In 2013, the US District Court for Arizona found Arizona’s longstanding anti-begging provision (ARS 13-2905(a)(3)) unconstitutional as violating free-speech rights under the US and Arizona constitutions. In response, the Arizona Legislature adopted SB1094 (2015 Ariz. Legis. Serv. Ch. 146) removing the provision and replacing it with an “aggressive solicitation” prohibition in ARS 13-2914 that applied to a broad range of public areas (including “alleys, bridges, buildings, driveways, parking lots, parks, playgrounds, plazas, sidewalks and streets open to the general public, and the doorways and entrances to buildings and dwellings and the grounds enclosing them.”). In 2015, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert that became the “new standard for content-neutrality determinations” under the 1st Amendment (including with regard to panhandling restrictions).

Since then, Arizona municipalities have been considering what restrictions might be applied to solicitation by persons of the occupants in motor vehicles on streets. In some cases, communities have prohibited all solicitation of such occupants (whether vehicles are moving or stopped). This has been based on concern for the safety of both those soliciting and the vehicle occupants (due to proximity to operational vehicles that are moving...or may move at any moment), as well as being based on the potential for impeding flow of traffic due to unexpected stops for reasons other than traffic control devices. Of course, competing interests of the right to expression under the 1st Amendment have continued to require consideration in adoption of any such restrictions.

It has been noted that the Town’s traffic medians are designed to serve as unoccupied buffers between opposing lanes of vehicular traffic, and as a place of temporary refuge for pedestrians while lawfully crossing a street. If pedestrians regularly occupy those medians for purposes other than lawful crossing of a street at a crosswalk, it can create a danger of physical injury to both the pedestrians and occupants of vehicles. It can also interrupt traffic flow and increase traffic delays by distracting and disrupting vehicular traffic.

ARS 28-791 authorizes Arizona cities and towns to require by ordinance that pedestrians strictly comply with directions of official traffic control signals. Also, ARS 28-646(B) prohibits pedestrians from loitering or unduly delaying crossing the roadway after traffic has stopped to give the right-of-way. Therefore, after consideration of the current status of 1st Amendment jurisprudence, staff is proposing that the Town Council consider modifying current restrictions regarding solicitation of occupants in vehicles by focusing on regulations prohibiting use of traffic medians by pedestrians for any purpose other than lawful crossing of a street.

Ordinance No. 2026-981 has been prepared for Council consideration in adopting such regulations. If it chooses to do so, the Council may vote to read the Ordinance by title only on two separate occasions (then place the same on final passage). The Ordinance would then receive its first reading by the Town Clerk. At a subsequent meeting, the Clerk would read the Ordinance by title only for the second reading. Thereupon the Council would vote on whether to adopt Ordinance No. 2026-981.

Motion to read Ordinance No. 2026-981 adopting regulations related to pedestrians loitering in traffic medians by title only on two separate occasions, then place the same on final passage. VOTE. 

[if the motion is to read the Ordinance, the Mayor instructs the Town Clerk to read Ordinance No. 2026-981 by title only for the 1st reading.]

Town staff recommends reading and ultimately approving Ordinance No. 2026-981 adopting regulations related to pedestrians loitering in traffic medians.

It is anticipated that there will be no public finance or revenue issues related to this proposed Town Council action.