►
From YouTube: Cranston City Council January 23rd, 2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
D
E
You
president,
this
past
week
we
lost
one
of
our
citizens.
Mr.
Joseph
Dwyer
Joe
was
a
good
friend
of
mine.
It
was
also
a
long-standing
teacher
in
the
city
of
Cranston,
former
basketball
coach
at
Cranston
West,
and
he
was
a
longtime
member
of
this
City
Council,
representing
what
six
so
through
the
president
I'd
like
to
take
a
moment
of
silence
in
Joe's
memory.
A
Thank
You
counsel,
Hopkins.
Thank
you
any
additional
public,
acknowledgments
or
commendations
there
being
none
I'll
move
on
to
the
next
section,
which
is
public
hearings
before
I
begin
public
hearings,
one
quick
statement.
Actually
two.
We
will
be
amending
the
solicitations
of
ordinance
this
evening,
I'm
per
council
rules.
If
those
amendments
do
pass
and
the
both
bill
passes
amended,
we
will
have
to
have
a
special
council
meeting
to
have
a
hearing
on
the
final
bill
as
amended,
so
we
will
be
amending
it
tonight.
A
You
want
to
let
the
group
know
that
and
additionally,
because
of
the
volume
of
people
in
the
dais
here
tonight,
we're
going
to
be
limiting
comments
to
Cranston
residents
and
we're
going
to
be
limiting
it
to
two
minutes
tonight.
So
please
a
lot
of
people
here
we
want
to
get
as
many
Cranston
residents
through
as
we
can
so
I'm
gonna
start
with
Tom
logic
and
name
an
address
of
the
record.
Please
Thank.
F
You
counsel,
my
name
is
Tom
logic:
I
live
at
11,
Hall,
Place
and
Cranston
Rhode
Island
I'm
here,
to
give
my
thoughts
and
opinions
on
the
potential
ordinance
for
panhandling
I
want
to
take
this
perspective
and
talk
about
language
and
words
and
their
meaning.
If
a
business
came
to
the
council
to
ask
for
tax
break
to
start
a
business
here,
would
you
refer
to
that
as
panhandling?
You
might
request
the
business
that
they
submit
a
proposal
for
review
and
consideration,
but
in
reality
the
business
is
asking
for
your
assistance.
F
They
are
respectfully
begging
the
council
for
your
help,
financial
NOFA.
We
have
carefully
crafted
distinctions
based
on
certain
factors,
along
with
language
and
words,
to
make
asking
for
money
respectable
or
businesslike
reframe,
the
ask
and
words
and
phrases
like
incentives,
loans
and
tax
breaks.
But
when
we
get
right
down
to
the
basic
transaction,
it's
an
ask
for
help
and
assistance.
It's
an
acceptable
form
of
pan.
F
This
fall
politicians,
panhandled
for
money
and
votes.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
I
received
several
panhandling
telephone
calls
and
flyers
from
many
of
you
sitting
in
this
room
and
I
certainly
saw
panhandling
Lewis
lawn
signs.
Asking
for
my
vote
using
the
term
panhandling
is
in
this
context,
may
not
sit
well,
but
the
core.
The
transaction
is
the
same
and
many
of
our
tax-exempt
churches.
They
pass
the
basket
for
donations,
it's
a
classic
form
of
panhandling.
F
F
Why
is
a
business
request
for
a
tax
break,
a
church,
passing
the
collection
basket
and
requests
for
political
donations
and
a
vote
types
of
panhandling
any
different
from
the
person
in
the
street
corner
making
request
for
help?
Is
it
because
we
don't
want
to
be
confronted
with
the
reality
of
poverty
and
homelessness
because
it
makes
us
uncomfortable?
Should
we
be
more
afraid
of
street
panhandlers
or
business
panhandlers?
Who
take
our
money?
Wasn't
Curt
Schilling
one
of
the
most
notorious
panhandlers
that
ever
pan
handled
in
our
state?
F
Should
it
matter
if
your
panhandler,
if
you
Panhandle
in
the
corridors
of
the
Statehouse
or
on
a
street
corner,
it's
okay
to
Panhandle,
if
you're
one
of
the
haves,
but
it's
not
acceptable,
and
now
we
want
to
make
it
a
crime.
If
you're
one
of
the
have-nots
asking
for
money,
you
might
say
that
business
panhandling
is
different
because
it
might
contribute
to
the
community
by
hiring
people
fair
enough.
I
believe
that
Street
PA
panhandlers
also
contribute
to
my
community.
They
contribute
by
reminding
me
how
fortunate
I
am
and
how
fragile
life
is.
F
A
H
Thank
You,
mr.
council
president,
my
name
is
John
Bolton,
22,
Macintosh,
Drive,
Cranston
I'm,
here
in
my
capacity
as
an
attorney
with
his
law
firm
in
Hinkley
Allen
and
as
you
as
you
mentioned,
I'm,
not
here,
I'm,
be
speaking
on
behalf
or
against
the
Panhandle
in
order
that
I
am
making
reference
to
ordinance
number
one
17
11,
which
I
understand
is
before
you
this
evening,
only
to
be
referred
to
committee.
H
We're
proposing
this
ordinance
at
this
time
to
allow
the
city
to
more
efficiently
dispose
of
certain
appeals
that
are
pending
in
Superior
Court,
which
would
then
allow
certain
shovel-ready
projects
to
proceed
in
the
city
which
will
allow
both
the
preservation
of
land
and
the
generation
of
tax
revenues.
And
unless
you
have
any
questions.
Those
are
the
only
comments
I
had
on
that
ordinance.
Mr.
council
president.
A
H
Council
president,
with
your
indulgence,
I,
would
and
I
when
I
was
looking
at
the
agenda
this
evening.
I
noticed
there
was
another
ordinance
ordinance,
one
17
OH,
which
I
quickly
read
and
it
had
to
do
with
electronic
filing
of
documents
on
applications.
Certainly,
clients
that
I
represent
in
the
city
would
have
I,
don't
think
any
problem
complying
with
any
of
those
requirements.
I
represent
many
developers.
H
I
Kate
Albin
39
Moreland
of
Cranston
I'm
here
tonight
to
speak
against
the
proposed
panhandling
ordinance.
This
proposal
is
being
touted
as
a
public
safety
ordinance,
but
it
does
little
to
ensure
public
safety.
What
it
actually
does
is
criminalized
both
poverty
and
charity.
The
thought
seems
to
be
that
if
it
becomes
illegal
to
accept
donations
given
from
the
driver's
side
of
a
vehicle
to
someone
standing
on
a
median
or
a
lane,
divider
that
panhandlers
will
stop
panhandling,
they
won't
the
majority
of
people
who
Panhandle
do
so
because
they
are
struggling
financially.
I
If
you
make
panhandling
illegal
in
one
location,
it
will
just
move
to
another
location
in
the
city
to
truly
solve
the
problem
of
panhandling.
The
city
needs
to
ensure
that
the
panhandlers,
many
of
whom
are
homeless,
are
receiving
the
services
they
need.
Many
people
will
point
to
all
of
the
organizations
and
services
available
and
it's
true
that
there
are
those
working
to
help
homeless
populations,
but
the
city
of
Cranston
needs
to
take
a
more
active
role
in
this
area.
I
We
need
to
work
to
solve
the
root
causes
of
the
problem
and
the
best
way
to
start
is
to
talk
with
the
people
who
deal
with
it
on
a
daily
basis.
If
we
as
a
city
work
to
eradicate
homelessness
and
poverty,
you
will
see
fewer
and
fewer
people
panhandling.
The
ACLU
sent
a
letter
to
its
members
last
week
stating
that
they
will
likely
be
pursuing
a
legal
legal
action
against
Cranston
because
of
the
unconstitutionality
of
the
ordinance.
This
lawsuit
will
cost
tenants
and
taxpayers
and
the
city
thousands
of
dollars.
Just
like
the
last
time.
I
A
similar
ordinance
was
tried
in
Cranston
that
money
could
be
better
spent
repair
Rhodes
continuing
to
improve
our
schools
are
helping
the
most
vulnerable
members
of
our
city.
I
urge
you
to
not
pass
this
ordinance.
Take
a
step
back
and
work
to
understand
the
root
causes
of
the
problem
to
come
up
with
a
solution
that
is
compassionate
sustainable
and
makes
Cranston
a
better
place
for
all
of
its
residents.
I
The
city
of
Cranston
has
the
opportunity
to
be
a
leader
like
Salt,
Lake,
City,
Utah
or
Phoenix
Arizona,
who
have
both
essentially
eliminated
chronic
homelessness
with
the
housing
first
model,
or
we
can
be.
We
can
be
known
as
the
city
that
is
constantly
fighting
lawsuits
that
we
inevitably
lose.
I
hope
you'll
make
the
right
choice.
J
It
sounds
like
a
much
better
long-term
solution
to
help
these
admit,
jiggles
individuals
with
their
needs,
then
shortsightedness
of
arresting
Andrea,
resting,
I'm
sure
the
Cranston
police
would
rather
be
part
of
a
solution
and
a
less
costly
one
than
pasta.
Then
the
cost
of
an
arrest
Andrea
rest.
If
we
don't
deal
with
the
underlying
problems
of
these
individuals,
individuals,
we
are
not
solving
anything
by
arresting
them.
The
only
thing
we
are
doing
by
removing
these
individuals
from
the
street
is
taking
them
out
of
our
sight.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
K
A
K
If
I
can
get
her
out
of
the
way,
it
won't
disturb
the
rest
of
the
hearing.
I
appreciate
it
good
morning,
a
good
evening,
a
council
president
Farina
and
council
members.
My
name
is
Sarah
Harrigan
and
I'm.
A
resident
of
74
encrust,
F
I'm,
also
a
volunteer
with
the
progressive
Cranston,
Action,
Network
and
I'm
here
to
respectfully
voice.
My
strong
dissent
to
ordinance
12
1602
I
have
three
concerns,
I'll,
be
as
brief
as
possible.
K
My
second
concern
is
a
financial
one.
The
Supreme
Court
has
overruled
anti
panhandling
laws,
and
this
is
an
anti
panhandling
law
in
sheep's
clothing.
There's,
no
doubt
that
this
ordinance
will
almost
immediately
be
challenged
and
that
the
city
of
Cranston
will
be
tied
up
in
an
expensive
legal
battle
over
the
constitutionality
and
I'm
concerned
that
our
tax
dollars
could
be
going
to
better
places.
K
And
third,
my
final
concern
is:
is
philosophical,
the
ordinances
unquestionably
criminalizing
poor
people
and
honestly,
if
you
think
that
our
state,
local
and
national
safety
net
safety
net,
is
strong
enough
to
support
their
complex
needs,
then
I
really
recommend
that
folks
spend
some
time
with
the
agencies
and
the
individuals
and
those
agencies
who
are
trying
to
provide
these
safety
net
services.
I
understand
that
that
people
have
concerns
about
panhandling
I'm,
not
being
a
proponent
of
panhandling
here
to
be
completely
honest.
K
I
have
also
felt
deeply
uncomfortable
when
being
approached
directly
for
food
for
food
or
money,
but
by
banishing
the
approach
by
banishing
this
approach,
it's
the
exact
opposite
of
how
we
need
to
be
handling
this.
These
problems
as
a
community.
We
really
need
to
acknowledge
the
poorest
among
us
and
work
together
to
find
better
solutions
and
far
too
many
of
us
are
just
one
pink
slip
or
hospitalization
away
from
being
in
this
position
ourselves.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
patience.
