Asbury Park's waterfront development boom and the revitalization of its downtown retail and restaurant district has drawn investors, shoppers and diners with cash to spare.

But, city officials and community leaders agree, those folks have attracted less prosperous people who are sometimes desperate for cash and not always bashful about asking for it.

So last month, the City Council adopted a ban on what it officially labeled "aggressive panhandling." The new law, which went into effect last week, was criticized by advocates for the poor and is being monitored by civil libertarians.

Violators of the begging ban are subject to fines ranging from $100 to $2,000, plus community service or jail time for repeat offenders.

"We think it's better for the city, now that the city is growing," said Councilman Jesse Kendle, who said Asbury Park's panhandlers were "embarrassing" to the city, and spread fear among residents and visitors alike. "When a man goes out with his fiance, his family, his children, he doesn't want that kind of thing."

The ban defines "aggressive panhandling" as following individuals in a menacing manner, using verbal abuse, or physically blocking someone's path while soliciting funds.

The ban also outlaws asking for money even peacefully in certain areas, including within 10 feet of an ATM or bank entrance, and from soliciting funds from certain types of people at specific locations, for example, patrons sitting at outdoor cafes on Bangs Avenue, Cookman Avenue, Lake Avenue, Main Street, the boardwalk, "or any other location(s) within the city where a sidewalk cafe permit has been issued."

Dozens of panhandling bans around county, including one out of New Brunswick, have been curtailed or struck down as unconstitutional by courts holding that asking for money is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment.

Since 2015, following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in an Arizona speech case known as Reed v. Town of Gilbert that limited a municipality's authority to regulate signage, 25 out of 25 local panhandling bans challenged in court have been struck down, according to the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty.

In August, the law center launched a campaign urging hundreds of cities and towns across the country to repeal their panhandling bans.

So Asbury Park tailored its ban to guard against a First Amendment challenge, using language specifically targeting "aggressive panhandling" involving physical or other types of coercion.

"The Mayor and Council of the City of Asbury Park recognize a constitutional right to beg or solicit in a peaceful and nonthreatening manner," the city's ban states.

However, it adds, "an increase in aggressive panhandling throughout the city has become extremely disturbing and disruptive to residents 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."

But Jeanne LoCicero, who this month was named legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said tailoring the ban to focus on "aggressive" forms of panhandling, or panhandling in certain locations, still fails the constitutionality test.

"This ordinance is targeting speech that is protected," said LoCicero, adding that the ACLU was monitoring the ordinance for its impact on residents.

Kendle said the issue had been raised among council members in discussing the ban ordinance. However, he deferred to the city attorney, Frederick Raffetto, when asked how the ban would stand up to constitutional scrutiny.

Raffetto's firm did not return a request for comment.

LoCicero said if officials want to discourage aggressive behavior by people who are panhandling, they should prosecute that behavior under existing, constitutionally permissible laws against assault, harassment, trespassing or whatever other offense is alleged.

"I really can't comment on why the town decided to pass this ordinance," LoCicero said. "But restricting the speech of people, especially the most vulnerable people, is not the way to address their homelessness problem."

Others agreed.

"This is a backhanded way of arresting the homeless," said Felicia Simmons, a local civil rights activist from the city's predominantly African-American west side, where the city's poverty and unemployment is concentrated.

She said Asbury Park's panhandlers are a finite group, made up of a few individuals familiar to the police and to city and community leaders. Rather than targeting them with local laws of questionable constitutionality -- and fines the perpetrators couldn't pay if they wanted to -- Simmons said the city should be getting the panhandlers help for the mental and substance abuse problems keeping them from more gainful employment.

"The panhandlers that they're talking about, everybody knows them," she said. "They're panhandling because they're hungry and they're homeless."

Simmons led a successful petition drive to ask voters in the Nov. 6 election whether the city should switch to a ward-based city council, and she is challenging Kendle for his at-large council seat in the city's non-partisan election.

Kendle rejected Simmons' assertion that the city should provide more social services for homeless people, including its panhandlers. Despite Asbury Park's rapid development in recent years, Kendle said the city could not afford to spend more on the homelessness problem, and that it still had to rely on state aid to help make municipal ends meet.

Steve Strunsky may be reached at sstrunsky@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @SteveStrunsky. Find NJ.com on Facebook