Over the objections of several residents and business owners, the council voted 4-1 March 9 for a stricter solicitation law. Members took no time to discuss the amendment and passed it immediately. Ward I Councilman Steve Troncale voted against it.

The mayor and council left the meeting quickly and refused to comment on their vote. None returned frequent telephone calls Wednesday.

Mayor Dusty Escapule and three other council members believed the previous ordinance was inadequate. According to the language written into the ordinance, they found that current methods of solicitation had become "extremely disturbing and disruptive to tourists, visitors, and businesses and has contributed not only to the loss of access to and enjoyment of public places, but also to an enhanced sense of fear, intimidation and disorder."

In the ordinance, the mayor and council wrote that the amendment is necessary to prevent solicitors from approaching or following pedestrians. They claim that solicitors repeatedly solicit, despite refusals, use abusive or profane language to cause fear and intimidation, have unwanted physical contact with tourists, and intentionally block pedestrian or vehicle traffic in front of other businesses.

Many Tombstone residents said they haven't seen this alleged use of fear and intimidation.

"I picked up this ordinance and I thought maybe we were in southeast LA or someplace, that all these things had taken place," said Moe Sinsley, a former Tombstone councilman. "If I read this here correctly, I'm looking around trying to figure out where these people are that I should be fearful of when I walk down the street. I don't see any of them."

Lee McKechnie, owner of Tombstone Trolley, said he's never heard complaints from his passengers. Even if solicitors are using fear and intimidation, he said he's not sure how this ordinance will prevent that.

"If you put a person 15 feet from his business, couldn't he still create fear and intimidation among the tourists? That's not resolving it," McKechnie said.

McKechnie suggested that the marshal's office start ticketing solicitors who are found abusing the ordinance. "The trolley has never received a citation. I don't think we should persecute a business that respects the current ordinance. You don't have to throw the baby out with the wash water," he said.

Heidi Dietrich, a Tombstone resident who lives on Toughnut Street, said she came to Tuesday's meeting to make sure her council members knew how one of their constituents feels about the ordinance. She said it's important to protect tourists, but that the proposed ordinance isn't the way to do it.

"Not allowing businesses on Toughnut Street to advertise on Allen Street doesn't protect tourists," said Dietrich. "It just severely limits their ability to draw tourists from Allen Street to their businesses."

Dietrich said the adverse effects that the ordinance might have regarding off-Allen Street businesses doesn't warrant the steps approved by the council.

"If you want to keep Tombstone safe for our tourists, then I say enact the portion that pertains to that goal," Dietrich said. "But if you want to put off-Allen Street businesses out of business, well, that's another thing, but it shouldn't fall under the guise of protecting our tourists. I don't know of one tourist who will feel protected if they come here and half the entertainment they expected to enjoy is gone because the city council did not think this through carefully."

Mike Carrafa, owner of Six Gun City on Toughnut Street and a long-time critic of the solicitation ordinance, was removed from the last meeting where he tried to discuss solicitation. At this week's meeting, he was given the full three minute­s allotted to each speaker and told the council that he was concerned that the ordinance's only purpose was to protect the businesses of council members and their friends.

"A lot of the people in this town and this country are questioning the council's integrity," said Carrafa. "Why do you want advertisers not on Allen Street? To protect your businesses? To protect your friends businesses? You're just going to cost the city more money and the lawsuits just have to continue."

Kim Herrig, owner of the Crystal Palace on Allen Street, said the ordinance wouldn't be necessary if businesses would work together and respect each other. "Morals and ethics always wins, number one," said Herrig. "And if you [other Tombstone businesses] had morals and ethics, we wouldn't be here tonight discussing an ordinance that the off-Allen Street people are mad about.

"How would you like it to have somebody standing screaming every day, seven days a week, from 11 in the morning to 6 or 7 at night, with menus, pointing to their place, right in front of your place, saying they have the best food?" said Herrig. "That's not morals and that's not ethics and that's not working together."

Steve Goldstein, owner of Big Nose Kate's and several other Tombstone businesses, agreed with Herrig that the point of the ordinance is to prevent people from "hawking" business away from other businesses.

"We have the most well-known city in the world, and [promoting the town] is what we should be doing," said Goldstein. "If you put 2,000 people on the street, everyone would have business. Instead, everyone is squabbling over 200, 300 people, everyone trying to divert and steal each other's business. It would be much better if we worked together to bring more people to Tombstone."

Other residents saw the current squabble as nothing new in town.

"That's the way it is in Tombstone, Arizona," said Tombstone resident Del "Doc" Roach.

"If we would get busy and improve our visitor's center, this would not be a problem. The problem would just disappear. The problem is that tourists can't find anything and that's what prompts these hawkers to be out there."