Friday Nov 30th, 2012 10:12 AM
On Monday December 3rd, the Library Joint Powers Authorities Board meets at the new Scotts Valley Library (251 Kings Village Rd.) to consider imposing new harsher policies regarding sleeping in the library, “smelling bad”, service animals, & unattended property. The matter was raised at a November meeting, but postponed according to Sentinel writer J.M. Brown (See http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_21936587/santa-cruz-library-board-delays-suspension-policy-changes).
Libraries are a last refuge for homeless people and folks should demand expansion not contraction of access there.
EXPANSION OF EARLIER CRACKDOWN
In the last several years, a First Alarm goon has taken to patrolling the library and library grounds, provoking complaints from one homeless patron that the burly wannabe cop followed him into the restroom to monitor his weewee. Benches have been removed. The area around the library has been made a “no trespass” zone after 9:30 PM or so. it seems to bel part of the “make Santa Cruz less welcoming” pogrom. Plus the police and their pals in the private “security” racket are empowered to interrogate, hassle,cite, and or arrest if homeless don’t show proper respect and deference and jump through the right hoops.
LACK OF SPECIFICS IN STAFF REPORT
There are no stats in the staff report itemizing the number of complaints received in the last year about the offending behaviors, how many people have been suspended or appealed, and why the current policy isn’t workable.
It’s similar to what happened when the law banning people from assembling in parking garages and lots was passed at the behest of outgoing Councilmember Ryan “Constitution for Dinner” Coonerty. No indication of a greater crime problem, but more police power to harass being granted–which is now being selectively used to target “suspicious” people (i.e. poor and homeless people).
PART OF A BROADER CRACKDOWN
With the four-fold increase in ticketing and concurrent survival gear destruction against homeless people on the levee, in the parks, and in the Pogonip to satisfy the Take-Back-Santa-Cruz bigots, the anti-protest curfews at City Hall, the County Building, and the Courts, the new forbidden zones adjacent to the levee, as well as the creation of 14′ “no go” zones around the big red Imagine anti-panhandling meters downtown–this library crackdown is another attack on poor and homeless people. Which is not clearly a response to real problems–at least, those problems are not articulated.
Demand there be a delay until homeless people and advocates can be contacted and consulted. And until real information is available about the real need for them.
APPEAL FROM HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom)
Becky Johnson sent out the following letter:
Dear HUFF members and friends,
At our Nov 21st meeting, HUFF passed a resolution urging HUFF members to attend the next two meetings of the Library Joint Powers Board re: new policies being considered which fundamentally change the haven-nature our libraries have come to function as in a world of ever diminishing social services where need is increasing, not diminishing.
Rules against backpacks, smells, sleeping, use of public space after hours etc. need to be carefully assessed.
The next meeting is at the Scotts Valley Branch of the Library on Monday, Dec 3 from 6:30PM – 8:30PM.
The next meeting is Jan 14th 2013 @ the SC Main Branch Library fro 6:30PM to 8:30PM.
Also: Please send a letter in advance to the members of the Board:
Dick English rpenglish [at] sbcglobal.net
Leigh Poitinger Vice Chair lpoitinger [at] comcast.net
Nancy Gerdt ngerdt45 [at] gmail.com
David Terrazas dterrazas [at] cityofsantacruz.com
Jim Reed jimreedsv [at] gmail.com
Katherine Beiers kbeiers [at] sbcglobal.net
Sam Storey Chair samforcapitola [at] att.net
Ellen Pirie ellen.pirie [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us
Mark Stone mark.stone [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us
Please post any responses you get or letters you write on line or send a copy to me at rnorse3 [at] hotmail.com . The reading area you save may be your own!
Comments (Hide Comments)
Friday Nov 30th, 2012 12:59 PM
Friday Nov 30th, 2012 3:39 PM
Oh, right, those gangsters run things, never mind.
