After delaying a vote on a panhandling ordinance last week amid free speech concerns, Evanston City Council will vote Monday on the measure without incorporating an Evanston resident’s proposed changes.

The Human Services Committee voted 3-1 earlier this week to dismiss Carol Moschandreas’ changes in the ordinance, which she contends is unconstitutional.

Members of the committee said they upheld the ordinance because they wanted to keep the wording consistent with an Indianapolis measure upheld by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“All of the fears of its unconstitutionality, according to our legal advice, were groundless,” said Ald. Gene Feldman (9th), a member of the committee. “Nobody’s rights would be violated.”

Moschandreas disagreed, predicting that no court would uphold the measure if the city is sued.

She’s concerned about free speech rights. Under the city’s ordinance, Moschandreas said, panhandlers and anyone on a city street will be restricted in what they can say.

“The Seventh Circuit opinion does not address the issues I’m raising,” said Moschandreas, an attorney. “It specifically says it’s not addressing those.”

Many of her suggested changes would redefine panhandling in terms of behavior and would removed some of the restrictions that she thinks violate people’s rights.

“If going on a safeness quotient, mine’s safer,” she said. “(The committee) is making a grave mistake here.”

Feldman said he plans on voting in favor of the ordinance Monday.

“It’s needed in downtown Evanston,” he said.

Ald. Steven Bernstein (4th) agreed that an ordinance is needed.

He said he thinks that Evanston’s urban atmosphere, with problems such as panhandling, creates a sense of danger for many residents and potential visitors to the city.

“If the person perceives a threat, that could be an attempted robbery” to them, Bernstein said.

He said many people from the North Shore, for example, are scared away from Evanston because of this.

“They would just as soon not come to our restaurants if there are beggars,” Bernstein said.

He said that while there may be enforcement and free speech problems with the ordinance, the Indianapolis model will protect the city in any possible lawsuits because it has been upheld in federal court.

“It’s becoming fashionable to sue the city of Evanston,” Bernstein said.

But Ald. Dennis Drummer (2nd) is more wary of the ordinance.

“I’m not certain I’m even ready to vote for the proposed ordinance from the committee,” Drummer said. “We already have an ordinance on the books that governs panhandling.”

In the end, Bernstein said, the issue is that Evanston needs to crack down on panhandlers, many of whom are not homeless.

“At the end of the day, they get back on the train and go home,” he said.

The City Council will vote on the panhandling ordinance at its meeting 7 p.m. at Monday.