Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roadway Solicitation Ban topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wicomico local bill would ban soliciting in roadways and medians; sponsors cite safety, opponents warn of constitutional legal risks
Summary
Delegate Doug Beacham (sponsor listed in transcript as Delegate Beauchamp/Wicomico County) presented a local bill to prohibit roadway solicitation in Wicomico County. Supporters including local schools, sheriff and police chiefs argued the ban protects pedestrians and school buses; an attorney cited Fourth Circuit precedent that may make similar,
Delegate representing Wicomico County presented House Bill 3 20 to prohibit solicitation of money or donations in roadways, medians and intersections in Wicomico County.
Sponsor testimony emphasized public safety and cited prior local laws in other Maryland counties. Delegate Beauchamp (recorded in the transcript as the Wicomico County sponsor) told the committee the bill is intended to prevent people from standing in roadways and medians where they could be struck and where traffic disruptions can create hazards for motorists, pedestrians and school buses. Supporters in the hearing included the Wicomico County sheriff, police chief, county executive, board of education officials and Salisbury University; Kim Miles, assistant superintendent for student and family services for Wicomico County Public Schools, testified in favor and said solicitation in roadways poses risks for school buses and students.
Delegate Long and others questioned whether the law would treat charitable groups differently from individuals who are homeless; the sponsor said the law is intended to be neutral and safety‑focused: "If someone wants to solicit, if they go to a parking lot, if they go... that's always been my suggestion," the sponsor said, adding he had personal experience with boot‑style fundraising and had stopped that practice locally after injuries occurred.
An opposing witness, attorney Darlene Stewart, cautioned that a Fourth Circuit decision, Clatterbuck v. City of Charlottesville (2015), struck down a substantially similar ordinance in Virginia, and suggested obtaining an Attorney General opinion on constitutionality before proceeding. The sponsor agreed to seek input from the Attorney General.
Ending: The hearing record shows local officials and school administrators in favor on safety grounds and a civil liberties/legal challenge raised by counsel; the sponsor agreed to follow up with the Attorney General's office on constitutional questions.
