[MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09

[kjerrim at missoula.com]

As usual no news is good news if you are marginalized low income and  
possibly exeriencing homelessness.  Between the newspaper article last  
week and comments here and else where I don't see a whole lot of  
community building going on. All this lumping together of different  
populations of people and different problems is always unfortunate.  
Individuals who are experiencing homelessness, chronic alcoholics and  
counter culture kids passing through town cannot be held responsible  
for the "ruin" of downtown.  That seems like a real stretch to me. And  
as mentioned in Bobs original update, lets all quit saying how awful  
it is downtown because thats certainly not good for business  
regardless of ones experience there.

It is clear that a number of downtown business owners are experiencing  
problems with behavior some of which is illegal and that the behavior  
does need to be addressed. I believe their are also many downtown  
business owners who are not having problems with behavior. Likely it  
depends on your location. One thing I have found in life is that its  
very hard to curb bad behavior in other people be they children,  
friends or strangers. It is not however difficult to mitigate illegal  
behavior. As I have mentioned several times in the course of the last  
several months we have a law- the states disorderly conduct law- that  
could be used to address most of what is plaguing business owners and  
those who find downtown to be a "gauntlet." But that means you have to  
call the police and report the behavior. Not call a downtown  
ambassador. I am perplexed by that whole phenomena. Why are people  
calling BID about this. Is BID an arm of the police? Further, why are  
the proposal of these ordinances-panhandling and ped interference  
relying on stats from BID?  I want to see the raw data from the  
police. How many unduplicated complaints about how many unduplicated  
individuals were received. Was the states disorderly conduct law used  
to deal with it. If not why. Jim Nugent wrote a very extensive opinion  
on the disorderly conduct law and how it might be used. Its on the  
citys website for anyone interested. Now that the Panhandling  
ordinance is passed, data should be collected and culled so that as we  
move forward we can evaluate if that ordinance effects any relief for  
the businesses experiencing problems.

Another thing I have learned in life is that we all find different  
things irritating and in this regard one cannot ordinance their way  
out of not irritating someone. Both ordinances will be ineffective in  
curbing the actions of individuals who are downtown passed out on the  
side walk or sleeping on the side walk who are chronic alcoholics. It  
would be more cost effective to house these individuals using a  
transitional housing voucher until they can get a federally funded  
shelter plus care voucher. Alcoholism is a disease. The current real  
change monies could be used to do this or the city could put forth  
some money. As for those kids passing through each year on their  
Hunter Thompson voyage who want to be seen and perceived as counter  
culture, whats the problem? They have a right to hang out on the side  
walk as long as they are not doing something illegal. Just because  
some find it offensive is mute. If they are doing something illegal or  
harrassing call the police. Otherwise live and let live. This is  
present in all major metropolitan citys and it doesnt dissuade me from  
walking down 1st ave in seattle.  I do not feel that current direction  
of some of the changes downtown is in keeping with the Missoula that  
people come to visit. People come from around the world to see James  
Crumley's Missoula- to experience Charlies, to see the Lee Nye  
"Missoulacana". To be in an eclectic environment. Trying to make  
Missoula the next Vail or park city is not going to be productive in  
the long run. Were a college town and haven of free thinkers. Having  
all this flap going on introduces an atmosphere that it neither  
conducive to the sense of community nor reflective of Missoula's  
unique, eclectic attributes. Lets move on and use the laws we have to  
curb illegal behavior.

Incidently, from a historical perspective I find it interesting that  
this "problem" with "vagrancy" hasn't changed much since the late  
1880s. One city council members conclusion at the city council meeting  
that passed the panhandling ordinance(I'll paraphrase here) that the  
ordinance wasnt just about aggressive panhandling but about people not  
wanting to see it while they shop really opitimizes the primary intent  
of the ordinances. This isn't much different then the intent of the  
original Poor Farm that was created by the city and operated between  
1886 and 1936 on the site of the current Pine View Park and  
Rattlesnake school. Historical documents indicate that the Poor Farm  
was created because vagrancy wasn't good for business.  So all this is  
nothing new.  But we could use a new approach. Let’s go back to the  
drawing board on this one and collect some data and look at long term  
solutions that will creatively address problems downtown, rather than  
voting in a ineffective ordinance that could possibly set a tone that  
is not part of the traditional inclusive spirit of Missoula.  Kate  
Jerrim Ybarra