[Hpn] Re: YOU and BUSH share in the assets of panhandling as well!

wtinker wtinker@metrocast.net
Fri, 1 Jun 2001 13:00:09 -0400


Hello!
In reading this post or exchange why do I have a distinct feeling that this
could be used as a selective means to arrest displaced persons,or in a
discriminatory fashion to arrest a disabled person in a wheel chair if they
did not move along as ordered by police?
William Charles Tinker
NHHomeless  25 Granite Street
Northfield,N.H. 03276 USA
1-603-286-2492
http://www.nationalhomeless.org/state/newhampshire.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewHampshireHomeless
Advocate,activist for displaced,disabled and human rights
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jackie.Goodman@ci.austin.tx.us>
To: <nyceguy50@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 3:55 PM
Subject: RE: YOU and BUSH share in the assets of panhandling as well!


> Hi, John,     the ordinance is about blocking, inhibiting, impeding safe
> passage by the public on public rights of way.  So that it is not used in
a
> way that can be selectively enforced, I got some of the legislative intent
> into the record, which is then the policy that has to go with any
legitimate
> enforcement of the provisions.
>
> There are other clarifications that I'll ask about at second reading.
> There is a real issue that needs to be addressed, and I consider it my
> responsibility to make as sure as I can that some additional purpose is
not
> hidden in the language of the ordinance - one that would encourage or
allow
> unconstitutional abridgement of the right of anyone to use the public
rights
> of way in a manner that does not block or inhibit anyone else's access to
> sidewalk or establishment, and so, cannot be used to discriminate against
> someone for perceived inappropriateness, income level, status of having
> shelter or by any standard or reason except that of compromising the safe
> passage of the public or any member of the public.
>
> As to campaign funds and war chests ~ you must not be aware of the
campaign
> finance reform the people of Austin approved by vote, which caps the
amount
> of money a City Council candidate can raise, and precludes a City Council
> member from having  - or raising - funds. During a campaign I send out
> invitations to fundraisers, and there is a limit [by law] to the amount of
> money a person can give to the candidate of their choice.  If people
choose
> to respond to that invitation, and either send a donation or attend the
> fundraiser and donate at the event, I accept that donation for the
campaign,
> if the donation is within the limit of the law.
>
> Jackie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: john macpherson [mailto:nyceguy50@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 2:09 PM
> To: Goodman, Jackie
> Cc: media challel24
> Subject: YOU and BUSH share in the assets of panhandling as well!
>
>
> Why are you creating an ordenance that selectivly
> enforces a class B assult charge, and is allready
> covered under said charge. The campaign war chest that
> you use is matched by your solicitation of funds that
> is described as agressive panhandling.  THe campaign
> mailer, public fundraisers, and other advertising
> modessurpasses the minimum requirements for your
> arrest in agressive solicitation of funds a/k/a
> AGRESSIVE PANHANDLING. I must admit that Austin
> resident GEORGE W. BUSH colleceted an enormous amount
> of money in this manner over the past three years. Why
> wasnt he charged with this crime in a class B assault
> which agressive panhandling is.