Bill 59 Could Have Stopped Homeless Panhandling in Traffic

Dear Editor,  Aug 8 2025

I am very disappointed Mayor Alameda vetoed Bill 59. This proposed legislation would have addressed the homeless individuals that actively solicit money at intersections.  The mayor’s reasoning for vetoing this bill was on free speech grounds. I can see the logic behind his decision, but it puts the community back at square one.

Bill 59 was flawed, but at least it would’ve created a path to address this public safety issue. The majority of these homeless individuals don’t want help and rather live on the streets soliciting money from the public.

As a result, this isn’t free speech activity like soliciting donations for a sports team. It only benefits the homeless individuals seeking a handout.

I hope the county council overrides Mayor Alameda's veto of Bill 59.

Aaron Stene

Kailua-Kona, Hawaii

  *   *   *   *   *

Support Veto of Bill 59

Dear Editor,  August 9, 2025

While I completely agree with Aaron Stene about the panhandling on busy intersections, there are other people using narrow (or not existent) sidewalks. I live in upper Hilo where marginal at best sidewalks exist on the makai side and drainage ditches on the mauka side.

We also have 'flag stops' where people can wait for the public bus system and flag them down - on the same roads.

Many roads, public or not, in Puna are served by school  buses as well - when drivers are available - and those roads do not have sidewalks.

The same is probably true in at least Ka'u and South Kona in a lot of places.

Thank you, Councilwoman Jenn Kagiwada and Councilwoman Michelle Galimba, for voting against it, and Mayor Kimo Alameda for vetoing it.

Aloha,

Maren Purves, Hilo, Hawaii

RELATED: Mayor Vetoes Bill Regarding Roadside Soliciting