The Observation Deck

I was approached by a panhandler in the Giant Eagle Parking lot on New Year's eve and after dealing with the not ready for prime time new Giant Eagle I was not in the mood to deal with the panhandler. But my gut response was to watch out for my groceries until I slammed down the trunk and to give her my "don't carry cash" response. But that's the first time I've encountered a panhandler in Lakewood since the 80s.

Having until recently worked downtown you get use to the usual panhandlers (and since our office moved, I do miss some of them). But they are generally focused on a spot, or a corner, not wandering through parking lots.

This woman changed her story from an offer to help me with my groceries to needing money to diaper her baby (photo of a baby shown). I now wished I had the Lakewood non-emergency police number on my cell phone. I think a call to them woud have brought an officer that would determine if she were just scamming for dollars, had a genuine need, or something in between.

Are my expectations out of place regarding the police? My inclination is alway to use the police as a last resort to avoid someone needlessly getting a record. But to maintain a civil and safe community the police do need to intervene at times. And then the definition of a emergency is a moving target as well.

When do you use the police, when do you not? Just like going to the emergency room with your current health care plan (if you're lucky enough to have a health care plan), when do you call the police and when do you deal with it yourself?

Kate--- You're dilemma is a proper one-- when to get the police involved. I'll give these two pieces of advice.
If you wonder whether or not it is a police matter, then it probably is.
Second, former police chief Mat Biscotti said, "better to call us and let us determine if it's a police matter. We'll sort it out."
Stan

Stan Austin wrote:Kate--- You're dilemma is a proper one-- when to get the police involved. I'll give these two pieces of advice.
If you wonder whether or not it is a police matter, then it probably is.
Second, former police chief Mat Biscotti said, "better to call us and let us determine if it's a police matter. We'll sort it out."
Stan

Kate

To back Stan up on this, the police have a system of ranking importance of calls. A panhandler could be a code 3(not pressing) or no code at all(have just check it out). Not a code 2 or 1 which would indicate get over there immediately. Maybe the dispatcher can figure out how important. I can assure you they will miss no "real crime" while dealing with peddlers, spare changers, etc. If something more important comes along they will issue a warning and be off ot the next call.

In the end it helps build the safe and secure part of Lakewood's brand.


.

We have bigger issues than panhandlers. I started this thread 5 days ago. It was a very short post that ended with this line:

stephen davis wrote:Any opinions from City Hall on this issue?

We already have three pages of posted concerns, questions, and suppositions, and almost 1,000 views by registered users on this topic.

The Mayor, Council, and half the employees at City Hall are regular readers of this forum. I KNOW THEY ARE READING THIS.

Don't you think some official or qualified person would make a comment here? Would it be so hard to say, "Yes, a call to the non-emergency Police phone number would be the appropriate response.", and then list that number? Maybe there is a more appropriate response that we should know about.

Steve,

You're asking to much in the days leading up to the coronation of Buckeye Day.

Reading the recent post about Jane Jacobs, I was reminded of her advice regarding sidewalk safety. In a nutshell, she says that police enforcement alone is never enough to make an area safe. The best way to make a public space safe is for there to be sufficient numbers of ordinary citizens to protect public safety.

That is, twenty law-abiding citizens on a sidewalk are more effective than one cop when it comes to discouraging a lot of anti-social behavior.

Obviously, you still need cops if you want to criminalize panhandling and enforce that criminalization. But if you're concerned with promoting the *sense* of public safety, people on the ground are the best remedy.

So, with that said, although I think a police levy is worth considering we should also think in the long run about how best to increase the numbers of pedestrians in the areas in question.

Making an area pedestrian-friendly is a large endeavor. It is a question of physical planning (sidewalk widths, speed limits, traffic layouts, regulations on building facades), economic planning (concentration vs. diffusion of employment location, commuter travel pattersn), legislation (criminalizing quality-of-life crimes more severely), and good governance (promoting sense of community). I think we should work on all these factors (of which a police levy is one).

Stephen Gross wrote:..........That is, twenty law-abiding citizens on a sidewalk are more effective than one cop when it comes to discouraging a lot of anti-social behavior.........

This entire post makes far too much sense. Are you sure you're in the right place?

[quote="Bill Call"]

This entire post makes far too much sense. Are you sure you're in the right place? :lol:[/quote]

Yeah, what am I thinking? Let's just blanket the city with security cameras, 24/7. That way, since everyone is being watch constantly, there's no chance for crime. That'll work! I read about it in a book... the title was a date, I think...

--Steve

Stephen Gross wrote:That is, twenty law-abiding citizens on a sidewalk are more effective than one cop when it comes to discouraging a lot of anti-social behavior.

