data
and
information
on
partnership
and
that
that
addresses
the
global
issue
and
then
somewhere
in
here,
we
need
to
talk
about
the
immediate
issue
too,
with
the
fourth
fourth
circuit
ruling
changing
or
impacting
our
turn
so
Canada.
You
know
it's
like.
We've
got
to
think
better.
C
B
Depending
on
how
these
cases
are
adjudicated,
if
that
is
leaving
someone
with
a
criminal
record,
while
she
pointed
out
that
the
putting
someone
in
jail
might
be
a
way
to
connect
them
to
services-
and
that
undoubtedly
could
be
true-
and
so
it's
sort
of
good
to
miss
Johnson's
point.
If
what
that
what
the
court
system
ends
up
doing
with
that
person
leaves,
you
know
black
mark
on
their
their
criminal
record.
That
then
prohibits
them
from
getting
a
job
that
we're
just
kind
of
perpetuating,
and
it's
mr.
Winston's
point
earlier.
B
F
Well,
to
that
end,
have
we
actually
talked
to
the
folks
that
will
be
considered
aggressive,
panhandlers
and
asked
them
what
would
be
needed
for
them
to
stop
and
stop
that
behavior
and
if
we
have
a
and
kind
of
I
guess
what
I'm
the
next
thought
that
comes
out
of
it
would
be
hey
if
they
are
telling
us
what
they
need.
Without
doing
these
studies
and
relying
on
professionals,
we're
actually
are
not
the
people
that
are
determining
what
the
actual
need
is.
F
F
Wouldn't
we
be
trying
to
create
a
solution
for
that
doesn't
exist.
You
know
for
a
problem
that
might
inconvenience
people,
but
it's
not
necessarily
illegal,
or
you
know
what
might
not
rise
to
the
level
of
a
new
ordinance.
It
might
be
something
low
hey.
We
need
to
learn
how
to
interact.
We
need
to
educate
the
people
that
feel
threatened
by
this
behavior
to
say,
hey
well,
part
of
this
is
that
you
need
to
learn
how
to
interact
with
unhoused
population
yeah.
F
F
Violent
and
well,
you
don't
have
to
be
physical
to
be
violent.
You
can
threaten
with
words
and
and
verbiage,
you
know
and
communicate
threats
and
in
many
different
ways.
We
know
that
you
can
certain.
You
can
feel
threatened
by
a
look
you
know,
but
if
people
aren't
being
violent,
you
can
be
aggressive,
but
by
law.
So
if
that's
not
illegal
and
that's
not
unconstitutional,
should
we
be
looking
at
that
from
an
ordinance
standpoint,
or
this
is
a
relationship
standpoint
about
the
facts
about
living
in
a
city.
So,
chief.
B
E
I
think
we're
trying
to
address
specifically
panhandling,
that
involves
a
citizen
who
was
in
fear
or
doesn't
feel
that
they
can
move
because
their
pathway
to
escape
is
being
blocked
and
and
threatening
type
behaviors
related
in
relation
to
panhandling.
At
the
same
time,
have
the
ordinance,
so
you
can't
you're
not
supposed
to
Panhandle
near
an
ATM
you're,
not
supposed
to
Panhandle
near
a
taxi
stand
where
people
congregate
and
they're
trying
to
go
about
their
normal
business.
F
E
F
Cuz
I
think
those
are
two
different
things
because
again,
if
there's
some
people
that,
if
this
is
their
lifestyle,
you
know
that's,
we
can
get
them
a
medicine
that
they
need.
You
can
get
them
stable
housing.
They
might
still
participate
in
this,
so
we
can
throw
all
the
solutions
and
think
thoughts
and
efforts
behind
it
that
we
want,
but
if
they're
doing
this-
and
they
have
a
right
to
do
this,
should
we
be
figuring
out
how
to
I
don't
know,
get
them
to
stop
because
of
somebody
else's
comfort
level.
With
that.
B
Well
again,
I
think,
based
on
what
he's
saying
we're
trying
she's
saying
we're
trying
to
address
I
do
think.
That's
behavior
that
it
overwhelming
majority
would
agree,
needs
to
be
curbed
as
much
as
possible.
I,
don't
think
that
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
make
a
code
that
is
stricter
on
the
free-speech
portion
of
panhandling,
but
I'm
I'm
not
going
to
defend
someone's
right
and
I
put
that
in
heavy
code.
Quotations
to
intimidate
somebody
or
to
make
somebody
feel
threatened
that
that
to
me
is
well
beyond
the
free
speech.
F
To
say
you
know
what
would
I
do
to
my?
What
I
do
that
intimidate?
You
might
not
be
my
intent,
it
might
not
be.