L
Excuse
me
once
again
I'm
here
as
a
resident
and
I
would
like
to
be
able
to
read
my
testimony
quickly,
I'm
here
as
a
resident
of
Cranston
Debbie
Flip
men
I
live
at
52
Lindsay
lane
in
Cranston
in
Alpine
estates
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
myself
as
a
resident
and
also
I'll,
be
representing
the
ACLU.
So
I
have
two
documents
to
read
and
I'll
keep
at
the
two
minutes.
L
L
When
you
took
your
the
oath
of
four
your
elected
position
on
the
Cranston
City
Council,
you
promised
that
you
would
be
true,
faithful
and
support
the
US
Constitution
I
for
one
I'm
going
to
hold
you
to
that
promise.
Everything
about
the
Constitution
matters.
You
have
stated
that
this
is
a
safety
ordinance,
one
that
is
being
proposed
to
keep
drivers,
panhandlers
donation
collectors
safe.
However,
you
have
failed
to
provide
any
backup
data
that
shows
an
increase
in
car
accidents
involving
people
asking
for
donations.
L
Our
tax
money
will
be
put
to
better
use
if
the
city
of
Cranston
would
increase
resources
for
homeless,
indigent
mentally
ill
and
school
children
who
are
often
out
there
requesting
donations.
You
may
not
realize,
but
if
you
pass
this
ordinance,
many
kids
in
Alpine
estates
where
I
live
will
be
extremely
disappointed.
The
entrance
to
alpine,
which
is
also
the
exit,
has
a
perfect
median
in
the
middle
of
the
entrance.
We're
selling
lemonade
has
been
a
summertime
tradition
for
many
of
the
kids
growing
up
when
my
kids
were
much
younger.
L
They
and
sat
on
chairs
for
hours
in
the
median
selling
lemonade
and
cookies.
One
day
they
collected
over
a
hundred
dollars
which
they
donated
to
the
local
animal
shelter.
Finally,
I'd
like
to
address
councilman
Farina
on
this
one.
With
regards
to
his
comment
at
the
last
meeting
at
the
ordinance
meeting
when
he
stated
that
he
has
65
comments
from
constituents
on
his
Facebook
wall,
all
in
favor
of
this
ordinance
I
hardly
think
that
your
personal
private
social
media
account
presents
an
even
playing
field
for
all
of
your
your
constituents.
L
If
you
have
a
direct
correspondence
from
someone
I'd
say:
well,
that's,
okay,
that's
valid,
but
a
private
account.
Sorry
I
can't
say
that's
very
fair!
So
as
one
of
your
constituents
I,
please
ask
you
to
oppose
the
this
proposed
ordinance.
Thank
you
now,
Debbie
Flint
from
the
ACLU,
the
testimony
is
very
similar.
You.
L
Well,
I
will
yeah
just
go
through
this
briefly
cuz,
it's
pretty
much
the
same
as
just
a
little
bit
updated
information
from
from
the
last
time.
I
I
testified
for
the
ACLU,
and
so
what
they
they
have
to
say
is
that
the
proposed
ordinance
is
designed
as
a
substitute
for
the
city's
current
ban
on
roadway
solicitation,
which
the
city
has
acknowledged
is
unconstitutional.
L
So,
let's
skip
to
further,
if
well
you
you
listed
a
whole
bunch
of
intersections
which
they
wanted
to
address
here
further
than
eat
further,
even
if
these
intersections
did
have
a
correlation
with
places
where
morsels
takes
place,
which
they
do
not,
the
proposed
ordinance
doesn't
attempt
to
limit
its
reached,
those
particular
intersections.
Instead,
the
proposal
prohibits
the
peaceful
exercise
of
this
particular
First
Amendment
activity,
citywide.
L
A
G
My
name
is
Joshua
Tony
I
live
at
39,
Moreland,
Ave
and
Cranston.
The
administration
in
some
members
of
this
council
keep
making
the
claim
that
this
is
a
public
safety
issue,
but
no
one
has
been
able
to
provide
any
evidence
that
panhandling
has
ever
caused
an
accident.
So
the
preamble
to
the
proposed
ordinance
provides
a
list
of
busy
intersections
in
Cranston
and
how
many
traffic
accidents
have
happened
at
each
but
make
no
mention
of
the
causes
of
any
of
those
accidents.
How
many
of
those
accidents
occurred
because
of
road
rage?
G
How
many
because
of
alcohol,
or
because
of
mobile
phone
users
or
inclement
weather?
The
point
is
that
lots
of
things
cause
accidents
and
there's
been
no
evidence
offered.
That
and
handling
is
one
of
them.
So
it
seems
like
this
ordinance,
if
is
indeed
about
Public
Safety
is
based
on
a
feeling
that
panhandling
might
be
dangerous
for
motorists
and
I.
Don't
believe
you
should
legislate
away
our
rights
based
on
something
you
guess
maybe
could
be
happening.
A
lot
of
things
might
be
dangerous
for
drivers.
Drinking
hot
coffee,
while
driving
might
be
dangerous.
G
G
G
I
also
just
want
to
say
click
quickly
that
because
the
ACLU
has
already
indicated
that
they're
likely
to
challenge
this
ordinance
in
court,
because
similar
ordinances
have
already
been
found
unconstitutional
by
the
courts
like
in
Portland
Maine
and
because
at
least
one
constitutional
lawyer
has
already
testified
before
this
committee,
or
rather
before
the
ordinance
committee.
To
that
conclusion,
it's
extremely
likely
to
have
passed.
This
ordinance
won't
survive
a
legal
challenge
and
will
end
up
the
city
of
Cranston
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
in
taxpayer
money.
G
N
My
name
is
Mary
Curtin
I
live
at
23,
Davis
Avenue
and
evening
Park
and
I'm
here
to
speak
on
the
panhandling
ordinance.
We
have
people
on
the
streets
in
Cranston
asking
for
our
help,
and
the
question
is:
how
do
we
deal
with
this
voting
for
this
ordinance?
So
it
says
that
we
will
deal
with
it
by
spending
money
on
a
legal
battle
over
the
constitutionality
of
the
ordinance.
There
is
another
way
to
go
and
another
way
for
the
City
Council.
N
As
our
representatives
to
approach
this
issue,
we
can
look
at
the
issue
of
people
needing
help
and
we
can
focus
our
attention
and
our
resources
on
taking
some
steps
to
alleviate
the
need.
I
would
suggest
that
there
are
three
areas
that
the
City
Council
could
think
about.
Focusing
on
one
would
be
to
create
more
safe
and
affordable
housing
in
the
city
of
Cranston.
Another
would
be
to
ensure
that
we
have
both
educational
and
recreational
programs
for
our
youth.
N
That
would
give
them
a
better
future
and,
lastly,
I
would
suggest
that
we
need
look
no
further
away
than
the
city
of
Central
Falls.
For
an
example
of
a
city
that
has
decided
to
work
on
a
coordinated
health
plan
for
all
of
its
residents,
based
on
the
community
health
center
model,
we
have
community
health
center
here
in
Cranston.
This
is
a
comprehensive
medical
care
plan
that
includes
behavioral
and
substance
abuse
services,
and
it
would
behoove
our
community
to
try
to
access
better
health
care
services
for
all
of
our
residents.
M
N
O
O
None
of
the
proponents
of
this
legislation
have
spoken
yet
this
evening,
but
there
were
several
objections
that
were
raised
in
the
ordinance
committee
meeting
that
I
would
like
to
address
in
case
they
do
come
up
tonight.
So
there
were
complaints
about
Harrington
Hall.
There
were
complaints
about
sex
offenders
and
there
were
complaints
about
violence.
I
would
like
the
council
people
to
remember
that
violence
is
already
against
the
law
and
that
other
complaints
that
have
been
brought
up
are
better
brought
up
in
another
setting
and
are
not
relevant
to
the
issue.
O
We're
discussing
here
tonight,
I'm
completely
flabbergasted
that
the
City
Council
members
are
considering
spending
tax
dollars
on
something
that
they
know
is
going
to
be
fought
in
court
mayor
fun,
I've
voted
for
you
several
years
ago
and
I
just
flabbergasted
that
this
ordinance
is
being
brought
up
again,
in
spite
of
the
fact
that
it's
been
shot
down
previously.
I
also
looked
carefully
at
the
intersections
that
were
on
the
list
in
the
proposed
ordinance,
so
there
are
21
intersections
that
are
listed.
19
of
those
are,
let
me
backtrack
a
moment.
O
Two
of
those
are
double
listed,
so
it's
listed
as
park
and
Elmwood
and
it's
listed
again
is
Elmwood
and
park.
So
we're
talking
about
19
intersections
just
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
can
look
at
those
intersections
and
ten
of
them
I
have
never
once
in
all
my
time,
driving
in
Cranston
seen
panhandling,
so
more
than
half
of
the
intersections
that
are
listed
in
your
documentation.
So
to
speak.
For
this
being
a
public
safety
issue
are
not
even
intersections
where
panhandling
occur.
O
I'm
gonna
skip
through
some
of
my
other
points,
because
they've
been
raised
already,
but
I
would
also
like
to
point
out
that
the
so
called
Facebook
poll
that
occurred
that
was
mentioned
in
the
ordinance
committee.
A
councilman
Farina
was
at
you
I
believe
so
so
somebody
one
of
the
council
people
talked
about
a
Facebook
poll
of
constituents
that
very
evening
I
went
home.
It
was
you
Councilman,
Farina,
I,
remember
now,
thank
you.
O
I
friend-requested
you
and
you
did
not
accept
my
friend
request,
so
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
that's
not
an
objective
poll
and
anything
any
kind
of
poll
of
that
matter.
It
needs
to
be
discounted.
We're.
What
we're
talking
about
is
an
issue
that
probably
makes
all
of
us
just
a
little
bit
uncomfortable
and
I
don't
think
we
can
legislate.
I
don't
think
we
can.
We
can
talk
about
unconstitutional
ordinances
for
things
that
make
us
uncomfortable
if
we
want
to.
A
P
Name
is
Leanne
Byrne
I
work
at
the
Rhode
Island
Coalition
for
the
homeless,
which
is
located
in
Pawtucket,
but
is
a
statewide
organization
working
for
a
comprehensive
solution
to
end
homelessness
in
our
state?
We've
we've
had
folks
it
at
ordinance.
Many
hearings
along
the
way
discussing
this
issue
and
I
just
want
to
reiterate
quickly
that
we're
just
appointed
that
municipalities,
like
Cranston,
are
going
against
Rhode
Island's
history
of
opposing
discrimination
of
people
based
on
their
housing
status.
P
We
were
leaders
in
passing
a
homeless
Bill
of
Rights
here
in
our
state,
and
our
country
has
looked
to
us
as
a
model.
I
also
want
to
say
that
criminalizing,
panhandling
and
visible
displays
of
poverty
create
additional
barriers
to
access
to
most
much-needed
social
services
for
people
who
are
arrested.
Additionally,
criminal
records
create
a
barrier
for
our
service
providers
to
place
people
who
are
experiencing
homelessness
into
housing.
Since
we
started
our
work
trying
to
end
homelessness
through
the
ziri
2016
campaign
in
early
January
of
2015,
we've
been
able
to
house
over
845
individuals.
P
That
is
incredible,
work
and
done
with
extreme
pride,
but
it
also
requires
intensive
service
intervention.
Intensive
engagement
of
folks.
We
want
you
to
know
that
our
providers
are
reaching
out
to
the
constituents
panhandling
in
Cranston
and
statewide
every
day,
but
folks,
but
ordinances
like
this
laws
like
this,
that
push
our
constituents
into
the
margins
and
prevent
them
from
getting
the
services
they
need
are
exactly
the
problem
part
of
the
problem
that
our
providers
are
trying
to
to
overcome.
