Panhandler Proposal Goes Begging : Government: Council opposes law to force beggars in Anaheim to buy a license. Citizen group pushes plan.

A majority of City Council members said Tuesday that they would not support a citizen group’s proposal to require panhandlers to obtain a city business license, effectively killing the plan.

While no formal vote was taken, four of the five council members said they would not support the proposal by the anti-crime group “Somebody,” indicating that they agreed with a legal opinion that it would violate the beggars’ First Amendment rights and would be struck down in court.

The council instructed City Atty. Jack L. White not to draft such an ordinance, which had been proposed by the citizens’ group “Somebody.” Civil rights attorneys believe that such an ordinance would have made Anaheim the first city in the nation to license panhandlers.

“If this council tries to adopt an ordinance regulating begging or panhandling, it is going to be legally flawed,” Councilman Fred Hunter said.

Under the group’s proposal--which gained national media attention after it was first proposed last month--panhandlers would have been forced to obtain an annual city business license and wear it on their shirts or around their necks.

The licenses, which cost as much as $100, would have included the beggars’ names, photographs and a telephone number where citizens could report overly aggressive panhandlers.

Under the citizen group’s plan, those found to be rude or obscene could have had their licenses revoked. Those who attempted to beg without a license could have been arrested or fined.

Maggie Gonzalez, a retired nurse who first proposed the ordinance to “Somebody,” said she does not understand how such an ordinance could violate a beggar’s constitutional rights.

The 150-member group--which takes its name from the lament “the police can’t solve all of our problems, but somebody’s got to do something”--collected 2,000 signatures in support of its proposal and made a presentation to the council Tuesday in support of the ordinance.

“We would not be obstructing their free speech rights because we would not be telling them they cannot panhandle,” Gonzalez said. “We are just saying they should have to have some identification.”

Gonzalez and others said they are constantly harassed by panhandlers, particularly downtown. Gonzalez said she was approached by a panhandler who frequents a shopping center parking lot across the street from City Hall two weeks ago, and the man would not let her drive away until she gave him money.

“What did he want? Twenty five cents? A dollar? Or did he want to go through my purse until it was empty?” Gonzalez asked. She said the man left when she yelled to a grocery store employee for help.

Gonzalez promised to continue her efforts to have the proposal enacted.

Councilman Frank Feldhaus, the only council member to support the proposal, said the city’s reputation is being tarnished by the aggressive begging that goes on in its streets. Police have said that approximately 100 beggars panhandle in Anaheim on a regular basis.

“I don’t want the city’s residents or the visitors who come here to be harassed,” Feldhaus said.

But White told the council that in 1991, a federal court struck down California’s law banning panhandling, saying it interfered with a beggar’s free speech right “to communicate his plight in life and make a statement about how society treats the poor.”

Since then, other California cities have explored ways to restrict begging, White said, but none have enacted an ordinance, fearing that they would also lose in court.

“They have looked at it and found it to be too difficult an issue to tackle,” White said.

Some council members said they opposed the proposal because giving beggars a business license would be tantamount to giving city approval to their activities.

“I don’t like what the proposal says: All you’ve got to do to be a panhandler in Anaheim is to go and get a business license,” Councilman Bob D. Simpson said. “I don’t like the connotation of that.”

Hunter said he also opposed the proposal on moral grounds, exhorting the city and its residents to do more to help those who have to panhandle.

“Jesus Christ was homeless,” Hunter said. “It would give the city a black eye if it passes this ordinance.”