Lakewood’s Response to Panhandling
Submitted by Joan from Lakewood
On July 26, 2024 , there were at least 20 individuals attempting to wash windows at the Wadsworth and Alameda intersection. Since both Denver and Arvada are addressing this issue, I believe the individuals are coming to a more friendly location. Very sad. Just four blocks from the City Council building and the police station yet no response.
After submitting this story to City Council, not one member responded but someone did forward the email to city staff to address. The response is below.
Why does City Council not feel the need to respond to legitimate concerns? Is responding as Lakewood “always has” enough?
City Staff Response:
“Thank you for expressing this concern regarding people trying to clean windows, we are examining all possible response options. We have also heard concerns of increased loitering at various businesses, panhandling, and issues like this relating to traffic safety, it’s important for us to acknowledge these valid community concerns. I’d like to offer some context regarding the legal and procedural changes that have occurred, which may shed light on the police responses observed in recent years in Lakewood (and across Colorado).
In the past, the City of Lakewood had ordinances addressing aggressive panhandling and panhandling in certain locations. However, a significant legal precedent was set on September 30, 2015, when Judge Christine M. Arguello of the United States District Court issued a decisive order in Browne v. City of Grand Junction. This ruling specifically targeted panhandling ordinances similar to those in Lakewood, emphasizing First Amendment considerations and challenging the city’s ability to regulate panhandling activities while upholding constitutional rights of free speech. Also in Colorado, the City of Greeley instituted a “median ban” for traffic safety and panhandling purposes, while Cranston, RI instituted a restriction on solicitation and panhandling in traffic. Both of those ordinances were defeated as well in ACLU challenged cases. Those, and other court cases around the country, have changed the way police respond to panhandling issues compared to decades past.
Following this legal precedent, the City of Lakewood repealed two specific ordinances related to panhandling, which were “Aggressive Begging Prohibited” (Section 9.50.120) and “Begging in Certain Locations Prohibited” (Section 9.50.130). Consequently, police agents were directed not to verbally warn or ask individuals on public property, holding signs or verbally seeking donations in a non-threatening manner, to “move along,” as had been done in the past, as it became a freedom of speech issue.
Instead, the focus shifted to whether a panhandler’s behavior posed a threat to public safety. Illegal behaviors, such as blocking passageways or refusing to leave private property after being instructed to do so by the owner, are now the primary concerns. Law enforcement prioritizes enforcing laws against criminal activity associated with panhandling, such as disorderly conduct, harassment, obstructing roadways, or trespassing, rather than the act of panhandling itself. We will also focus on traffic safety, such as obstructing traffic or incidents which cause safety concerns to any road user. When local businesses call and complain about people trespassing, we are responding as we always have.
As we see in the news, efforts are underway in the City of Denver to address the issue of mass immigration while other municipalities are identifying what the implications will be for them. What is most visible as people drive around Lakewood are more people on the street participating in activities such as window washing in traffic or panhandling on streets or nearby businesses. Again, we are examining all of our options, which may include education, enforcement and engineering changes. Obviously, the safety of all of our road users is of critical importance and know that we are striving to uphold public safety, and will examine local ordinances and state laws for ways to address any public safety concerns like we always have.”