P
Q
I'm
Michel
Roux
Joe
I
am
a
resident
of
Cranston,
a
livid
53
Circuit
Drive
Edgewood
I'm,
also,
the
executive
director
of
Rhode
Island
jobs
with
justice
and
a
member
of
the
Rhode
Island
afl-cio
Executive
Committee
I
am
here
and
seeing
a
bold
high
school
teachers
is
also
a
wonderful
thing.
I'm
here
in
opposition
to
the
anti
panhandling
ordinance
I
believe
that
the
motivation
for
it
is
besides
being
unconstitutional,
unfair
it
criminalizes
people
who
barely
could
afford
to
live
as
it
is.
It
makes
an
environment
that
is
both
cruel
and
deeply
wounding.
Q
Two
people
who
have
so
few
options
as
it
is.
There
are
factual
problems
with
the
idea
that
this
is
causing
traffic
problems
at
intersections
intersections
intersect
by
nature,
and
there
are
accidents
at
intersections
unless
you
can
demonstrable
prove
that
it
is
panhandling
that
is
causing
these
problems,
then
I
would
say
our
data
is
kind
of
flawed.
This
is
a
kind
of
a
red
herring.
The
other
issue
that
I
have
with
it
as
a
director
of
a
labor
organization,
is
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
reach
citizens
in
public
places.
Publicly.
Q
It
is
also
our
basic
right
to
assemble,
becomes
threatened
for
a
striker
to
reach
out
to
a
passing
motorist,
to
explain
the
situation
that
they're
having
is
real,
and
they
need
to
have
access
that
for
a
fundraiser
like
I
did
years
ago,
as
a
student
to
raise
money
for
a
sports
team
is
a
real
thing
and
to
deny
access
to
that,
it's
to
deny
us
the
right
to
speak.
This
is
an
unconstitutional
ordinance
that
just
invites
an
aggressive
response
from
the
legal
community
and
also
invites
an
attitude
that
criminalizes
poverty.
Q
R
Good
evening
my
name
is
Karen
Rosenberg
and
I
am
a
resident
of
46
Bow
Street
I've
been
at
Cranston
homeowner
and
a
taxpayer
for
20
years
I'm
here
tonight
to
express
my
strong
opposition
to
this
ordinance
against
panhandling.
That's
gonna
be
voted
on
this
evening.
I
attended
the
meeting
of
the
ordinance
committee
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
I
heard
Roger
Williams
law,
professor
and
ACLU,
cooperating
attorney
Andrew
Horowitz
explained
that
the
ordinance
is
unconstitutional
and
that
the
ACLU
will
challenge
it.
If
it's
adopted,
the
response
from
the
city's
attorney
was
frankly
unimpressive.
R
The
city
is
not
well
served
by
lawyers
who
tell
councillors
what
they
want
to
hear.
Instead
of
providing
sound
legal
advice,
it
should
be
clear
that
the
ordinance
is
unconstitutional
because
it
seeks
to
regulate
free
speech
without
being
narrowly
tailored
to
meet
a
compelling
state
interest.
Public
Safety,
the
compelling
state
interest
proponents
claim
is
bogus.
No
reasonable
judge
would
accept
that
the
targeted
speech
is
the
cause
of
traffic
accidents
when
the
city
has
not
conducted
any
study
or
produced
any
actual
evidence
that
a
single
traffic
accident
has
been
caused
by
the
targeted
activity.
R
The
claims
of
the
ordinance
of
the
ordinance
proponents
notwithstanding
the
targeting
activity
is
obviously
panhandling
and
the
real
reason
it
is
being
targeted
is
not
accident
prevention.
It
is
the
fact
that
some
in
Cranston
are
made
uncomfortable
by
the
sight
of
panhandlers.
It
was
obvious
from
the
testimony
of
supporters
at
the
committee
meeting
that
many
are
driven
by
fallacies
like
the
one.
R
The
only
panhandlers
will
be
affected
by
this
ordinance
that
most
panhandlers
are
sex
offenders,
and/or
that
most
sex
offenders
are
homeless
panhandlers,
so
that
they
seem
convinced
that
this
ordinance
is
going
to
protect
us
from
sex
offenders.
Of
course,
all
of
that
is
absurd.
Panhandlers
are
people
who
have
resorted
to
a
very
difficult
way
of
making
money.
They
come
from
all
walks.
In
fact,
many
panhandlers
seem
to
be
veterans.
Many
are
people
struggling
with
homelessness,
addiction
or
mental
illness.
R
Furthermore,
this
ordinance
is
written
does
not
just
affect
the.
It
also
affects
groups.
Excuse
me,
it
also
affects
school
groups,
sports
teams
and
others
who
raise
money
for
charitable
causes
by
soliciting
motorists.
It
would
also
ban
someone
from
handing
leaflets
or
selling
newspapers
to
motorists
stopped
at
intersections.
These
are
all
protected
speech,
I'm,
not
reassured
by
the
unspoken
suggestion
that
the
ordinance
will
be
discriminatorily
applied
and
that
all
the
free
speech
that
we
like
will
be
left
alone,
while
only
the
free
speech
we
dislike
will
be
suppressed.
So
here's
why
I
object
to
this
ordinance.
R
First
I
do
not
want
my
city
government
in
my
name,
trashing,
the
Bill
of
Rights
I,
heard
councillor
freeness,
say
the
ordinance
at
the
ordinance
committee
meeting
that
he
feels
justified
in
the
support
of
the
ordinance,
because
constituents
have
spoken
on
his
Facebook
page
in
favor
of
it.
Well,
here's
the
inconvenient
truth:
constitutionality
is
not
decided
by
popularity
contests
or
polls
oftentimes.
Our
speech
speech
that
we
most
need
to
protect.
R
Frankly,
if
the
councilman's
Facebook
friends
were
asked
a
more
honest
question
such
as,
are
you
in
favor
of
the
city
violating
the
First
Amendment
of
the
Constitution
and
spending
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
in
a
losing
effort
to
defend
the
city's
actions?
The
result
might
be
different.
Second,
as
a
Cranston
taxpayer,
I
object
to
the
use
of
tax.
A
R
Almost
finished
I
object
to
the
use
of
tax
tars
to
to
defend
on
constitutional
laws.
If
the
Constitution
means
anything,
the
city
will
lose
in
court
and
play
substantial
amounts
of
money
that
could
be
used
for
better
things
like
funding
services
for
our
kids
or
seniors
paying
for
infrastructure
improvements
or
paying
the
company
that
employs
our
school
cafeteria
workers
better
so
that
they
can
pay
a
living
wage
and
give
health
benefits
to
their
employees.
The
the
ordinance
is
a
gross
misuse
of
city
resources.
Third
I
asked
at
the
last
council
meeting
mister.
A
R
A
R
S
Hello
good
evening,
fright
sober
honest
I've,
been
in
the
hospital
this
past
week
with
a
heart
condition:
I
just
want
to
say
being
homeless
can
happen
to
any
one
of
us.
I
want
to
become
a
productive
member
of
society.
I
don't
want
to
be
out
there
every
day,
holding
up
a
sign,
I
feel
humiliated
and
I'm
in
a
situation
right
now,
where
I
don't
know
what
to
do,
I
feel
like
I'm
in
a
hole
and
I
can't
dig
myself
out
by
holding
up
my
sign.
S
It
gives
me
an
opportunity
to
receive
job
opportunities
to
put
myself
out
there.
It
may
be
earn
a
couple
dollars
to
put
towards
my
apartment
that
I'm
saving
for
I,
just
I
feel
it's
very
important.
I
mean
I'm
not
out
there
trying
to
scam
anyone
or
trying
to
get
over
on
anyone
I'm
just
trying
to
make
people
understand
where
I'm
coming
from.
Thank
you.
T
Hello,
City
Council,
everybody,
I'm,
Dennis
bunker,
I
am
currently
homeless,
I'm.
Actually,
a
college
graduate
I
went
to
Sarah
choose
two
years
played
baseball,
got
hurt,
went
to
Connecticut
school
broadcasting,
studied
communications,
and
then
my
father
passed
away
two
days
after
I
graduated
college,
and
he
was
the
military
thirty
years
and
depression.
I
PTSD
there's
other
things
that
come
involved
and
I've
been
struggling
ever
since.
To
get
my
mind,
everything
back
to
work,
so
my
mother,
just
moved
to
Florida
I
was
staying
with
her
and
I
at
the
time.
I
can't
move
with
her
I.
T
Don't
have
the
funds
to
move
with
her,
so
I
mean
I'm
coming
up.
Here
is
in
kind
of
embarrassing,
because
I
am
a
homeless
person
and
like
I
humbled
myself
every
day.
First
time,
I
ever
did
claw
flying
a
sign
first
time.
I
ever
did
it.
I
worked
in
a
lot
of
restaurants
in
Rhode,
Island
I
know
a
lot
of
people.
My
dad
was
a
lot
of
people
I.
U
T
The
sign
down
I
was
so
embarrassed
to
do
it.
I
pulled
my
head
up
and
every
time
I
stand
and
I
put
my
head
down
so
humiliated,
and
it's
it's
not
fun.
It's
not
like
you
know
what
I'm
saying
like
like
a
raffle
to
try
to
like
you
know,
I'm,
saying
something:
it's
it's
something
for
myself:
I
don't
use
drugs
I,
don't
use
alcohol
and
I'm
just
in
a
spot
where
I
have
them
on
three
different
housing
lists.
T
I
just
got
my
my
deburr
certificate,
social
security
I'm
trying
to
get
my
life
back
together
and
slowly
but
surely
I
stay
at
Harrington
hole,
also
and
I'm,
not
a
sex
offender
and
half
tomorrow,
but
I'm,
not
one
of
them
I'm
one
of
the
ones
that
are
actually
trying
and
you
said
homeless,
doesn't
happen.
Anybody
like
I,
said
a
college
graduate
played
for
sports
at
his
Providence
high
school
and,
like
things
happen,
you
know
in
life
who
you
wouldn't
in
my
life.
I
wouldn't
see
this
happening.
T
T
Even
than
just
to
get
a
meal,
you
know
buy
myself
a
shirt,
I
was
wearing
the
same
clothes
for
two
weeks
straight
and
I
broke
down
and
cried,
and
they
helped
me
out
and
the
shot
that
I'm
saying
gave
me
close
and,
like
I
said,
that's
humbling
in
itself
and
to
just
it
just
makes
you
so
embarrassed
is
to
be
in
the
situation
that
you're
in
so
I
mean
to
get
rid
of.
This
I
mean
it's
basically,
everything
I
mean
it's.
Not
all.
T
P
V
You
for
listening
to
us
I'm
concerned
about
the
disingenuous
nature
of
this
ordinance.
That
says
it's
concern,
is
Public
Safety,
but
really
seems
rooted
and
how
uncomfortable
panhandling
makes
people
of
privilege
feel
mayor.
Fung
mingled,
with
the
rich
in
the
elite
at
president
Trump's
inaugural
ball
in
Washington
last
Friday,
but
has
turned
his
back
on
the
poor
and
struggling
people
here
in
Cranston.
So
I
have
two
questions
whose
mayor
are
you
and
does
the
City
Council
represent
everyone
in
Cranston,
including
those
who
need
our
help?
Thank
you.
W
Hello,
thank
you
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
guys
again.
I
was
here
last
week,
I
represent
the
muscular
dystrophy
association,
I'm
sure
that
most
of
you
are
familiar
with
the
partnership
that
the
muscular
dystrophy
association
has
with
the
International
Association
of
firefighters,
so
I'm
just
here
to
tonight
we're
ready
to
reiterate
the
importance
of
the
Cranston
fire
departments
bill,
the
boot
campaign
and
the
detrimental
effects
that
the
proposed
ordinance
will
have
on
the
MDA
and
the
families
in
the
city
of
Cranston
annually.
