AURORA | The busy exit off northbound Interstate 225 as it turns onto Parker Road has been considered a panhandler’s oasis for decades to the chagrin of several Aurora city council members.
“Our whole issue is a safety issue. When people stand in the medians, they can get hit,” said Barb Cleland, who was behind instituting the city’s longstanding ordinance which prohibits panhandling.
Now, Cleland is finally a step closer to getting what she and several Aurora council members have long desired: city ownership of the off-ramp through an annexation petition submitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The off-ramp is not only confusing in terms of who owns it, but is, in effect, a governmental island. The land is currently owned by the federal government represented by the Corps of Engineers. It is in Arapahoe County’s jurisdiction, and the Colorado Department of Transportation off-ramp facility is within an easement granted to the state by the federal government. None of these entities prohibit panhandling, and Aurora does.
In 1993, the City of Aurora passed a panhandling ban in response to what officials said were safety issues being caused by street vendors hawking papers for the former Rocky Mountain News. The paper promptly sued the city for what it said was a violation of its First Amendment rights, and the case was taken up by the Colorado Supreme Court in 1995, which ultimately upheld the city’s right to regulate its streets. Video tapes reviewed for the case showed hawkers at Aurora intersections who danced and sang as well as some who conducted sales transactions in lanes of moving traffic.
That same law holds true today in Aurora, long after the hawkers disbanded.
In fact, Aurora was one of the first cities in the country to successfully pass legislation that prohibits panhandling at intersections without tripping free press and assembly issues. Aurora lawmakers have long held that the panhandlers aren’t a nuisance, but they’re a danger to themselves, motorists and other pedestrians.
Parker Road on the west side of I-225 belongs to Aurora, where the activity is prohibited and Aurora police can enforce it.
For nearly two years, Aurora City officials have been working to annex the off-ramp.
The off-ramp is not only confusing in terms of who owns it, but is, in effect, a governmental island. The land is currently owned by the federal government represented by the Corps of Engineers. It is in Arapahoe County’s jurisdiction, and the Colorado Department of Transportation off-ramp facility is within an easement granted to the state by the federal government. None of these entities prohibit panhandling, and Aurora does.
City Councilman Bob LeGare said he believes the time and effort the city has put into owning the ramp will not be worthwhile in the long run because people can still stand on a patch of dirt near Cherry Creek Reservoir and ask for money without reprimand as long as they are not stepping into the street.
“The only thing that’s going to stop is they’re not going to stand in the center island,” he said of the annexation’s impact. At a city council public safety meeting in September, city officials confirmed the annexation would not prevent people from standing on the curb outside of the center of the median.
“Until the person actually steps into traffic or their actions cause a vehicle to change their course, no action is taken,” said senior assistant city attorney Nancy Rodgers at that meeting.
A slew of lawsuits that have prevented cities across the state from enforcing stricter panhandling laws also has LeGare questioning how well the city ban will work.
“I’m curious to see how creative the panhandlers get to comply with law,” LeGare said.
But changes in other municipalities’ laws and panhandling behavior may end the city’s attempt to outright stop the activity. Aurora Judge Richard Weinberg confirmed the city has worked to design its ordinances in order to meet constitutional tests, as whereas other municipalities in Colorado have not withstood legal challenges from the ACLU to similar panhandling restrictions.
Last March, Fort Collins agreed not to ticket people who peacefully panhandle under a settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union of a federal lawsuit challenging that city’s crackdown on panhandling.
Last spring, Grand Junction city lawmakers approved changes to their panhandling ordinance after the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging the panhandling law there. Councilors removed a prohibition on knowingly panhandling from at-risk individuals and near school grounds and reduced a no-begging zone around bus stops and ATMs from 100 to 20 feet.
In fact, Aurora was one of the first cities in the country to successfully pass legislation that prohibits panhandling at intersections without tripping free press and assembly issues. Aurora lawmakers have long held that the panhandlers aren’t a nuisance, but they’re a danger to themselves, motorists and other pedestrians.
Durango agreed to stop enforcing its panhandling limits after learning of the ACLU’s objections.
Another issue with calling the I-225 off-ramp unsafe is that the data hasn’t backed up that claim.