It
might
just
be
me,
asking
you
a
question
and
all
of
a
sudden
you
feel,
like
you
have
to
run
across
the
street.
That
happens
plenty
of
times.
You
know
the
implicit
biases
that
already
occur
on
top
of
people
in
these
specific
situations.
G
Can
we
work
with
the
courts
to
find
out
how
many
people
are
being
convicted
of
the
aggressive
panhandling
because
being
chief
said
that
many
of
the
cases
are
dismissed
and
I'd
like
to
know
how
big
of
a
problem
this
is?
So
if
we're
just
creating
an
ordinance,
that's
going
to
just
create
you
know
the
courts
being
crowded
with
these
cases
that
are
ultimately
dismissed,
I
mean
we
want
to
be
effective.
G
So,
let's
find
out,
you
know
what
the
numbers
are
and
then
to
councilmember
Braxton's
point:
if
there
are,
you
know
one
or
two
people
or
a
handful
of
folks
that
we
can
that
someone
could
just
say
hey
what
are
the
problems
and
we
could
address
this,
then
that
would
be
good,
but
is
this
really
a
problem,
and
what
are
we
asking
the
police
to
do
you
know?
Are
they
just
making
these
arrests
for
cases
that
are
ultimately
going
to
be
dismissed?
G
We
want
to
be
effective
in
in
our
problem,
something
so
I
think
those
numbers
of
how
many
people
have
been
convicted
and
I.
Don't
know
what
charges
are
our
place.
There's
a
just
aggressive
panhandling
if
they're
blocking
a
path,
it's
a
kidnapping,
I
mean
I,
have
no
idea
what
the
charges
are,
but
if
we
could
look
at
what
charge
what
they're
charged
with
and
what
they're
convicted
and
the
numbers
do,
you
think,
do
you
think
that
that
would
be
a
way
to
approach
this?
Yes,.
E
E
We
don't
categorize
that
that
way,
it
may
be
that
they
give
an
address
of
like
the
shelter.
So
maybe
that's
something
that
we
can
say
that
arrest
is
probably
a
homeless
person,
but
we're
working
on
clearing
that
up
on
the
handout
that
we
gave
out
of
the
citations
that
were
issued
for
chargeable
panhandling
offenses
we
had
209
55%
were
dismissed
and
70%
projected
dismissal
rate
when
pending
cases
are
factored
in.
So
for
the
most
part,
it's
not
something
that
they
get
convictions
from
and.
B
It
might
be
helpful
to
and
I
think
the
and
I
want
to
be
respectful,
I
rise
time,
because
I
know
we've
got
a
marathon
budget
workshop
coming
up
here
shortly,
I
think,
undoubtedly
for
us
to
fully
dig
into
this
issue.
It's
all
been
said
and
I
think
miss
Charles
is
captured
at
all.
We
just
need
more
information.
B
I
do
think
part
of
that
more
information.
It
would
be
helpful
to
know
the
30
percent
or
so
that,
ultimately,
our
charges
that
do
stick
to
that
person
what
those
charges
are
and
what
kind
of
the
litmus
test
is
for
why
the
charges
stuck
vs
charges
were
dismissed
because
again,
if
we
track
those
30
percent
of
charges,
does
that
create
a
vicious
cycle
of
this
person
has
fines.
They
can't
pay
they've,
you
know
it
ruins
our
credit.
F
One
thing
to
also
consider
if
we're
looking
as
best
specifically
excuse
me
court
records
how
many
of
these
aggressive,
panhandling,
citations
or
court
cases
originate
or
involve
chief
4-s,
you
know,
and
on
the
transit
system,
as
well
as
whatever
private
corporate
police.
There
are
I
know
we
see,
MPD
gets
quality,
get
a
call,
but
sometimes
they
get
calls
to
assist,
and
sometimes
g4s
is
responsible
for
the
arrest,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
but
see,
MPD
will
transport
them
to
the.
E
B
G
B
Our
next
meeting
is
Tuesday
April
7th
come
food
to
have
some
more
of
this
information
by
then
and
and
I
hope
to
that,
whether
it's
non
CMP
staff
or
see
MPD
or
working
together
on
it.
But
if
there
are
revisions
that
that
are
thought
to
be
needed
as
far
as
the
ordinance
goes,
that
some
of
those
options
are
may
be
brought
forward
in
terms
of
what
language
changes
could
be
made
to
make
our
ordinance
more
effective
but
less
punitive.
B
So
hopefully,
if
that's
the
goal
for
the
committee
bring
forward
some
draft
language
for
that
for
us
to
consider
at
that
meeting
along
with
that
new,
with
the
additional
data
that's
been
requested.
So
with
that
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
close
when
you
guys
come
forward.
I
was
talking
about
a
budget.