In July 2022, the Cottonwood Police Department launched a program to install temporary “no panhandling” signs at rotating locations throughout the city.
The signs, which urge residents to donate to local charities instead of giving to individuals, were originally proposed by CPD Officer James Repp, who was assigned as the department’s outreach services officer at the time.
“My primary responsibility was to work with the homeless, to try to connect the homeless to local resources, and then also use state statutes and city ordinances where needed for those who are resistant to getting services,” Repp said. “One of the issues I identified was people panhandling, and I was finding most of the people are panhandling because the resources don’t provide stuff for alcoholism or drug use, things like that, so they panhandle to make money for those kind of things.”
“I was doing research and discovered other communities like Scottsdale, Arizona, Anaheim, Calif., had similar programs, like Anahiem has the ‘be the change, keep the change’ program,” Repp recalled. “Scottsdale had a sign program that they were seeing good results with, so that’s kind of where I got the idea from. So then I put together a presentation and presented it to our command staff, and then it went to city council and they approved it.”
The program started with four signs but is currently down to three, as one of the signs has been damaged.
Repp would like to add additional signs to bring the total to five or six. The signs are portable and routinely relocated, and are primarily used outside grocery and convenience stores.
“They’re movable for several reasons,” Repp said. “One, it cuts a lot of red tape from getting approval to put permanently-mounted signs. You can put a sign along the roadway, which is a state highway, which Cottonwood has several. Then you have to get ADOT permits and it’s a nightmare … Also because one of my agreements with the city council was, I’m not going to plaster the whole city with these signs. And being able to move them helps to where they don’t become part of the background. You drive by a sign every day, you just learn that it’s not there, whereas when I move them, it becomes something new and then people recognize them.”
“On the front of the sign, it’s just an education thing, just to educate people that they don’t have to give to panhandlers but they can give money to local service providers where that money can go to good use in providing healthy services for those in need,” Repp explained. “There’s a decal on the back of the sign for those who are actually experiencing homelessness that has a list of resources and phone numbers on how they can reach out to local resources.”
Donations to Nonprofits
The effectiveness of all financial contributions to charities is reduced by those organizations’ overhead costs.
A 2012 study from Georgia State University found that the average overhead costs for nonprofits were 18.3%. Conversely, the results of direct giving experiments published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that each dollar of direct giving produces an economic benefit of $2.40 within a community.
However, as Repp outlined, the aim of the program is to achieve a utilitarian balance rather than to promote charitable donations.
“The primary purpose behind the signs, and the idea of putting them out there, is trying to improve overall quality of life for everybody,” Repp said. “Trying to improve the overall quality of life for the community by trying to get people to not be out there panhandling, but also trying to improve the quality of life for those who are panhandling by connecting them to constructive resources.”
“If we can get people to quit giving them money, then they have to go get resources,” he said. “Because they don’t need food and the requirements for life because there’s so many local services in our community that are there to help … And trying to eliminate resources that help them with their destructive behavior like alcoholism and drug use.”
“They’re doing all right,” Repp said of the signs’ effectiveness. “I think it has helped. I’ve had local businesses call and request more signs. There’s an email address on the signs for CottonwoodCares.org … we’ve received messages through that website of people saying they appreciate the signs. Before the signs came out, I had a lot of local citizens come and ask what the police department was doing about the panhandling issue. One of the other things that the signs do is it shows the community that we’re not ignoring the problem.”
Online Reaction
Comments left on the CPD’s Facebook page tell a somewhat different story about the public’s reaction to the signs.
“Absolutely disgusting,” Joanne Kiefer wrote. “This is a harassment of the population. I would never ever give a dollar to a charity out here. Charities don’t help the people.”
“A little more control by the cops, one step at a time, and all your rights will be gone,” Kenneth Trott commented.
“Shame on you, Cottonwood Police Department,” Meg Shapleigh agreed. “I’m absolutely disgusted by your lack of humanity with this decision.”
“If I want to give out a few dollars here and there to someone I think can use it more than me, I will continue to do so,” Bert Campbell said.
“You’ve got to be one cold-hearted group of individuals to pick on the homeless, especially in this heat,” Kim Armstrong pointed out.
Repp said that he has not received any complaints about the signs from religious organizations.
“I’ve had a couple complaints from people who are experiencing homelessness. I would say maybe one or two … I know a lot of them,” he said. “Most of them, once I showed them the signs, they were totally fine with it. I’ve even had some that said it’s helped their panhandling.”
Panhandling is Constitutionally Protected
Panhandling on public property is protected speech under the First Amendment and cannot be prohibited, as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2015 in Thayer v. City of Worcester.
“Flying a sign is protected speech,” Repp said. “The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that that’s protected speech as long as they’re on public property, not private property. So we can’t go and violate somebody’s right to free speech, but [our] signs demonstrate that the city is aware of the people that are out there doing it and we’re not ignoring it. The signs are a visual thing for that.”