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 12:01 PM
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 5:34 PM
It is typical of how he ACTUALLY views homeless folks that he ASSUMES that “smelling bad”= homeless. I don’t care who is stinking up the place: take a shower, stinkies!
Either way, I support the Homeless Services Center to help out the homeless. I support County Health to fund health for the poor. I support the EDD to find jobs for the unemployed. I support the LIBRARY TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO FREE BOOKS AND MEDIA TO THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, THAT’S THEIR JOB AND THEIR ONLY JOB! That’s it, that’s all they have to do. And Norse, you want to make their job harder.
In SLO, they have figured out a humane and friendly way to deal with this issue…
In Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo, patrons who smell are not simply shown the door, McGee and Macias said. They are provided with a means of correcting the problem.
“We seldom have to ask someone to leave,” McGee said. “It rarely happens. If it does we’re very careful to give coupons about where they can wash their clothes or take a shower. We do it in as humane a way as possible.”
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 6:31 PM
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 7:59 PM
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 9:58 PM
You’re only likely to be hassled, however, if you linger to rest on one of the few remaining benches, or perhaps try to use the lone payphone there and look raggedy. Or sit with your laptop nearby using the library wi-fi “after hours”. The last actually happened to Craig Canada even before the new “no trespassing at night” hours were posted in the late summer of 2010.
Public areas are places where everyone should have the right to “hang out”–bums, bigots, blowhards–you name it.
The exclusionary policy at night isn’t a matter of setting hours for “doing business” at all, but for the bad business of running off homeless people who socialize, rest, and seek mutual companionship there away from the hassles of Pacific Avenue. Naturally bigots (those who term homeless people “bums”) don’t have any problem excluding the poor. Hopefully the rest of us do.
Also the “no trespassing at night” policy was not subject to any kind of public input or debate. No showing of a need for it was made. It was cooked up in secret between the police chief Kevin Vogel, the head of parks and rec Dannettee Shoemaker(who controls these spaces outdoors), the mayor (Coonerty at the time), and City Manager Bernal. Or so I was told by Shoemaker in August of 2010.
I spoke with Council members and Library Board members Beiers and Terrazas at the Homelessness Summit earlier today. Beiers had no idea how she was going to vote; Terrazas neither. Neither seemed to know what the rules were currently and to what extent the rules were being changed as well as what specific evidence had been provided to show that such a change was necessary or beneficial. I suggest people e-mail them at their above addresses.
Beiers promised to “try” to forward me a set of the current rules and how they’d be changed. Terrazas evaded repeated attempts to get a meeting time, saying he had no time until late Monday afternoon (when it probably wouldn’t make any difference, since that’s right before the meeting). He did reluctantly indicate a willingness to be accessible after 3 PM on Monday.
E-mail them and other board members. Demand to know the specific complaints that have led to both the current proposed changes, and whether the earlier “forbidden zones at night” homeless-begone proposals went through their board formally or informally. Also urge that the library property be declared open at night. It’s already a crime to sleep there, cover up with blankets, or set up camping equipment with the intention of remaining overnight.
And when will the benches be restored to the sides of the building?
Ask the questions. Demand the answers.
I’ve never had smell problems with anyone in the library (again, where are the reports?). But the stench of bigotry hangs heavy over some of the comments.
Saturday Dec 1st, 2012 10:06 PM
Library Board to Consider Restrictive New Policies
that Impact Homeless People (& You)
Monday December 3rd 6:30 PM , the Library Joint Powers Authorities Board meets at the new Scotts Valley Library (251 Kings Village Rd.) to consider imposing new harsher policies regarding sleeping in the library, “smelling bad”, service animals, & unattended property. Libraries are a last refuge for homeless people and folks should demand expansion not contraction of access there.
LACK OF SPECIFICS IN STAFF REPORT (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/11/30/18726836.php)
There are no stats in the staff report itemizing the number of complaints received in the last year about the offending behaviors, how many people have been suspended or appealed, and why the current policy isn’t workable.
