Board “solicited” to make the simple complex but why?
By Gary J. Groman, a.k.a. The Ole Seagull
In the world of “no brainers,” whether one uses Webster’s definition of “to approach with a request or plea” or some other definition just about everyone knows when they have been “solicited.” Left alone it’s a relatively simple determination, but left up to the Branson Board of Aldermen (Board) it gets a little more complex.
A couple is walking down a public sidewalk in beautiful historic downtown Branson. As they walk by the door of an establishment a person standing in the doorway says, “Hey how are you doing, come on in we have some free show tickets for you.” They have been solicited. Whether or not they go into the establishment or whether or not there are actually free tickets inside the store for them has nothing to do with the fact that they were solicited.
The couple refuses and walks on down the street a few feet and are stopped by another person who says, “Hey, if you’ll come with me and agree to attend an exciting courteous 90 minute vacation club presentation we’ll give you a $100 gift card.” They have been solicited whether or not they chose to attend the presentation or whether or not they actually get the $100 gift card for doing so.
The couple refuses and continues down the street until they are stopped by someone who hands them a coupon for one of the downtown unique and fine restaurants saying, “If you go to this restaurant, order the special, and present this coupon you’ll get 10 percent off the entire meal.” Although the couple accepts the coupon, they have been solicited. It has nothing to do with whether or not they use the coupon or actually get 10 percent off their entire meal.
They cross the street and start down the sidewalk toward the restaurant for which they have the coupon. On their way they pass a small shop with a person standing in the doorway. As they walk by the person says, “Great day isn’t it, why don’t you come in and see our selection of premium “troass” lures and not one of them is over a $1.00.” They have been solicited whether or not they go in and look at the “troass” lures.
Currently, the Branson Municipal Code (BMC), in Section 26-67, entitled, “Unlawful Solicitations,” makes it unlawful “to solicit when either the solicitor or the person being solicited is located on public property.” Another provision of the same section goes into even more detail and makes it a specific violation of that section to solicit when either the solicitor or the person being solicited is located on public property and “Within ten feet of the doorway to any business.”
Each case set forth above appears to be a violation of Branson’s current solicitation ordinance. Somehow, somewhere, someone has come up with the concept that the current ordinance can’t be enforced. Why can’t it be enforced?
Shouldn’t that question have been asked and answered before the Board let the issue get to the point of announcing a solution that was incapable of addressing the problem and had to be withdrawn for further study. An Ole Seagull cannot help but wonder, with all the challenges facing the city currently, why the board is wasting its time making the simple more complex.
Wouldn’t normal prudent business practices dictate that the Board request the police department to submit a written report substantiating why they cannot enforce the current solicitation ordinance? At the very least shouldn’t there be a logical cohesive rationale submitted for any suggested change to the ordinance establishing why it is needed and would be more enforceable that the current ordinance?
An Ole Seagull just has to believe that the problem isn’t enforcing the solicitation aspects of the current ordinance but relates more to being able to enforce it against just certain businesses such as time shares and vacation clubs. He knows it’s popular to be down on those businesses, particularly the way one or two of them are operating in the downtown area, but the discussion and actions of the Board on the record so far regarding this situation evidences, in an Ole Seagull’s mind, clear pattern of discrimination against those businesses.
The sad thing is that the current ordinance is more than sufficient to address any solicitation problems on public property in Branson and does so in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner. All that has to be done is fairly enforce it against all who violate it. It’s just that simple!