W
W
We
have
successful
amendments
to
ordinance
like
this
one
that
is
proposed
tonight
across
the
country
that
allow
firefighters
to
safely
conduct
fill
the
boot
drives.
We
feel
strongly
that
the
firefighters
should
be
exempt.
If
this
is
passed
from
this
as
they
are
trained
public
safety
professionals,
they
follow
safety
plans.
We
have
an
MDA
insurance
policy
that
covers
every
firefighter
on
behalf
of
the
MDA
and
those
we
serve
here
in
Cranston.
We
ask
that
you
allow
the
firefighters
to
continue
their
dedication
to
the
MDA
fill
the
boot
drive
last
week.
W
X
X
We
only
go
out
a
couple
of
sad
deeds
for
a
few
hours
and
through
the
generosity
of
the
citizens
of
Cranston,
we
raise
ten
to
twelve
thousand
dollars
and
that's
do
the
citizens
that
live
here
and
the
people
that
go
through
our
city,
but
there's
also
a
bigger
issue
here,
not
just
the
MDA
and
I
speak
as
the
as
the
union
president
for
this
issue.
This
is
an
unconstitutional
and
I.
X
There's
been
several
meetings
when
I
didn't
get
up
and
speak.
I
I
was
asked
by
my
international
to
get
up
here
and
speak
tonight
in
my
state
organization,
but
there
is
an
unconstitutional
law.
This
is
unconstitutional,
I
mean
it's.
It's
been
adjudicated
all
over
the
country
and
I
understand:
I'm,
gonna,
I'm
gonna
believe
everybody
that
says
that
doing
this
for
a
safety
reason,
because
none
of
you
have
ever
lied
to
me
before
so
I
believe
this
is
a
safety
issue.
X
If
the
come,
if
the
council's
some
council
people
in
them
and
the
mayor
thinks
it
is,
but
we
have
to
find
it
different
if
you
really
believe
it's
a
safety
issue,
then
we
have
to
find
a
different
mechanism,
because
this
is
unconstitutional.
I've
listened
to
people
before
smarter
than
me
that
have
talked
about
this.
There
was
a
professor
that
came
up
here
and
my
mother
always
taught
me.
If
you
don't
know
about
a
subject,
listen
to
people
that
do
and
this
this
gentleman
it
you
know,
told
us
why
it
was
unconstitutional.
X
I
did
some
work
over
the
weekend,
knowing
that
I
would
come
before
you
to
speak,
they
just
had
a
case
in
Lowell
Mass
and
every
almost
every
circuit
appeal
in
the
country
has
shot
down
these
laws.
I
won't
bore
you
with
all
the
all
the
circuit
appeal
cases
that
I
found,
but
they've
all
shot.
These
now
and
Lowell
Mass
just
lost
that
in
the
First
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals,
which
covers
Rhode
Island.
So
that's
where
we
would
be
if
we
were
to
to
someone
were
to
adjudicate
this,
but
something
struck
me
and
I'm.
X
One
of
those
raging.
Left-Wing
liberals,
but
but
something
struck
me
that
was
was
said
in
that
Circuit
Court
of
Appeal
and
actually
one
of
the
clergymen
said
it
at
the
last
ordinance
meeting.
You
can't
pass
a
law
that
pratap
s--
one
citizen
of
this
country
from
ask
for
from
asking
another
citizen
for
help,
and
that's
what
we're
doing
here
and-
and
that
just
say
I
mean
they
got
to
me-
it
really
kind
of
made
me
emotional.
Actually
it
got
to
me
that's
what
we're
doing
here.
X
X
And
I'll
wrap
it
up.
Mr.
president,
the
last
thing
I'll
say
is:
as
the
union
president
I
don't
want
to
spend
Monday
now:
listen
if
you
guys
and
the
mayor
always
governed
by
how
you're
threatened
to
be
sued,
nothing
would
ever
get
done
because
you're
always
threatening
to
get
sued.
I
understand
that
and
you
have
to
govern,
but
this
is
so
obvious
that
this
is
unconstitutional.
X
A
Y
My
name
is
Jonathan
Lewis
I
live
at
185,
bluff,
Avenue
number,
3
and
I
have
come
here
to
echo
much
of
what's
been
said.
I
would
prefer
not
to
pay
for
a
lawsuit
with
the
ACLU
over
this
issue,
because
I
would
be
paying
for
it
twice
once
voluntarily
and
once
involuntarily
you
say
that
panhandling
causes
accidents.
You
have
no
evidence
to
support
this
claim.
You
say
that
panhandlers
in
Cranston
are
sex
offenders
in
layer.
Four
threat
to
public
safety,
pleasantly
surprised
that
certain
representatives
of
a
certain
political
party
here
are
concerned
about
this
issue.
Y
Y
This
proposed
law
demonstrates
a
shameful
lack
of
compassion
for
the
most
vulnerable
members
of
our
society,
given
the
inaccessibility
of
good
public
transportation,
mental
and
physical
health
care
and
other
services
essential
for
many
to
find
and
keep
gainful
employment.
It
seems
incredibly
cruel
that
you
would
deny
marginalized
people
one
of
the
very
few
methods
they
have
to
sustain
themselves.
It
also
concerns
me
that
it
seems
you've
proposed
this
law
without
giving
any
thought
to
its
enforcement.
You
catch
a
kind
person
giving
50
cents
to
a
panhandler
may
be
homeless
may
be
disabled.
Y
Z
Good
evening,
Alan
Davis,
once
65,
Oak,
Lawn,
Avenue
Cranston,
a
retired
police
officer
and
I,
was
in
the
Traffic
Division
for
better
than
ten
years
and
as
far
as
the
the
ordinance
goes
I'm
also
of
the
opinion.
It's
a
dead
loser
on
on
any
type
of
court
challenge.
The
the
need
for
a
statute
here
is
there
is
no
need.
It's
already
been
written
out
for
you,
you're,
not
looking
in
the
right
places.
Z
You
won't
find
the
term
panhandling
anywhere
in
nitsa
USDOT
Federal,
Highway
Administration.
You
will
not
find
that
term
anywhere.
What
you
will
find
is
the
term
pedestrian,
because
that's
what
these
folks
are.
They
are
pedestrians,
standing
along
the
side
of
the
road.
What
they're
doing
I
don't
really
care.
They
are
in
a
certain
amount
of
danger,
depending
on
their
position
in
the
road.
For
the
folks
that
don't
know
me,
I
was
the
a
fatal
accident
investigator
in
this
town.
Z
For
a
long
time,
I
can
count
five
of
our
homeless
people
in
Cranston
in
my
term,
in
the
Cranston
division
that
I
picked
their
bodies
up
off
the
road
for
crossing
Pontiac,
Avenue
crossing
New,
London
Avenue,
and
in
that
general
area
back
when
the
shelter
was
before
the
shelter
was
torn
down
over
there,
the
while
panhandling
is
not
going
to
be
regulated.
Pedestrians
are
in
a
book
called
the
MU
tcd
manual
of
uniform
traffic
control
devices.
Z
The
term
pedestrian
refuge
is
what
you
want
to
look
at
for
the
folks
that
are
standing
in
the
middle
of
the
road
out
on
the
islands.
A
pedestrian
refuge
by
definition
is
4
to
6
feet
wide
and
a
DA
accessible.
Now
as
dumb
as
this
is
gonna,
sound,
you're,
gonna
have
a
homeless
person
or
a
pen,
antler
pedestrian,
say
I
want
to
stand
out
in
the
middle
of
the
street
too,
because
those
folks
get
more
donations
than
I
get,
but
because
that
particular
median
is
an
ad.
Z
A
assessable
now
does
that
man
have
the
ability
to
force
the
town
of
the
state
to
make
that
portion
of
the
road
ad
a
accessible
when
it's
not
designed
for
pedestrians
to
be
you
don't
need
an
ordinance.
You
don't
need
anything
else,
other
than
to
enforce
the
MU
tcd
requirements
for
pedestrians
and
where
they
can
be
certain
highways
are
marked
no
pedestrians
at
all.
Those
highways
include
certain
ramps.
It's
not
in
any
way
shape
or
form
targeting
any
one
particular
group.
Z
C
AB
My
name
is
John
Donegan
196
Norwood
Avenue
Cranston.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak.
I
just
want
to
talk
on
quickly
makes
a
statement
on
the
panhandling
ordinance
when
you,
when
you
go
to
take
this
vote,
I,
ask
you
ask
yourselves
what
what
message
do
you
want
to
send
to
your
constituents
to
the
residents
of
Cranston
to
the
people
of
Rhode
Island
to
the
people
across
the
country
who,
when,
if
you
do
pass
this
they'll
learn
about
it
when
it's
in
other
case
studies
and
in
other
media
write-ups
about
another
ordinances?
AB
Such
that's
been
struck
down.
What
message
do
you
want
to
send?
Do
you
want
to
send
the
message
that
do
you
want
to
send
a
message
that,
where
a
city
that
turns
its
back
on
the
needy,
the
homeless
and
the
most
vulnerable
of
our
community
I
know
that's
not
what
Cranston
stands
for
I
know:
that's
not
what
all
these
people
stand
for
and
I
hope.
That's,
not
what
you
stand
for.
A
D
M
AE
B
AE
M
AE
A
AE
B
AE
B
B
AC
AD
AD
AE
AE
D
M
AC
AD
A
AG
Thank
you
so
much
council
president
and
members
of
the
City
Council
I
know
that
Colonel
Winn
quests
also
had
requests
not
to
me
to
speak
in
on
this
ordinance.
1216
OH
as
as
well
I
know
that
mrs.
Annie
is
currently
passing
out
some
photographs,
which
will
be
part
of
my
testimony
as
well.
But
tonight
I'm
here
to
speak
in
support
of
this
ordinance
now
I
understand
the
council.
AG
Members
had
heard
testimony
not
only
at
the
ordinance
committee
from
many
members
of
the
public,
both
in
support
and
in
opposition,
as
well
as
individuals
that
are
here
tonight,
testifying
in
opposition.
But
what
I
do
know
is
that,
after
thoughtful
consideration
of
those
concerns
that
were
expressed
previously,
particularly
with
respect
to
some
of
the
legal
issues,
it's
my
understanding
that
I
know
that
mr.
Kirschenbaum,
the
council
City
Attorney,
worked
with
our
outside
counsel,
mr.
de
Sisto,
to
further
strengthen
the
ordinance
so
that
it
would
address
many
of
the
prior
questions
that
had
been
raised.
AG
But
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
clarify
and
clarify
tonight,
because
I'm
fortunate
didn't
have
an
option.
You
come
before
the
Ordnance
subcommittee
is
this
misconception.
That's
been
put
out
there
and
falsely
spread
that
this
ordinance
is
only
about
one
thing
and
that's
homelessness,
and
that
is
absolutely
not
true.
AG
This
ordinance
was
designed
with
first
and
foremost
Public
Safety.
In
mind,
with
the
goal
of
preventing
and
reducing
reducing
the
incidence
of
distracted
driving
caused
by
vehicle
occupants
seeking
to
receive
and/or
pass
any
item
from
a
vehicle
to
a
pedestrian
in
the
roadway
and
also
from
pedestrian
in
the
roadway
to
receive
in
or
pass
items
to
a
vehicle
occupant.
AG
And
if
you
take
a
look
at
the
data
that
we
have
presented
to
you
in
the
past
the
past
testimony
as
well
as
current
testimony
from
many
individuals
and
particularly
the
photographs
which
I
handed
to
you
of
an
incident
that
I
personally
encountered
back
on
December
19
2016.
