Relating to crimes and offenses; to amend Sections 13A-11-9 and 32-5A-216, Code of Alabama 1975, to prohibit an individual from loitering on a public roadway maintained by the state or in the right-of-way of a public roadway maintained by the state; to remove the prohibition on a pedestrian soliciting employment, business, or contributions or distributing articles on a highway; to provide criminal penalties for violations; and in connection therewith would have as its purpose or effect the requirement of a new or increased expenditure of local funds within the meaning of Section 111.05 of the Constitution of Alabama 2022.
The proposed changes could lead to increased expenditures of local funds, as it may necessitate new local law enforcement practices and potential costs associated with managing those who are loitering. However, the bill does exempt itself from certain requirements under Alabama's constitutional law that typically governs local financial impacts, arguing that it merely redefines a crime. The implications here hint at a possible shift in how resources are allocated towards local law enforcement, particularly in responding to loitering incidents.
SB170 aims to amend the existing laws regarding loitering on public roadways in Alabama. Specifically, it proposes to prohibit individuals from loitering on public roadways maintained by the state or in their right-of-way. This change introduces stricter measures against loitering, thereby altering how such behavior is criminalized within the state. The bill entails clear definitions of loitering activities and enumerates specific scenarios under which a person could be charged with this violation. Interestingly, the law enforcement authorities are permitted to instruct individuals to leave the premises before arresting them, which includes options for transporting these individuals to emergency housing if available.
One notable point of contention revolves around the bill's removal of the prohibition on pedestrians soliciting employment or contributions along highways. By allowing this kind of solicitation, SB170 faces criticism that it could create new challenges concerning public order on roadways. Critics may argue this change could lead to increased traffic hazards, while proponents may see it as a step towards more civil liberties for individuals facing economic hardships. Overall, the bill reflects a larger conversation about how the state balances public safety, local spending, and individual rights.