A proposal to penalize people who seek jobs by hanging around street corners cleared the Legislature and is on the governor’s desk.
The Senate approved the proposal on a strictly partisan vote on April 24. The Legislature then sent it to Gov. Janet Napolitano’s office the next day.
On and off the floor, Democratic senators criticized the bill as infringing on people’s right to free speech. Senate Minority Leader Marsha Arzberger, D-25, said the issue that the bill tries to address should be handled at the local level, not the state level.
But its supporters said the bill addresses the problem of people congregating on sidewalks to hunt for a job but affecting nearby businesses as they supposedly drive away potential customers.
Its sponsor also said these jobseekers are a safety problem, since they potentially impede motor and pedestrian traffic.
In fact, the bill is anchored on the notion that this type of job hunting is a safety issue. Similar measures have either been struck down or upheld by the courts in Arizona and elsewhere.
Free speech or traffic safety?
“I’m hopeful that the governor will sign it. It is primarily a traffic safety bill. The provisions don’t go into effect unless these people are disrupting traffic, which is the real safety problem,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. John Kavanagh, R-8.
All 13 Democratic senators voted “no” and all 17 Republicans voted “yes.”
But one Democrat indicated that while he and the minority caucus strongly opposed the bill, Napolitano might sign it.
“I would definitely urge her to veto it, but I know she may not veto it,” said Sen. Jorge Luis Garcia, D-27.
Garcia said Napolitano signed a bill two years ago prohibiting a city, town or county from using taxpayers’ money to build and maintain a day-labor center that knowingly facilitates the hiring of undocumented workers.
That bill is a harbinger of what Napolitano might do to H2589, Garcia hinted.
Kavanagh said while the bill received a partisan vote in the Senate, some Democrats in the House crossed the party line to support it. (Two members of the House minority voted “yes” on March 8).
Kavanagh also pointed to Napolitano’s veto of a bill that would have required towns to establish ordinances permitting sign walkers.
He was referring to H2369, which was vetoed April 16.
In her veto message, Napolitano said the bill was “overly broad and would force every municipality in the state to allow at least 10 sign walkers, regardless of the size of the city, the configuration of its streets, or the traffic flow patterns within the community.”
She said she appreciated the problem that the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bob Robson, R-20, was trying to address.
She added: “Depending on the size and configuration of a city’s streets, sign walkers can pose safety hazards by distracting or obstructing the view of motorists and pedestrians. Municipal leaders, who are most familiar with their community’s roads and traffic accident history, must retain the regulatory flexibility to ensure the safety of their residents.”
“She said that they are a distraction to traffic and that’s why she vetoed the bill,” Kavanagh said, adding that day labor is “also a traffic distraction.”
Two major points have been raised against the bill. One is that it potentially infringes on people’s right to free speech. The second is that if it were a safety issue, why make a distinction between minors and adults?
As written, the bill prohibits a person from soliciting employment while standing or remaining unlawfully on public and private property, making the act a criminal trespass in the first degree. A criminal trespass in the first degree ranges from a Class 1 misdemeanor to a Class 6 felony. The bill exempts those younger than 18.
The jobseeker is also liable if he or she remains on private property after a “reasonable request to leave by the owner.” It defines soliciting as “verbal or nonverbal communication by a gesture or nod that would indicate to a reasonable person that (the) person is willing to be employed.”
Earlier, Democratic Sen. Albert Hale, D-2, rhetorically asked how a person could be held liable for simply standing on a public street.
His colleague, Sen. Victor Soltero, D-29, told colleagues on the floor that he “wonders how they are going to enforce what the bill proposes.”
Arzberger, who said the issue is local, added, “If there needs to be an ordinance of some kind in a particular city it is their choice.”
But Kavanagh said the problem is not confined to one or two cities.
“This has become a statewide problem, which requires a standard uniform statewide solution,” he said.
Kavanagh also explained that the bill exempts a minor from being penalized because should one seek a job on the street, the issue should be left to Child Protective Services to deal with. That minor should not be arrested, he said.
So there is no confusion, the bill does not apply to high school students washing cars to raise funds, according to Kavanagh.
“They are not a persistent problem,” he said of students trying to raise money by offering a car wash. “Day labor is there every day disrupting traffic in many jurisdictions.”
As far as concerns that it violates the First Amendment, he said the bill is modeled after a Phoenix ordinance prohibiting the solicitation of charity on streets. Soliciting labor is no more protected than this particular activity, he said.
“They are both commercial. They are not political speech,” he said and added that commercial speech can be reasonably regulated.
Kavanagh raised another point.
“This bill will also prevent the exploitation of those day laborers who are here illegally. Street pick-ups are the back alley of employment. These people are exploited. They are not paid (right). There is no workers’ compensation. The whole street corner labor market has no place in a decent society,” he said.