You
will
see
that
this
ordinance
the
desire
to
protect
people
from
getting
injured
and
having
accidents
in
our
already
busy
roadways,
medians
and
intersections.
AG
There
are
numerous
examples
of
intersections
throughout
the
city
that
have
a
high
number
of
vehicle
collisions
or
even
single
car
accidents
for
the
time
period
between
January
1st
2016
up
to
and
including
December
12
2016.
You
all
have
that
data
and
I
want
to
address
one
of
the
prior
speakers.
I
think
it
was
miss
Holmgren,
Susan
holmgren,
for
bringing
to
my
attention
and
everyone's
attention
and
proved
up
points
that
Seminoles
in
the
sections
that
are
listen
and
was
a
representative
sample
in
that
legislative
intent.
AG
Didn't
include
intersections
where
panhandlers
are
present,
because
this
ordinance
wasn't
designed
with
panhandling
for
and
attacking
homeless
or
attacking
any
specific
people.
That
exactly
proved
my
point.
It
shows
what
those
data
points
were
driven
to
show
is
the
busy
intersections
that
we
have
the
dangers
that
lurk
in
intersections.
The
collisions
that
happen
at
these
intersections
end
up
potential
dangers
that
could
happen
to
individuals
that
go
into
our
roadways
and
I
want
to
also
address
one
of
the
points
that
she
had
mentioned
about
Elmwood
Avenue
and
it
seemed
as
if
it
was
duplicative.
AG
Well,
it's
not
duplicative.
When
you
take
a
look
at
the
data
and
what
Avenue
and
say
I
think
it
was
Park.
Avenue
was
one,
but
it's
listed
on
two
different
occasions
with
two
different
data
points
about
the
number
of
accidents.
Well,
that
is
designed
because
of
the
direction
of
the
vehicle
that
is
traveling.
So
it's
not
duplicative.
It
is
different,
different
same
intersection,
but
different
lanes
of
travel
and
that's
how
odd
data
is
recorded
from
our
Police
Department,
but
I
also
want
to
mention
and
thank
officer
Davis
for
coming
up.
AG
While
he
was
testifying
in
opposition
of
it.
He
actually
also
further
proved
my
point.
We
weren't
trying
to
design
to
show
a
cause
and
effect
between
one
versus
the
other,
because
that's
not
the
point,
but
he
did
raise
a
very
valid
point,
because
we
did
not
find
any
incidences,
at
least
within
the
data
that
we
had
over
the
past
year
about
fatalities.
But
thank
you
for
pointing
out
the
five
fatalities
that
a
cap
and
on
these
intersections
and
roadways.
AG
That's
further
proof
that
they're
about
the
dangerous
does
that
happen,
but
also
the
second
point
about
the
medians,
the
medians
that
you
talked
about
in
the
Motor
Vehicles
and
the
laws
that
are
already
in
effect
on
a
state
road
show
that
there
are
already
restrictions
from
the
state
with
respect
to
motor
vehicle
traffic,
to
pedestrians,
going
to
roadways.
And
that's
one
of
the
amendments
that
are
going
to
be
brought
up
before
you
tonight.
AG
But
I
want
to
focus
on
one
of
the
busy
intersections
and
that's
Park
Avenue
and
reservoir
Avenue.
Here
I've
personally
had
two
separate
incidents
with
individuals
in
the
roadways
that
have
distracted
myself
on
one
occasion
in
November
of
2016
I
was
traveling
northbound
heading
towards
Providence
in
the
middle
lane
of
reservoir,
Avenue
heading
towards
City
Hall
and
stopped
at
an
intersection
on
Park
Avenue
waiting
on
a
red
light
and
out
of
the
blue
I
was
startled
by
a
loud
banging
on
my
passenger
window.
AG
Fortunately,
even
though
I
was
startled,
I
kept
my
foot
on
the
brake,
but
what,
if
I,
didn't
what?
If
it
was
enough
that
it
caused
my
vehicle
to
lurch
forward
or
lurch
side
in
a
particular
direction?
Because
of
the
startling
did
it
happen?
Believe
me,
you
might
be
sitting
there
laughing
I
see
some
of
you
laughing
I've
been
in
a
situation
where
I've
taken
a
life.
You
can
laugh
all
you
want,
sir,
but
that
is
something
that
I
live
with
every
single
day.
I
don't
ever
want
that
to
happen
to
anyone.
AG
But
on
a
separate
occasion-
and
this
is
the
big-
and
this
is
the
photos
that
are
before
you
on
December
19
2016
I-
was
traveling
this
time,
southbound
on
reservoir,
Avenue
again
near
the
Park
Avenue
intersection
and
in
the
middle
lane
in
the
series
of
four
photos
that
are
before
you
tonight
shows
the
inherent
danger
of
what
transpired
and
potential
tragedy
that
this
ordinance
is
designed
to
prevent
401
and
they're
marked
on
the
back
there.
It
should
be
in
sequential
order,
but
four
to
one
shows
a
male
in
an
orange
vest
in
a
Santa
hat.
AG
So
listening
in
the
middle
of
the
roadway
walking
northbound
on
reservoir
Avenue
trying
to
get
the
attention
of
drivers
again
he's
in
the
middle
of
a
busy
roadway.
But
if
you
see
from
the
light,
the
light
is
turning
green
at
that
moment.
If
you
move
to
the
second
photo,
this
was
just
taken
immediately
after
that
same
individual
had
gotten
something
I
couldn't
tell
what
it
was
from
one
of
the
vehicles
in
that
middle
lane,
and
he
finally
noticed
that
the
light
was
turning
green.
AG
That's
a
male
noticing
the
traffic
really
moving,
suddenly
dots
in
front
of
a
silver
sedan
which,
if
you
notice
in
that
right,
travel
lane
immediately
adjacent
a
sidewalk,
is
the
one
that's
breaking
he
jammed
on
his
brake
and
fortunately
he
didn't
hit.
This
individual
in
photo.
Four
shows
that
individual
finally
getting
to
the
sidewalk.
AG
Because
god
help
me
I,
don't
want
anyone
to
go
through
what
I've
been
living
through
for
all
my
life
and
I
know
that
I,
along
with
some
members
of
the
council,
have
not
only
witnessed
situations
like
this
but
heard
from
other
numerous
constituents
about
many
other
dangerous
situations
on
our
waise.
This
ordinance
is
simply
a
tool
designed
to
prevent
dangerous
conditions
in
many
busy
roadways
and
intersections
that
are
exacerbated
by
the
presence
of
pedestrians
that
are
engaging
in
acts
that
promote
distracted,
driving
and
I've
heard.
Many
of
you
talk
about.
AG
Every
single
one
of
these
groups
that
are
out
there
under
this
ordinance.
This
activity
can
still
be
done,
but
in
safe
areas
and,
most
importantly
away
from
moving
vehicles
all
along.
My
goal
has
been
to
make
sure
that
everyone
in
Cranston
is
safe,
whether
they're
in
a
car
or
on
foot.
This
ordinance
and
the
forthcoming
amendments
was
drafted
with
the
Constitution
in
mind
and
that's
why
we
took
into
consideration
everything
that
even
the
ACLU
said
and
I'm
confident
that
we
always
stand
a
legal
challenge.
AG
You
know
I
want
to
take
a
moment
to
thank
all
the
members
of
Cana.
This
is
an
easy
decision,
and
for
many
of
you
this
is
your
first
meeting,
but
it's
a
weighty
one.
It's
an
important
one
and
I
urge
you
to
pass
this
amended
version
when
it
comes
up
of
12
1602,
because
I
believe
personally,
that
it
is
the
right
thing
to
do
and
it
provides
a
safe
way
for
individuals
to
still
get
their
message
out
and
do
it's
needed.
Thank
you.
AH
As
the
mayor
pointed
out,
my
number
one
objective
is
Public
Safety
in
this
city
and
I
am
supported
in
support
of
this
ordinance
and
I'll.
Explain
why,
since
we
stopped
enforcing
this
ordinance,
back
in
April,
complaints
have
been
coming
in
left
and
right
to
the
police
department.
There
are
a
lot
of
people
out
there
that
are
in
opposition
of
panhandling
in
our
streets.
AH
Actually,
the
number
of
complaints
have
increased
since
we
stopped
enforcing
the
ordinance
and
I
can
tell
you.
The
calls
coming
in
to
dispatch
in
detail
are
different
than
what
you
might
think
are
occurring
out
on
our
streets.
There's
aggressive
solicitation,
going
on
at
many
intersections
across
the
city.
AH
Throng
of
objects
at
passing
traffic
persons
believed
to
be
intoxicated
or
under
the
influence
of
drugs
approaching
motorists
doesn't
get
more
dangerous
than
that.
Some
of
the
under
influence
stepping
in
the
roadway
medical
events
where
persons
soliciting
for
motors
have
passed
out
on
the
side
of
the
roadway,
a
person
soliciting
for
money,
seen
smoking
drugs
out
of
a
bottle,
individuals,
soliciting
money
running
in
and
out
of
traffic,
so
the
gist
of
microcosm
of
some
of
the
stuff
that
we're
dealing
with
as
a
result
of
some
of
the
activity
that's
taking
place
at
these
intersections.
AH
Most
persons
soliciting
voters
from
one
do
saw
out
there
major
intersections
I,
think
those
are
the
ones
that
are
listed
in
the
ordinance
due
to
the
high
volume
of
traffic.
Obviously,
wherever
the
high
volume
of
traffic
is
that's
where
you
can
make
the
most
money,
unfortunately,
those
are
the
most
dangerous
intersections.
Where
we're
seeing
this
activity
in
2016,
our
Police
Department
investigated
to
2179
accidents
at
intersections
alone,
so
you
have
a
list
of
the
most
busy
intersections,
but
we
are
2179
accidents
at
intersections
across
the
city
and
328
of
these
accidents.
AH
Roughly
10%
the
vehicle
vehicles
involved
left
the
roadway
in
these
collisions
and
struck
a
secondary
object
such
as
a
pole,
god
rail
traffic
control
box
and,
in
some
instances,
a
pedestrian.
That's
exactly
what
we're
trying
to
avoid
by
removing
these
people.
Out
of
these
dangerous,
dangerous
intersections
standing
on
a
median
or
in
the
roadway
is
inherently
dangerous.
AH
I,
don't
know
how
we
could
anybody
could
refute
that,
based
on
the
law
of
averages,
a
person
standing
on
a
median
or
in
the
roadway
collecting
money
for
an
extended
period
of
time
has
an
increased
probability
of
eventually
being
struck
by
a
vehicle.
So
long,
you're
out
there
and
the
volume
of
traffic
and
looking
at
statistics,
we
don't
want
to
wait
till
we're
handling
a
fatality
just
because
we
haven't
had
one
it's
not
not
the
time
to
sit
back
and
and
not
have
an
audience.
The
pre
ordinance
to
protect
these
people.
That
are
out
there.
AH
There
is
no
question
not
holding
a
person
holding
up
a
sign
and
standing
in
a
busy
intersection
poses
a
significant
distraction
to
pass
the
motorist.
We
all
know
that
distracted
driving
is
not
not
only
dangerous
for
the
operator,
but
even
more
so
for
the
person
standing
in
or
close
proximity
of
a
roadway
unprotected.
AH
Furthermore,
persons
staying
in
the
roadway
collect
the
money
at
the
traffic
signal
when
it
turns
green,
also,
direct
disrupts
the
efficient
flow
of
traffic
through
these
very,
very
busy
intersections,
often
causing
frustrations
or
other
motorists.