I think twenty, or one thousand, law-abiding citizens on a sidewalk would be like a day in heaven for a panhandler.

[quote="stephen davis"]
I think twenty, or one thousand, law-abiding citizens on a sidewalk would be like a day in heaven for a panhandler.[/quote]

Ah! Good point! Let me try to clarify a bit:

(1) Yes, you're right: Simply increasing the numbers of people actually is great news for panhandlers.

(2) There's a distinction here that I forgot to delineate: there's passive panhandling and aggressive panhandling.

Passive panhandling, which would include people simply sitting outside with signs, as well as not very invasive requests) is not a major problem. That is, it's not pretty, but ordinary pedestrians will not feel threatened by it and by and large it won't be perceived as a security threat.

Aggressive panhandling, on the other hand, is rightfully perceived as a security threat. SHouting at people, tracking them down, and so on really freaks out ordinary pedestrians.

(3) Increasing the sheer numbers of people cuts down on aggressive panhandling, not non-aggressive panhandling. More people around means pedestrians will not be as isolated, or as isolatable. Pedestrians have the security of their fellow citizens. It is physically more difficult to follow a person when there is more people traffic on the sidewalk. Also, aggressive confrontation is less possible, since the odds run in the favor of the pedestrian, not the panhandler (assuming the numerical support of the other law-abiding pedestrians).

Thanks for your input!

--Steve

Good point. Just increasing the number of people on the street may have no effect if these people are apathetic. If people feel that they can be involved, and do get involved when needed, safety is maintained.

Pan-handlers seem to be everywhere these days. Maybe it's the cool thing to do - turn a parking lot into shakedown street.

Tonight I was out at Half Price Books in North Olmsted with Dan Slife. In the parking lot, a big pleading glassy eyed dude was pan-handling. He said his friend's car was out of gas. He said he was broke. I was prepared to give him a five. I asked him where he lived. He said Wellington. There were four guys total. Two more approached us. One was sitting in the car. I said, "Let me see the gas gauge." The driver lit his cigarette lighter to display the gauge. That was a smooth move. I said, "Turn on the ignition and let me see what you have." He did. There was three quarters of a tank. I said "You guys can drive." The panhandler said, "But the car keeps stalling out." I said, "Take it to a station."

Then we left. They drove away, too.

Kenneth Warren

It is horrible to be lied to - especially when you are trying to be nice.

However, you bring up an interesting question. Why are their more panhandlers now - or are there? Are panhandlers today's version of gypsys and hobos?

Do they exist more during periods when it is difficult to get jobs, when the economy is bad?

What do you think is causing this? I have not personally encountered any in Lakewood - but I don't doub that they are there and everywhere. Does that say something about the economy?

Are they more prevalent during different seasons of the year?

Just curious. I personally think what you are seeing is a sympton and will exist until the root cause(s) are eliminated. JMHO

Sorry I'm late to the thread.

My two cents...

The answer is simple, NEVER EVER GIVE A PANHANDLER MONEY!

If someone comes up to you asking for a handout, fine, they may indeed be down on their luck, but cash (in any amount) will never be the answer. Buy them a sandwich, buy them gas, give them a bus/rapid card, but never the money.

If someone feeds you a story, it's usually made up, and very well rehearsed. But just in case it isn't, offer them what they want. If they ask you for money for food, cut out the middle man and give them food. If they want money for gas, offer to go and get a five gallon can of gas for them. Diapers for baby. Whatever. They're response is all the information you will need.

The minute the funds dry up, the fake panhandling will stop.

The only problem is that there are far too many people out there looking for a quick boost to their self esteem and they think that giving a pocket full of change to a stranger who may or may not be lying to them is some easy way to buy karma.

Trust me, if you give a dollar to a panhandler, even if it went to what they said, you still did much less with your money than if you would have donated the same dollar to a homeless shelter.

Just about any shelter out there can feed more than a hundred people with much less than a hundred dollars.

If someone is asking for help, give it to them. But don't confuse panhandlers with the homeless, and don't assume those that ask are the ones who really need.

To drive home the real issue...

This coming Saturday and Sunday, January 27 & 28, I will once again be working with a very dedicated group of Jr. and Sr. high kids who will be finding out first hand what it's like to be homeless in Cleveland.

Starting Saturday afternoon, the youth groups of Lakewood Congregational and Pilgrim St. Paul churches will be spending the night on the street (in front of their respective churches) to bring attention to the plight of the homeless.

At that time, we will be seeking donations from the public in the form of blankets, clothing, food, toiletries, and of course cash, that will go to the local homeless shelters and other non-profit organizations.

If you happen to drive by that night, please be kind, your contributions would be greatly appreciated by those who truly need.

They should at least be juggling or playing a musical instrument.