ACLU Declares Victory in Cranston Panhandling Case, Mayor Hopkins Says Litigation Too Expensive

ACLU Declares Victory in Cranston Panhandling Case, Mayor Hopkins Says Litigation Too Expensive

The ACLU is declaring victory for the First Amendment and the rights of the poor that ends a four-year battle between the ACLU of RI and the City of Cranston.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge William Smith on Tuesday signed an order declaring the City’s anti-panhandling ordinance unconstitutional and barring the City from enforcing it or enacting any similar ordinance.

The ordinance, barring any person from entering a roadway “for the purpose of distributing anything to the occupant of any vehicle or for the purpose of receiving anything from the occupant of any vehicle,” was enacted in February 2017 by a 5-4 vote of the City Council.

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

ACLU of RI cooperating attorney Lynette Labinger filed suit against the ordinance, arguing that it violated the First Amendment right of individuals to solicit donations and to distribute literature on Cranston roadways. In response, Judge Smith issued a temporary restraining order against the ordinance’s enforcement, and that order remained in effect while discovery in the case proceeded.

 

Hopkins Says City Facing "Financial Exposure"

Cranston Mayor Ken Hopkins said in a statement that the cost of continuing litigation is exposing the city to significant financial costs. “I supported the majority on the City Council in 2017 consistent with my strong views that our citizens need the best protection in our neighborhoods and on our streets,” said Hopkins.

“After consultation with the city’s special legal counsel and the city solicitor’s department, I have determined it is in the Cranston taxpayers’ best interest to end this litigation,” said Hopkins. He stated, “During the transition and in my first few months in office I have been carefully reviewing the various pending litigation involving the City.  Based on the posture of this case in Federal Court and the recommendation of Marc DeSisto, our well-respected special counsel, I felt that we should find an acceptable resolution that minimizes future financial exposure to the City.”

Hopkins said that as part of the settlement, the City will reimburse the ACLU for legal expenses incurred. He said the City will reimburse the ACLU a total of $140,000 that can be paid over two fiscal years.  “We have the funds available and our finance department will coordinate payment with legal counsel.” Hopkins stated, “While $140,000 is not insignificant, my former council colleague, the late John Lanni, had predicted that a challenge to the ordinance would end up costing the city $500,000 (see minutes of February 15, 2017, special council meeting).

The ACLU has long opposed ordinances like these for criminalizing poverty. Although City officials had claimed the ordinance was adopted as a “public safety” measure and cited the number of car accidents at various city intersections,  the consent judgment notes that discovery conducted for the lawsuit “has not substantiated that there is any correlation between pedestrian accidents and the soliciting of donations and leafletting on the city streets between 2007 and the present,” nor did it show any increase in vehicle or pedestrian accidents during the time the ordinance has not been enforced.

In April 2016, the ACLU had favorably settled a lawsuit against Cranston over a similar ordinance that City officials acknowledged violated the First Amendment. Undaunted, the City Council nonetheless went ahead a year later to adopt a new anti-panhandling ordinance, which made several cosmetic revisions to the earlier one in an unsuccessful attempt to pass constitutional muster.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit settled today were the R.I. Homeless Advocacy Project; two Cranston residents – Karen Rosenberg and Deborah Flitman – who wanted to leaflet from traffic islands but were barred from doing so under the ordinance; and Francis White, Jr., a disabled and formerly homeless person, who has occasionally relied upon panhandling to support himself.

“Hopkins said, “It is time to end this time-consuming and costly lawsuit and move on to other efforts to protect the public on our streets and in our neighborhoods.”