So
we
do
receive
a
lot
of
calls
on
this
in
a
daily
basis,
based
on
my
26
years
of
law
enforcement
experience
to
include,
unfortunately,
investigating
many
accidents
involving
pedestrians,
as
well
as
the
information
I
presented
here
tonight.
I
believe
passing.
The
audience
is
in
the
best
interest
of
Public
Safety.
AH
The
ordinance
would
be
enforced
uniformly
and
without
bias,
regardless
of
who
is
collecting
the
money
and
for
what
purpose
and
I
heard
before
that.
There's
some
type
of
premise
that
we'll
be
arresting
people
by
enforcing
this
ordinance
that
is
couldn't
be
furthest
from
the
truth.
The
person
we
receive
a
civil
citation
just
like
a
traffic
citation
or
a
seatbelt
violation,
so
no
one's
getting
arrested,
there's
no
resources
being
used
to
book
people
and
put
people
behind
bars.
That's
not
the
intent
of
this
particular
audience.
AH
The
ordinance,
as
the
mayor
said,
if
we
can
divert
these
people
to
a
safe
area
hour
before
that,
nobody
wants
to
stop
these
people
from
getting
some
assistance
and
that
and
that's
the
bottom
line
so
I've
been
out
there.
I've
spoken
to
many
of
the
people
out
there
that
are
out
there.
Collecting
money
I
have
empathy
and
sympathy
for
their
situations,
but
there
has
to
be
a
better
way
than
them
standing
in
a
busy
intersection.
Thank
you.
A
D
AE
AE
I'd
like
I,
think
these
following
amendments
will
help,
and
this
will
go
back
to
ordinance
committee
and
before
I.
Do
I
just
wanted
to
make
one
comment.
If
I
may,
the
point
of
personal
privilege
I
know,
there
were
quite
a
bit
of
discussion
about
spending
taxpayer
dollars
on
ACLU
lawsuits
and
I
just
wanted
to
remind
the
public
that,
first
of
all,
we
can't
do
it
do
everything.
AE
AE
As
the
police
chief
said
and
I've
witnessed
a
number
of
incidents
where
there
have
been
some
dangerous
situations,
one
in
which
the
panhandler
was
not
in
the
center
of
the
road
but
had
he
been,
he
would
have
been
crushed
by
three
vehicles
and
I
actually
spoke
to
another
constituent
who's
witnessed
the
same
accident,
but
luckily
no
one
was
on
that
median
at
the
time.
So,
within
that
regard,
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
on
paragraph
83,
which
is
on.
AE
This
would
be
after
the
sentence
ends
where
it
says
from
non
moving
vehicles.
Well,
I
would
like
to
add
to
that
and
that
the
following
restrictions
are
authorized
pursuant
to
Rhode
Island
general
law
31:18
to
local
ordinances,
and
such
restrictions
are
consistent
in
subject
matter
and
intent
with
several
provisions
of
state
law
of.
A
AE
But
I
can
explain
a
little
bit
further
and
they're
very
short
I.
We
can
give
you
a
copy
of
each
of
those
state
laws,
but
they're
very
short,
and
to
the
point
first.
It
just
says
that
local
authorities
are
in
power
powered
by
ordinance
to
require
that
pedestrians
shall
strictly
comply
with
the
directions
of
any
official
traffic
control
signal
and
maybe
by
ordinance,
prohibit
pedestrians
from
crossing
any
roadway
in
a
business
district
or
in
any
designated
highways
except
an
across
the
crosswalk.
AE
Excuse
me
and
then
the
the
830
118
5,
which
we
can
get
your
copies
of
that
as
well,
is
another
short
one
talks
about.
If
you're
in
a
crosswalk,
you
have
to
yield
the
right
of
way
to
vehicles,
31
1810,
walking
in
the
street
is
prohibited,
and
if
there's
a
sidewalk
available,
then
you're
supposed
to
use
the
sidewalk
walk,
you're,
not
supposed
to
run
or
jog
in
a
roadway,
especially
if
there's
a
sidewalk
available
in
the
section
31
1811
is
a
little
longer.
It
talks
about
walking,
jogging
or
running
in.
AE
Basically,
if
there
is
no
sidewalk,
you
have
to
run
facing
vehicular
traffic
for
safety
concerns.
So,
though,
and
I
think
the
and
the
other,
the
last
one
is
hitchhiking
does
hitchhiking
is
not
allowed,
let's
see,
I'm,
sorry
and
and
I'm
sorry,
there
is
one
more
31
1817
talks
about.
Pedestrians
cannot
cross
onto
a
freeway,
pretty
pretty
simple.
AA
AE
AE
All
right
I'll
stay
on
the
first,
but
the
basically,
it's
basically
incorporating
state
law
which
deals
with
pedestrians
on
highways
and
roads,
roads
and
highways,
and
what's
already
on
the
books
from
the
state
level.
As
far
as
these
kind
of
activities,
okay,
I
think
the
general,
the
general
idea
is
that
we're.
Actually
this
is
going
to
be
far
less
restrictive
than
the
youth
in
the
way
it
was
before,
and
you'll
see
that
in
the
second
part,
because
it's
not
going
to
apply
to
all
roadways
and
it'll
address
your
concern.
AE
Anyway,
the
the
first
pot
deals
with
the
state
legislative
intent
and
the
laws
that
already
apply
to
people
being
in
roadways.
Okay,
that's
if
you
want
to
and
then
I
think
you'll
you
can.
You
know
you
know
that
all
but
certainly
exploring
the
second
part,
which
will
create
a
bit
much
better
picture.
I.
Think.
D
Palacios,
thank
you
answer,
president,
through
the
chair
to
the
author
of
the
amendments.
So
basically
in
a
nutshell,
what
you're
saying
is:
there
are
already
state
laws
on
the
books
that
the
state
has
passed,
that
reference
a
lot
to
do
with
public
safety
and
what
the
ordinance
are
working
on
now.
Yes,.
AE
AF
AF
AE
Q
AE
AF
AE
AF
So
you're
taking
state
law
excuse
me
X,
taking
state
laws
adding
into
a
book
that
adding
to
an
ordinance
that
will
not
pass
constitutional
amendment
to
start
with,
and
so
you
think
this
is
going
to
make
it
pass
constitutional
commandant
amendment,
I,
I,
don't
think
so!
Well,
I
think
you
did
you
write
these
ordinances
yourself
or
did
you
have
help
Kozma
Vecchio?
These.
A
AI
AE
AI
AI
Think
it's
important
to
note
that
the
restrictions
and
state
law
that
are
already
on
the
books
are
illustrative
of
the
types
of
restrictions
that
our
state
legislature,
state
legislature
has
put
on.
The
books
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
have
never
been
overturned
by
any
court
and
show
the
types
of
safety
restrictions
that
are
on
state
roads
throughout
Rhode.
Island,
there's
also
a
reference
to
a
section
of
state
law
that
empowers
local
governments
to
put
their
own
traffic
restrictions
by
ordinance.
AI
AI
AF
Right
my
final
statement,
I
can
ask
a
question:
is
I
was
at
the
ordinance
committee
meeting?
I
spoke
against
this
particular
ordinance.
I
guess
somebody
listened
because
he
redrafted
it.
I
still
don't
think
it's
gonna
pass
constitutional
muster
I
think
it
violates
the
First
Amendment,
the
Constitution
I
and
everybody
in
this
council
took
an
oath
to
protect
the
US
Constitution.
We
all
took
that
oath
and
I
intend
to
abide
by
it.
I
will
not
vote
for
this
particular
ordinance.
AF
AF
A
AC
Call
Thank
You
council
president
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
my
understanding
is
vice
president
for
Vecchio
is
changing
the
original
ordinance
proposed
ordinance
and
he's
incorporating
a
number
of
state
statutes
within
his
amendment.
These
state
statutes
are
running
on
the
book
and
basically
it's
it's
to
further
reinforce
the
enforcement
of
this
ordinance.
That's
my
interpretation.
Well,.
A
A
AA
What
is
the
legal
of
effect
it's
in
the
legislative
findings,
so
does
that
have
any
it's
a
question
for
the
lawyers
here?
Does
that
have
any
legal,
binding
power
or
is
it
just
a
statement
of
you
know,
statement
of
legislative
findings
which
is
not
I,
I,
just
don't
understand
what
the
point
of
this
is.
AJ
You
chose
the
legislative
intent
of
this
body,
but
it
also
shows
that
the
state
has
laws
regarding
pedestrians
in
roadways
and
also
the
state
enables
local
ordinances
to
enforce
those
the
way
they
see
fit.
So
it's
a
preamble
just
showing
the
ten
intent
behind
the
ordinance.
It's
an
important
introduction
because
we
are
modifying
and
in
a
way
also
codifying
this
day,
laws.
AK
AA
A
AA
Can
I
just
finish:
I'm
sorry,
I,
I
I,
don't
quite
understand
where
this
is
going,
but
I
don't
see
any
point
to
adding
this,
except
as
more
cover
to
a
ordinance
that
is
aimed
at
panhandling.
And
if
these
all
these
laws
are
on
the
books
and
can
be
enforced
by
our
police,
then
they
should
enforce
the
law
just
like
they
should
obey
the
Constitution.
So
I'll
be
opposing
this.
E
Thank
You.
Mr.
president,
I
found
it
interesting
that
there
was
a
again
using
social
media
to
encourage
people
to
show
up
tonight
to
oppose
this
ordinance
by
a
member
of
the
Council,
encouraging
them
very
strongly
to
come
in
and
speak
against.
It
and
I
took
the
time
to
go
to
that.
Facebook
page
and
I
read
every
single
one
of
those
statements
and
of
the
total
of
a
hundred
and
forty-six
people
that
responded
to
this
councilman's
request.
E
A
AF
B
AC
AE
I'm
thanking
now
this
might
bring
into
clearer
focus
so
I
mean.
Let
me
read
the
second
one
now,
the
second
one
and
there's
nothing
would
go
after
it
part
of
110
line
110
after
the
word
dividers.
Now
that
number,
that
line
number
may
change
once
the
clerk
does
the
first
amendment,
but
for
purposes
of
tonight
you
can
read
it
after
that.
We're
weird
dividers,
we're
gonna.
AE
Add
the
following:
provided,
however,
that
the
term
roadway
shall
not
include
any
street
road
or
highway
one
having
a
paved
surface,
with
no
greater
than
30
feet,
as
measured
from
one
edge
of
pavement
to
the
opposite.
Edge
of
pavement,
which
measured
measurement
shall
not
include
sidewalk
areas
to
is
an
undivided
roadway
on
which
traffic
flow
is
restricted
to
a
single
lane
of
travel
in
opposing
directions
or
a
single
lane
of
travel
in
one
direction
and
three
upon
which
the
legal
speed
limit
does
not
exceed
25
miles
per
hour.
AE
So
basically,
what
this
does
is
permit
the
exercise
of
free
speech
on
just
about
everyone
on
every
road.
Actually,
it
doesn't
prohibit
anyone
from
even
on
the
the
roads
that
are
more
dangerous.
However,
the
this
roadway
restriction
basically
says
it's
got
to
be
a
falling.
It's
got
to
be
more
than
a
two-lane.
Highway
has
to
have
a
speed
limit
greater
than
25
miles
per
hour
and
is
more
than
30
feet.
The
motion
in
width,
so
basically
it
eliminates
in
your
example
I-
have.
AE
AE
Okay,
Thank
You
council
president-
and
this
part
of
this
was
to
address
what
consequence
Tycho's
mentioned
in
the
prior
meeting,
and
that
was
in
his
own
side
street,
whether
he
could
go
out
to
the
milk
truck
and
I
thought
of
a
pretty
good
example
of
why
we
need
these.
