Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Paris council delays panhandling ordinance, asks staff to compile data
Loading...
Summary
After public commenters urged caution, the Paris city council voted to delay drafting a panhandling ordinance and directed staff to compile police and dispatch data and explore whether existing laws can address specific unsafe or nuisance behaviors.
The Paris City Council on Jan. 27 debated whether to pursue a new city ordinance to restrict panhandling but decided to postpone any lawmaking and instead directed staff to compile a factual record before drafting rules.
Shelley Bridal, executive director of the Lamar County Human Resources Council and president of the Lamar County Homelessness Coalition, urged the council to pause and consider alternatives, saying the Salvation Army shelter needs sprinkler funding and warning that a hasty ordinance could further harm people experiencing homelessness. "I would also like to remind you that panhandling is classified as a charitable solicitation, which is considered protected free speech," Bridal told the council.
Joanie Moore, a Paris resident, told the council that private charitable acts should not be regulated: "If I see someone standing on the corner and I wanna give them a blanket ... that's my business."
City Attorney (name on the record) warned council members that broad bans are likely unconstitutional and urged a cautious, evidence-based approach. "You can't have an outright ban on panhandling," the attorney said, adding that restrictions that single out one kind of speech or are not narrowly tailored have frequently been struck down in litigation.
Paris Police Chief (name on the record) said compiling data will take time because dispatch codes do not currently identify calls as "panhandling," and calls are logged under varying activity codes such as "suspicious person" or "city ordinance violation." The chief said staff will need to review individual calls to build a factual record.
Council members expressed concern about rushing a policy that could face constitutional challenge and suggested first using existing laws—such as statutes addressing assault, impeding traffic or littering—where appropriate. Council consensus was to instruct staff to gather statistics, identify locations and incidents tied specifically to panhandling behaviors, and return with recommendations and possible narrow drafting that focuses on public safety, not general solicitation.
The council did not introduce or vote on a specific ordinance at the meeting; the next step is staff data collection and a future report to the council.