It’s similar to what happened when the law banning people from assembling in parking garages and lots was passed at the behest of outgoing Council member Ryan “Constitution for Dinner” Coonerty. No indication of a greater crime problem, but more police power to harass—now being selectively used to target “suspicious” people (i.e. poor and homeless people).
EXPANSION OF EARLIER CRACKDOWN $80,000 funds a First Alarm goon patrolling the library and grounds, provoking complaints from one homeless patron that the burly wannabe cop followed him into the restroom to monitor his weewee. Benches have been removed. The area around the library has been made a “no trespass” zone after 9:30 PM–part of the “make Santa Cruz less welcoming to people experiencing homeless” agenda. Police and security thugs can now interrogate, hassle,cite, and or arrest if homeless don’t show proper respect and deference and jump through the right hoops for being there.
PART OF A BROADER CRACKDOWN There is a four-fold increase in ticketing and concurrent survival gear destruction against homeless people on the levee, in the parks, and in the Pogonip (to respond to bogus security concerns). Also new: the anti-Occupy curfews at City Hall, the County Building, and the Courts, the new forbidden zones adjacent to the levee, as well as the creation of 14′ “no go” zones around the big red Imagine anti-panhandling meters downtown, This library crackdown adding new library rules is another fashionable attack on poor and homeless people.
FIGHT BACK Demand restoration of the library as a welcoming space! Document and make public the real complaints and delay until homeless people and advocates can be contacted and consulted. And until real information is available about the real need for them.
HUFF resolution: Attend the next two meetings of the Board, The new policies fundamentally change the haven-nature our libraries have come to function as in a world of ever diminishing social services where need is increasing, not diminishing. Rules against backpacks, smells, sleeping, use of public space after hours etc. need to be carefully assessed.
Send a letter this weekend to the members of the Board:
Sam Storey Chair samforcapitola [at] att.net Leigh Poitinger Vice Chair lpoitinger [at] comcast.net
Nancy Gerdt ngerdt45 [at] gmail.com David Terrazas dterrazas [at] cityofsantacruz.com
Jim Reed jimreedsv [at] gmail.com Katherine Beiers kbeiers [at] sbcglobal.net
Ellen Pirie ellen.pirie [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us Dick English rpenglish [at] sbcglobal.net
Mark Stone mark.stone [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us
Sunday Dec 2nd, 2012 9:45 AM
There is no easy solution, but I’m personally terrified by the fact that we’re technically still in the recession, and we can only expect the economy in San Francisco and Silicon valley to rev up more in the next year, and what happens when prices get even more expensive??
Sunday Dec 2nd, 2012 9:05 PM
Sunday Dec 2nd, 2012 10:42 PM
You’re only likely to be hassled, however, if you linger to rest on one of the few remaining benches…”
Because ‘lingering on the benches’ has nothing to do with returning a library book. It’s a library, not a shelter.
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 12:59 AM
I know, I know. It’s selective enforcement. Go ahead and shoot me.
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 8:24 AM
*lol* You’ve lost your perspective.
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 11:01 AM
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 4:38 PM
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 7:36 PM
Really, what, besides dramatic emphasis, supports your position?
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 9:47 PM
Monday Dec 3rd, 2012 10:26 PM
It’s maliciously deceptive to misdescribe the rule changes as “telling people to take a shower, leave the library at 9:30 pm and to stop crapping in the bushes”. It’s a matter of driving the homeless out of town–the library closes much earlier, but the grounds are now forbidden after 9:30 PM–specifically to deny homeless people a traditional place of refuge. Ditto with the removal of the benches. Crap in the bushes? Haven’t heard specific complaints, but I wouldn’t be surprised since public bathrooms close at night. Surprised why people fall asleep in libraries when it’s illegal to sleep at night? I’m not.