This
type
of
restriction,
certainly
on
the
on
the
side
streets,
we're
not
we're
not
concerned
with
as
much
with
the
safety
issue,
because
there's
not
a
lot
of
traffic
there,
not
a
lot
of
accidents,
the
middle
of
side-streets,
possibly
yours,
I
thought
of
an
example.
AE
When
the
ice
cream
truck
comes
down
the
street,
they
have
the
their
service
windows
on
the
right-hand
side
of
the
vehicle
for
a
reason,
because
they
want
people
to
access
from
a
sidewalk
from
a
safe
place,
not
in
the
middle
of
the
street.
So
I
think
you
might
still
not
be
able
to
transact
business
in
the
middle
of
your
street,
but
certainly
your
street.
You
know
you
certainly
have
the
ability
to
go
in
the
middle
of
the
street.
No
one's
going
to
bother
you
and
it
doesn't
apply
to
your
side.
Streets
doesn't
apply
to
mine.
AE
It
basically
says
if
you're
on
a
major
intersection
and
a
major
Street,
where
the
speed
limit
is
more
than
25
miles
per
hour
and
the
street
is
greater
than
30
feet
wide
in
there.
Multiple
lanes
of
travel
that
you
shouldn't
be
standing
in
the
middle,
don't
transacting
business
or
doing
whatever
and
endangering
yourself
and
the
motorists
so
that
that
kind
of
explains
this
part
of
it,
which
greatly
I
think
greatly
reduces
the
the
reach
of
the
of
the
ordinance.
As
you
pointed
out
in
the
prior
meeting.
AE
So
I
think
this
was
part
of
it
was
to
address
some
of
your
concerns
and
some
of
the
other
councilman's
concerns
with
regard
to
the
extensiveness
of
the
of
the
ordinance.
But
I
think
that
this
greatly
restricts
it
to
the
areas
we
have.
As
the
mayor
spoke
and
the
police
chief
mentioned,
the
multitude
of
incidents
and
accidents
that
have
occurred,
some
of
which
that
I
also
witnessed
so
any.
A
AC
AC
To
be,
it
narrows
the
field.
Okay,
absolutely.
AA
AA
A
AA
A
AA
A
A
A
AE
AA
AI
Mr.
president,
I
will
take
some
credit
for
assisting
more
so
than
with
the
last
amendment
offered
by
Councilman
Viki,
oh,
but
after
much
discussion
with
the
with
the
attorneys
and
and
the
council
members,
as
was
suggested,
I
brought
our
traffic
engineer
into
the
conversation
and
asked
him
to
define
for
me
roads
that,
by
their
nature,
would
be
less
dangerous
roads
that
maybe
could
be
exempted
from
this
ordinance,
at
least
at
the
first
pass,
taking
separating
those
from
the
more
the
busier
higher
speed
roads
that
are
inherently
dangerous.
AI
As
the
mayor
and
the
chief
of
police
spoke,
and
these
are
the
criteria
that
were
set
forth
for
me
by
the
traffic
engineer,
specifically
roads
that
are
no
greater
than
two
lanes,
whether
it's
one
lane
in
each
direction
or
a
one-way
road,
a
one-way
street,
obviously
no
greater
than
30
feet
in
width
and
speed,
limit,
25
or
lower.
These
are
residential
streets
streets
where
time's,
councilman,
Vicki
Oh
had
a
great
analogy.
The
ice
cream
truck
comes
down
the
street
and
people
go
out
in
the
street
and
buy
ice
cream.
AI
B
B
A
So
now
that
we
have
the
amended
ordinance,
it
is
technically
before
us,
but
we
will
have
to
have
a
special
council
meeting
in
the
next
14
days.
I
will
schedule
that
with
the
clerk
to
hear
on
the
ordinance
as
amended,
but
tonight
I
will
allow
any
you
know
everyone
can
speak
once
about
the
ordinance
as
amended.
If
you
have
any
concerns,
so
we're
not
doing
that
again
at
the
next
meeting,
so
we
can
take
those
back
to
the
administration.
If
you
have
questions
on
data
sets
questions
to
the
kernel,
questions
for
the
administration.
A
AA
The
the
problem
I
have
is,
frankly
the
fact
that
someone
commits
a
crime
and
they're
panhandling
doesn't
mean
that
panhandling
is
is
therefore
should
be
discouraged
in
any
way
an
example
that
was
given
it
that
a
non
a
person
was
soliciting
for
a
non-profit
that
didn't
exist,
which
I
would
think
as
fraud
and
the
person
should
be
arrested.
I
was
on
the
School
Committee,
when
a
member
of
the
school
committee
was
collecting
for
a
charity
that
didn't
exist,
and
no
one
reacted
to
that.
AA
AA
I
I
do
want
to
thank
councilman
slavicky
Oh
for
attempting
for
narrowing
the
scope
of
this
ordinance,
but
I
think
it
is
still
very,
very
broad,
and
when
you
look
at
the
Portland
decision,
the
Portland
is
what
Portland
tried
to
do
was
banned
activity
on
medians
and
the
court
said
no.
No,
no.
You
can't
do
that
in
a
blanket
statement.
You
you
have
to
focus
on
the
medians
where
there
are
problems.
AA
Would
that's
that's
what
the
decision
would
you
have
to
narrowly
tailor
the
decision,
the
the
the
ordinance,
and
so
this
still,
even
by
with
these
reductions,
is
I.
Think
you'd
have
to
agree
far
broader
than
what
Portland
was
unsuccessful
in
court
with
Portland
said
medians
and
we're
saying
essentially,
all
roads
over
30
feet
wide
medians
and
everything
else.
AA
AE
AF
All
right,
I
agree
with
counseling
psychos
on
this
I
like
to
see
the
data
also
I'd
like
to
know
how
many
accidents
in
the
city
of
Cranston
would
directly
caused
by
panhandlers
best.
My
knowledge
is
none,
so
we're
ready
in
ordinance
to
keep
people
off
medians
because
they
may
cause
accidents
or
they
may
get
injured,
but
we
don't
know
of
any
accidents
or
injuries
to
date.
Other
than
a
police,
retired
police
officer
got
up
here
mr.
Davis
and
said
that
he
witnessed
5-4
deaths,
but
he
didn't
say
they
were
paying
endless.
AF
People
cross
the
roads,
they're,
probably
more
injured,
bicyclists
in
the
city
than
paying
an
ilysm,
and
that's
why
I
brought
up
everything
here
about
jogging
walking
running,
but
they
don't
talk
about
bicycles
is
there
as
it
should
be.
That
should
be
added
that
this
also
because
I
think
voiceless.
People
on
bicycles
have
to
be
on
one
side
of
the
road
going
with
traffic
rather
than
against
and
all
the
years
I've
driven
to
sit
in
the
city
of
Christ
and
I,
see
him
on
both
sides
of
the
street.
AF
AC
You
president
Farina
first
let
me
thank
everyone
coming
tonight.
I
appreciate
it
very
informative
and
your
testimony.
Secondly,
I'd,
like
to
thank
vice
president,
affect
you
for
his
hard
work
on
those
two
amendments.
Mike
I
know
you're
trying
to
make
restrictions
and
narrow
it
down,
but
I
agree
with
counsel
and
psychos
that
I
think
it's
still
too
broad
and
I
think
it's
going
to
get
beat
in
the
in
the
federal
court.
I
really
do
I
have
a
number
of
reservations
on
this
ordinance
as
I
think
councilman
Lanny
said
earlier.
AC
We
all
took
an
oath
of
office
to
uphold
the
US
Constitution
in
the
state
constitution.
The
city
charter
and
I
really
think
it's
the
violation
of
First
Amendment
rights
of
a
citizen.
So
I
can't
support
this
ordinance.
Also
to
me,
you
know,
I
think
it's
the
person's
basic
right
to
ask
for
help,
and
if
we
pass
this
we're
telling
the
rest
of
Rhode
Island
that
we're
criminalizing
people
that
they're
hurting
they
they
need
help
and
they're
asking
for
help.
AC
So
that's
another
reason
why
I
can't
support
this
ordinance
as
a
historian,
as
a
history
teacher
is
my
colleague
here.
Mr.
Hopkins,
also
during
the
French
Revolution,
they
passed,
the
Constitution
called
the
declarations
of
Rights
of
men
and
during
that
French
Republic,
a
lawyer
came
to
power
rush
Pierre
in
rush
Pierre
on
behalf
of
the
citizens
and
the
guise
of
Public
Safety.
He
passed
the
Committee
of
Public
Safety
and
that
Committee
of
Public
Safety
stripped
numerous
First
Amendment
rights
from
French
citizens.
AC
A
Any
further
comment:
well
I'm,
gonna,
say
a
couple
things:
I
have
a
couple
questions,
so
Mike,
council,
vice-president,
you
could
ceremoniously
take
the
gavel
to
director
Ralston
or
attorney
Ross
and
the
director
coop.
Have
we
worked
with
our
constitutional
attorney
on
the
constitutionality
of
this
ordinance
after
the
amendments
without
divulging
anything,
we
can't.
AI
Mr.
president,
I
did
inform
our
attorney,
who
has
represented
the
city
and
has
advised
us
in
this
process
of
the
intended
amendment
that
councilmen
for
Vickie
o
introduced
and
was
approved
without
going
into
too
much
detail,
because
this
is
attorney-client.
Communication
I
can
say
that
it
was
reviewed
in
the
context
of
the
portland
maine
case.
That's
been
widely
referenced
by
members
of
the
public
and
members
of
the
council,
and
that
is
the
name
of
that
case
is
cutting
the
city
of
portland.
In
the
words
of
our
of
the
city's
attorney.
AI
As
such,
I
think
the
proposed
ordinance
meets
the
two
major
requirements
set
out
in
the
First
Circuit
case
of
cutting
the
city
of
Portland
and
is
defensible
following
as
my
reasoning,
I
can't
go
through
all
the
reasoning
because
it
lays
out
to
some
extent
a
legal
strategy,
but
I
will
say.
The
cutting
Court
took
great
exception
to
the
city
of
Portland's,
broad
definition
of
the
applicable
roadways
terming
it
an
all-encompassing,
banned
ban.
The
court
found
that
the
ordinance
was
geographically
over
inclusive
career
instance
proposed
ordinance.
AI
I
think
the
reduction
in
applicable
roadways
is
reasonable
and
will
meet
the
courts
admonition
to
avoid
geographical
over
inclusiveness.
In
my
conclusion,
it
is
my
conclusion
that
the
limiting
roadway
additions-
the
ordinance,
is
defensible
while
we
can
never
be
certain
I
think
the
ordinance
is
a
fair
and
reasonable
response
to
the
city's
safety
concerns.
Thank
You,
director
and.
A
AI
A
Thank
You
director
koo
before
I
take
a
vote
to
move
this
to
an
exec.
You
know
the
meeting.
What
I
will
say
is
after
the
ordinance
committee
meeting
you
know
we
had
some
concerns
and
reservations.
I
want
to
thank
director,
coop
attorney,
Ross
and
attorney
Kirshenbaum
attorney
the
Sisto
for
hearing
those
concerns
and
coming
back
to
us
with
some
amendments
we
could
make
as
a
group
Thank
You
councilman
for
Vickie.
D
AA
A
AE
Calcavecchia
thank
you
and
to
follow
up
on
Councilman
psychos
question.
I.
Think
what
he's
referring
to
is
the
the
cutting
case,
but
I
don't
believe
the
the
issue.
There
was
how
many
miles
of
roadway
I
think
it
was
the
the
size
and
scope
of
the
medians,
which
is
very
different
in
characteristic
from
Cranston.
