Take Action

Target Poverty, Not The Poor.

On Monday, April 19th, the City Council passed the Aggressive Solicitation Ordinance by a vote of 5-4. Mayor McGinn will veto the measure sending it back to the council where it would need 6 votes to override the Mayor’s veto. The supporters of this ordinance simply do not have the votes to do that, it will die without being enacted.

Two things you can do:

1.) Attend the veto signing Friday, 11:30, City Hall, Bertha Landes room.

2.) Thank O’Brien, Harrell, Rasmussen, and Licata for their courageous votes to do what is right in the face of enormous counter-pressure from the downtown business interests.

Mike O’Brien
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
(206) 684-8800

Bruce Harrell
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
(206) 684-8804

Tom Rasmussen
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
(206) 684-8808

Nick Licata
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
(206) 684-8803


Get the facts (PDF)

Read the Seattle Human Rights Commission Report (PDF)

The City of Seattle’s proposed “aggressive solicitation” ordinance attacks free speech rights, gives police broad new powers to harass the visible poor, and returns Seattle to the divisive Downtown Interests vs. Poor People politics of the Sidran years.  The ordinance makes solicitation within 15 feet of someone engaged in a parking or ATM transaction, or immediately carrying a document related to that transaction, a civil infraction and imposes a $50 fine for each violation.  Aggressive panhandling is already illegal under current law.

According to one study, quality of life ticketing cost the City of San Francisco at least $10 million in police and court expenses over a three year period and have only deepened the problems they claim to address.  Of the roughly 12,000 citations issued annually, the majority disproportionately go to people of color.

The Consensus Project has found that national trend toward “quality of life” enforcement and punitive drug laws have led to large increases in the incarceration of the mentally ill.

This ordinance:

  • • Distract our police and courts from the real issues demanding our attention, such as the increase in open air drug dealing and the appalling recent rise in youth violence.  This ordinance will waste scarce resources without addressing the reasons people panhandle.  Fining or jailing them will not solve the problem of poverty.  Seattle already has a law against ‘aggressive panhandling. We don’t need another one.
  • • Is expensive and targets the wrong people. A similar ordinance in San Francisco resulted in expenditures of roughly $10 million (in three years) without solving the underlying problems.  The Seattle ordinance will impact the homeless, people of color, the mentally ill and those selling newspapers or cookies or seeking donations to political causes will be prohibited from conducting their business in many neighborhoods of Seattle.
  • • Violate our constitutional right to freedom of speech by redefining ordinary street solicitation as illegal.  The proposal prohibits anyone from soliciting within 15 feet of Seattle’s many parking pay stations or ATMs, and from aggressively soliciting.  The poor definition for aggressive solicitation offers no clear guidance on what behavior is off limits—so it will end up chilling everyone’s speech and behavior.
  • • Will disproportionately impact people of color.  Of the 12,000 infractions given per year in San Francisco, the majority are given to people of color and yet 80% percent of these cases are dismissed for one reason of the other.
  • • Is divisive and blames panhandlers for economic troubles that come with recession.


Join Us
There are many groups and individuals opposing the ordinance including:


Nominate a Vendor of the Week