Deputy Aurora Police Chief Paul O’Keefe said at the September public safety meeting that the actual number of traffic violations was much less than originally thought.
According to the Colorado State Patrol, going back to 2009, there has been an average of fewer than two non-serious accidents per month in that strip of area. It’s unclear whether panhandling caused or had any effect on those incidents. According to CDOT, there were no pedestrian crashes at that intersection between 2010 and 2014.
In conjunction with the approval process for the annexation, the city is updating its panhandling ban to address and define aggressive panhandling. According to city officials, Aurora police frequently receive complaints on this issue, especially panhandling in private parking lots for large shopping areas.
Nancy Bailey, an administrator with development assistance for the city, said updating the panhandling ordinance is not directly tied to the city’s annexation of the off-ramp.
The I-225 off-ramp annexation comes on the heels of a larger effort by city officials to annex 3,000 acres on the east side of Aurora for mostly residential development.
The petition for the I-225 offramp annexation will be presented to the City Council on Oct. 12.
— The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Watch out! These bums have ‘RIGHTS’ The ACLU (the most un-American organization in the nation) sued Boulder for trying to rid itself of these drunks, drug addicts and bums, and won an injunction against throwing them out.
I don’t drive that often, but there is too much going on at that intersection now with all the traffic, and though RTD lite Rail is being extended to take some off the road, in the 12 mile extension from 9 Mile, to Peoria (Smith Road) 16 stations are being built with parking at majority. With 1225 already parking at 9 Mile daily, and Iliff being built for 600 cars now, 600 more later, there will be much more traffic with everyone looking for shortcuts, or faster ways to get from where they are, to where they are going. Also increases apartment numbers living along that corridor, with cars. And when the Shopping center at Parker and I-225 is completed,, there will be mixing of slow drivers, and much faster drivers, since I-225 is now 65 mph speed limit. That is what Heather Garden residents are complaining of now, with all the traffic cutting through the area, as high speed short cut.
I would say it will not be safe for any pedestrian, (seniors, drunks, drug addicts, children, or those not know what they are) to be walking anywhere other then marked walk areas or sidewalks. Time to make it safer for drivers who have to merge or exit, without having to watch of people in the mix.
All people in this country have the same “Rights”, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.
What you failed to mention in this article is the number of traffic accidents that occur in this area that the city would now have to respond too which now the Arapahoe sheriff has too. This takes away resources from APD to do other things.
Councilman Legare is correct when he says people get creative when told they can not do things.
This by the way has come up before in another article so why you didn’t mention it now means someone didn’t do their homework.
just as Kathy responded I am amazed that some people can profit $28273 in four weeks on the internet ……..Easy online work for all. Make $5000 to $9000 per week online.4-5hour daily work………read the full info here
..os..
➤➤➤ https://GoogleTopCareersGetOmegaFinanceJob/get/morethan$97/hour…✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥
Not only is it annoying and unsafe to have the panhandlers at this off ramp, they leave their trash and discarded clothing behind.
DUH? “They’ll get hit.” If they are standing in that area, they know that.
I pass by there all the time. Let the folks do their begging, it doesn’t bother me. I’ve been known to contribute on occasion. “There but for the grace of God, goes John Bradford”
GOOGLE CAREERS::As Joan replied I am stunned that a mom can make $28273 in four weeks on the internet ……..Simple online work for all. Make $5000 to $9000 every week online.4-5hour day by day work……….read the full info here
/g1v…..
➤➤➤ https://GoogleChampionTopPayingOnlineClubCareer/Earn/hourly/$97….✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥✥
I have real concern in general on pan-handling and the elderly. They can feel quite intimidated, and forced to give so that they are not hurt or injured in some way. This happens at the BANKS, The Kaiser Building, and quite honestly even the grocery store. Not to mention, the bus stops, and corners in general. Today I saw a woman trying to get away from a Man in her face, on Mississippi and Havana. I almost opened my car to the woman for her to get away from him, but I was driving, and it would have most likely caused an accident. This harassment is for the birds. It’s bad for the city and it’s flat time to stand up to the ACLU! It’s not OK! OK?