They
have
you
know
park-like
medians,
and
that
was
the
issue
they're,
not
the
the
miles
of
roads
that
they
have,
but
the
you
know
the
huge
parks
that
they
have,
which
are
called
medians.
AE
So
I
I,
don't
know
that
that
that's
gonna
be
necessary
to
have
you
know,
but
if
they
can,
if
the
administration
is
able
to
I,
don't
know
how
they
I
think
I
guess
we
could
calculate
it,
but
I
don't
know
that.
That's
a
if
that's
what
your
question
is
in
applying
the
cutting
decision.
I
think
that
I
don't
think
that
the
number
of
miles
is
really
gonna
matter.
I.
AA
A
Important
Thank
You
counsel
as
a
confirm
we
will
get
you
an
estimate
by
the
next
council
meeting.
Oh
and
one
before
I
motion
do
pass
the
ordinance
as
amended
to
a
special
council
meeting
I
do
on
our
reference
Facebook.
My
comment
exactly
at
the
meeting
was
during
the
campaign-
hundreds,
if
not
thousands,
of
people
during
my
campaigning
as
I
am
a
citywide
councilman
asked
us
to
address
public
safety
and
to
something
about
the
people
standing
in
the
roadways.
I
also
mentioned
the
two
hours
prior
I
put
a
little
note
on
Facebook
and
67
of
68.
A
People
had
mentioned
that
they
were
for
us
trying
to
do
something
to
ensure
Public
Safety
and
to
address
one
of
the
woman's
concerns
when
she
said
how
about
you
tell
people
that
were
violating
their
First
Amendment
civil
rights?
Well,
a
councilman
did
that
and
as
councilman
Hopkins
said,
that
87%
of
those
people
said,
let's
try
to
do
something
about
public
safety.
So
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
send
this
as
amended
to
a
special
council
meeting
at
a
date
certain
so
moves
Thank,
You,
councilman,
pavlovsky,
second
Thank
You
council.
Vice
president
Clark,
please
state
the
roll.
M
AC
AD
A
A
AK
A
Let
it
be
known
that
these
have
been
reported
out
of
the
claims
committee.
Public
hearings.
The
floor
is
now
open
to
any
thing.
Anyone
would
like
to
talk
about
going
watch
one
twice.
While
the
caring
disclosed
election
of
city
officials,
Arts
Commission
I
have
Lea
Thomas
Ian
Hill
as
an
alternate
proposed
by
Councilman
Stojko,
so
I
have
a
motion,
counsel,
slager's
motion.
AA
To
let
you
know
this
I
don't
know
who
this
person
is,
but
she
was
one
of
the
original
people
who
wanted
to
be
on
the
Commission.
She
didn't
live
in
Cranston,
but
she
said
she
was
going
to
move
and
move
to
Cranston.
So
we
didn't
nominate
her
as
one
of
the
originals
because
she
didn't
yet
live
in
Cranston
she's
been
attending
the
meetings,
she's
endorsed
by
the
Arts
Commission,
who
says
she's
a
valuable
addition
to
the
group.
Okay,.
AC
A
B
A
L
A
L
A
AL
AL
A
Know
we'll
make
on
the
panhandling
in
the
audit
committee
guys
unless
you're
not
supposed
to
go
to
the
special
meeting
director
I,
don't
know
what
okay!
Thank
you:
okay,
City
Council
internal
auditor,
Stephanie
maderos
decided
against
the
position.
She
feels
she
won't
spend
more
time
with
her
family.
Politics
is
a
little
different
and
political
position.
She
she
wanted
to
shy
away
from
so
I
have
a
second
appointment
whose
resume
was
sent
to
you
last
week.
He's
also
here
for
questions.
If
you
have
them
his
name
is
Christopher
hallström
evidence
in
a
motion
to
approve
mr.
A
AM
AA
AM
AA
A
Additional
questions
for
mr.
halston
just
my
comments
on
mr.
hallström
I've
known
him.
First
for
almost
a
decade
now,
I
find
his
content
is
above
reproach.
He
is
a
straight
shooter.
He
will
not
do
anything.
One
person
or
body
says
he
will
do
what
is
in
the
best
interest
for
the
people
for
his
CPA
and
he
will
stand
up
for
the
little
guy
absolutely
I.
Do
clerk.
Please
take
the
role.
AC
M
A
As
for
grant
writer,
I'm
gonna
position
was
a
little
murky.
I
worked
with
the
clerk.
We're
gonna
put
the
position
on
hold
for
a
little
while
I'm
gonna
actually
ask
the
Finance,
Committee
and
council
vice-president
for
vecchio
to
review
how
we
currently
have
the
grant
writer
looking
at
different
ways
of
compensation,
maybe
a
per
grant
basis
CEO
of
the
cities
and
towns.
Do
it
to
see
if
we
could
drive
additional
grants.
I
thank
mr.
filarsky
for
his
service.
A
The
goal
for
this
is
potentially
to
have
multiple
grant
writers
facilitating
grants
for
us,
as
opposed
to
just
one
so
we'll
let
the
Finance
Committee
review
and
look
and
decide
and
figure
out
what
the
best
course
of
action
is
with
grant.
Writing
so
I.
Ask
you,
council,
vice
president
with
that.
Thank
you.
A
Parks
and
recreations
Advisory
Committee,
we
have
to
have
a
majority
vote.
Councilman
Kenneth,
Coons
I
would
like
you
to
serve
in
this
capacity
because
of
your
history
in
the
Cranston
School
Department
in
your
history,
with
youth
sports,
your
history
and
the
Cranston
athletic
fields
working
with
fields,
I
think
you'd
be
a
welcome
addition
to
the
Parks
and
Rec
Advisory
Commission
in
emotion,
function.
AC
AD
A
A
Committee
I
did
I,
think
you,
council,
vice-president,
and
he
can
be
honest.
I
did
deny
so
school
buildings
committee,
I
I
picked
a
majority
and
a
minority
member.
If
the
minority
does
not
want
counts,
when
are
kiddo
to
be
the
member,
they
can
present
a
different
member
if
they
still
fit
if
they
so
see
fit.
But
if
councilman
arquero
accepts
the
mine,
Thank
You
counselor,
so
I
nominate,
transfer,
Holford
I'll
accept
a
motion
to
approve
mr.
Cole
for
two.
These
school
buildings
I.
D
M
B
AD
A
Yes,
yes,
now
the
auxiliary
judges
again
referencing
we're
kicking
this
to
the
next
council
meeting.
I
had
to
submit
ordinances
to
change
the
structure
of
the
court
after
some
input
from
Mattie
Smith,
the
new
chief
judge,
I
will
say,
as
Lisa
Brianna
has
withdrawn
his
application
so
I'll
to
motion
to
continue
mr.
cappella
mr.
Agosta
to
the
next
city
council
meeting
in
accordance
with
the
ordinances
which
will
go
through
a
committee
process,
so
moved.
Second
I
have
a
motion
in
a
second
any
discussion
there
being
none
clerk.
Please
take
the
law.
Yes,.
A
D
A
AL
A
AI
A
A
Council
president
communications,
so
I
welcome
you
my
first
meeting
as
council
president.
It
is
an
honor
to
be
up
here
and
honor
to
serve
this
city
in
this
capacity.
I
look
forward
to
having
two
very
good
years.
I
can
tell
you
that
we're
going
to
be
following
Robert's
Rules,
wherever
possible,
we're
gonna
keep
order
and
decorum
in
the
chamber.
It's
gonna
be
a
couple
years.
A
I
look
forward
to
working
with
everyone,
we're
gonna,
keep
open
to
a
policy
so
I'm
sure
after
we
get
through
the
solicitation
ordinance,
we
can
start
doing
some
good
work
for
the
city
of
Cranston.
In
addition
to
things
that
are
going
on
now,
the
only
I
will
say
about
the
solicitation
ordinance
being
council.
President
I've
learned.
You
can't
really
speak
that
much
when
you're
going
through
laws
and
ordinances,
but
there
was
an
overwhelming
support
for
the
legislation.
A
We
work
together
as
a
group
on
the
Republican
side
to
look
at
ways
to
work
with
our
attorneys
to
solicit
information,
to
talk
things
through
I'm,
proud
of
the
work
that
that
we
did
so.
Hopefully
we
can
look
at
the
special
committee
meeting.
Have
more
people
come
get
some
more
testimony,
make
a
final
decision
on
the
law.
Calton
have
a
communications,
councilman's
Tycho's.
AA
U
A
A
AA
AA
AL
Psychos,
if
you
recall,
we
had
an
ordinance
by
the
City
Council
that
was
approved
back
in
it
looks
like
May
of
2016.
There
was
a
promissory
note
drawn
up
in
June
on
June
6
2016
4
$113,000,
the
Cranston
West
Little
League
loan
they've
only
drew
on
this
note.
A
hundred
eight
thousand
five
seventeen
currently
they've
paid
back
in
September
fifteenth
twenty
thousand
october,
fourteenth
another
ten
thousand,
so
their
current
remaining
balance,
as
of
1
1917
is
seventy
eight
thousand
five.
Seventeen,
and
this
is
a
ten-year
promise
every
note
it
goes
to
2026
I
believe
so.
AL
AI
Q
AL
AI
AI
AI
AI
Yeah
unfortunately,
councilman
I
can't
address
that
I'm,
not
sure
which
one
that
is
and
Jeff
Berlin
was
out
is
out
sick.
So
he
was
not
available
for
Arisa
as
a
resource
to
me
today.
So
I
don't
have
any
information
on
that,
but
I'll
check
with
him
when
he
gets
back
and
have
him
contact
you
directly.
Maybe.
AA
AC
You
council
president
friend,
it's
one
one
item
I
received
a
call
from
representative
Charlene
Lima,
who
stated
that
several
members
of
the
senior
men,
a
presidential
manner
on
Grant
Avenue
I,
know
there's
a
typo.
It
says
grant,
but
it's
grant
g
ra
NT,
there's
dumping
in
that
area.
All
the
residents
have
been
complaining
so
to
the
chair
to
the
administration.
If
we
could
get
some
highway
department,
employees
will
be
they
pick
up
the
trash
and
then
monitor
it
in
that
area,
be
helpful.
AI
A
Concludes
everything
on
the
docket
for
council
member
communications,
any
other
account
of
communications
tonight's.
There
being
none
we'll
move
to
the
rules
committee
councilman
for
Vickie,
Oh,
two
or
three
tonight
and
said
that
there
were
some
changes
he
wanted
to
make
to
the
rules.
So
he
wanted
a
call
on
the
rules
committee
meeting
so
yeah.
AE
AE
A
M
AE
A
U
So
the
code,
the
city
of
Cranston,
title
motor
vehicles
and
traffic
for
one-way
streets
enumerated
for
Coronel
Street,
proposed
ordinance,
one
1709,
an
amendment
of
chapter,
seventeen
point
two
for
the
code
of
the
city
of
Cranston
entitled
zoning
performance
standards
for
licensed
cultivators
proposed
ordinance,
one
1710,
an
amendment
of
chapter
17
of
the
Code
of
the
city
of
Cranston
2005,
entitled
zoning
establishing
a
Garden
City
Center
development
district
that
is
erroneously
listed
on
the
docket
is
being
referred
to
March
16th.
It
will
be,
in
fact
we
heard
on
February
16th
I
have
the
I.
U
Then
we
have
one
ordinance
to
be
referred
to
the
ordinance
committee
for
hearing
on
March
16th.
That
is
one
1711
ordinance
amending
the
comprehensive
plan
of
2010
for
solo
performance
standards.
Then
we
have
the
following
new
claims
to
be
referred
to.
The
claims
committee
for
hearing
on
Monday
March
deputy
excuse
me
February
6.