'Street harassment' prompts DeBary to take on traffic, pedestrian safety concerns
In recent years, municipalities throughout Florida have sought to target panhandling through ordinances regulating the activity, only to find themselves facing lawsuits alleging First Amendment violations.
The City of DeBary – looking to lessen distractions to motorists and assuage the concerns of residents and business owners, while trying to steer clear of potential legal challenges – recently enacted a "traffic and pedestrian safety" ordinance.
The ordinance, which received unanimous approval on the final reading June 16, aims to regulate "certain activities associated with the impediment or obstruction of safe and free-flowing vehicular and pedestrian traffic and prohibiting harassment of persons utilizing public streets and sidewalks and other public areas."
During the second half of last year, both DeLand and Deltona, using Daytona Beach as a model, updated their respective panhandling ordinances by barring soliciting within specific areas, regardless of whether the offender is a homeless person or a firefighter participating in a boot drive.
Report: Pedestrian fatalities increased in 2020 despite fewer cars driving during pandemic
Mark Lane: Volusia and Flagler are the new leader ... in dangerous walks across the road
Since updating those ordinances nearly a year ago, law enforcement officers made seven related arrests in DeLand and three in Deltona, records show.
It's unclear how many warnings were issued, as those are given at the officer's discretion.
DeBary City Manager Carmen Rosamonda and City Attorney Giffin Chumley acknowledged the City Council's concerns regarding free speech and some court rulings that have barred municipalities from enforcing similar ordinances, such as the case of Messina v. City of Fort Lauderdale.
The Florida Justice Institute partnered with two Fort Lauderdale attorneys, arguing that two of the city's ordinances targeting panhandling violate First Amendment rights.
"That's why we're seeking here more to regulate behavior, time, place and manner and not the message," Chumley said during a discussion by the council on May 18. "We don’t want to make a content-based decision here."
The Messina case is slated for trial in October.
In June 2021, U.S. District Court Judge Roy K. Altman issued a preliminary injunction barring Fort Lauderdale from enforcing its panhandling ordinances.
Related restrictions: Brevard County borrows playbook from Melbourne and effectively bans panhandling
Florida Justice Institute to court: Throw out Palm Beach County's anti-panhandling law
What does the ordinance say?
DeBary's new ordinance, in the section on "Obstruction or Impediment of Public Streets and Rights-of-Way," states "it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian or person to:"
For any period of time, sit or stand in or on: an unpaved median or any median of less than 3 feet, or any median less than 5 feet where the adjacent roadway has three or more vehicular travel lanes in any one direction at the point of intersection (including turning lanes), except that pedestrians may use median strips only in the course of lawfully crossing from one side of the street to the other.
Occupy a paved travel lane or other portion of a roadway while traffic is flowing.
Alter or impede the flow of vehicular traffic by any means.
Remain in the portion of the paved road or highway designated for vehicular use upon the commencement of traffic flow from a stopped position.
It also prohibits the following behaviors for people on foot:
Crossing a roadway at a point within 200 feet outside of a marked crosswalk.
Crossing at a controlled intersection contrary to the signal lights or the direction of a traffic officer.
Crossing a roadway intersection diagonally, unless authorized by official traffic control devices or a traffic officer.
Crossing a roadway with four or more total travel lanes (counting both directions), except in a marked crosswalk or any other place than by a route at right angles to the curb or by the shortest route to the opposite curb.
Crossing a roadway intersection in any manner prohibited by official traffic control devices or signage directing or pertaining to such crossing movements.
Where sidewalks are provided on a roadway with four or more total travel lanes (counting both directions), walking along and upon the paved portion of a roadway intended for vehicular traffic.
Between adjacent intersections at which traffic control signals are in operation, crossing at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
Intentionally blocking the path of travel of a vehicle or acting in such a manner so as to cause a vehicle operator to take evasive action to avoid contact or collision with such person.
Physically reaching into a vehicle, touching a vehicle occupant, or touching any portion of a vehicle without the consent of a vehicle occupant or owner, or throwing any object at or into any vehicle unless specifically requested by an occupant or owner of such vehicle.
The ordinance also prohibits "street harassment," which includes:
Approaching or communicating with a person in such a manner that would: Cause a reasonable person to believe that the person is being threatened with either imminent bodily injury or the commission of a criminal act upon the person, or cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed, and the conduct in fact seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the person.
Willfully blocking, either individually or as part of a group of persons, the free movement of an individual against such an individual's will.
Following another person for no legitimate purpose after being asked by such person to desist.
Willfully touching a person without explicit permission.
Engaging in aggressive conduct that a reasonable person would construe as being intended to intimidate, compel or force an individual to accede to the offending person's demands or requests.
Vice Mayor Phyllis Butlien pointed out the ordinance doesn't impact activity on private property.
Mayor Karen Chasez echoed that sentiment, referring to an often-inebriated individual who spends time on private property near a gas station at U.S. 17-92 and Highbanks Road.
"We're aware of these concerns, but we have to walk this very tight line," Chasez said. "We cannot infringe on rights, and we also do not have control over permission for people to be on private property."
She said the city's ordinance "seems like a defensible start."
A violation may result in a fine of up to $500 and/or 60 days in jail.
This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: DeBary takes on panhandling using traffic, pedestrian safety concerns