More upbeat, however, was the 5-4 decision of the Library Board to defeat a proposal to add a Sleeping Ban to its lilbrary policy. This was unexpected until the very last moment. Katherine Beiers, who dissented from the broader motion supporting harsher policies against “rule breakers” (rules being things like having unattended property, smelling bad, and having a dog in the library), moved to divide the question, and finally got a substitute motion passed over the confusion of David Terazzas, which passed everything but the Sleeping Ban.
The Sleeping Ban was then proposed as a separate motion (with pretexts like sleepers were “in the way”, “misusing the library for a purpose for which it was not intended”, “discomforting others”, “blocking access” and other pretexts that ignored the basic “they make us uncomfortable and we want a simple rule to exclude them”). Based on the general silence seeming to give consent to the Ban, this seemed like it would be Beiers alone, but Samuel Story gave an eloquent statement, and others apparently jumped on board. For once, the staff didn’t get their way.
But the victory was only on that one issue–and perhaps because the issue was what each speaker focused on–how libraries were sanctuaries, how there’d been a host of anti-homeless rules around the library, how the city-wide sleeping ban added insult to injury, how winter and Xmas time was the wrong time to bring the hammer down, etc. Apparently it all had an impact.
Of course, the staff got a new policy that allows for much longer suspensions for a variety of rules that weren’t available for the public to read (there was no agenda packet available for the public). There was also a peculiar process that didn’t allow public comment on any staff items, except, suddenly, the new policies issue, which was packaged as a “staff report” and not as an action item. I tried to raise this, but was silenced by Story, the chair of the meeting.
I did speak with Teresa, the chief librarian who was pushing these restrictive rules, saying that the existing policy just allowed for a 30-day suspension followed by a restraining order (that’s now changed, and there can be much longer suspensions after the 4th warning). When I asked her how many people came back to repeat the policy after being suspended for thirty days, she had no stats or figures. she did say that they’d only issued one restraining order this year but that was because her staff was “heavily burdened”.
Another member of the public objected on a different issue that the library had failed to provide a copy of the prior agenda on request, insisting that he fill out a written public records act request and wait 10 days because of “staff problems”.
All very arrogant and unlikely–showing again that rules (as when the Homeless Lack of Services Center was closed–and remains closed) to “non-business” assembly during the day it was for the convenience of the staff. Upside down logic since the staff are supposed to be serving the public. But chillingly similar to why the Parking Lot Paranoia law (banning people from reading books in their cars in city parking lots, or gathering in a parking lot)—as Ryan Coonerty explained it–to accommodate city staff complaints (as well as the anxieties of his employees at the Bookshop Santa Cruz).
Still, it showed that liberals like to keep the pretty make-up on, particularly if enough people show up to challenge the latest civil rights seizure. I admit that I even applauded and thanked John Leopold (who actually proposed the motion to ban sleeping, but voting not to do so).
Nice work, Occupy Santa Cruz activists (all the critics were from Occupy Santa Cruz, and all over 50). Now we have to plan for the next library sleep-in when we receive reports of people being suspended from the library for objecting when they’re told to leave their backpacks outside to be stolen.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 1:34 AM
That hyperlink is bad, but I get the point. It’s not that I don’t know the history. What I don’t follow are these massive leaps of logic. You are simply not making a convincing case that a concentration camp is in store for us in the future, near or distant.
You guys don’t like rules and boundaries, except for your sworn enemies. This is a sociopathic mindset that I’d venture traces its roots back to your failed and continuing adolescence. Your parents should have corrected this with a strong regimen of discipline. It’s too late for that at this point, unfortunately, so we now have to all deal with it, I suppose.
I’d still really like to hear a convincing argument from you guys about how closing the library grounds at 9:30 pm today is going to result in the future establishment of a modern-day Dachau in the Santa Cruz city limits. Not a metaphorical concentration camp, but an actual one, where Ryan Coonerty dons a Wehrmacht uniform and charges about gassing people like Linda Lemaster, Shane Maxfield, Donna Deiss and White Dove.
I’m not holding my breath, though.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 8:30 AM
“When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
“When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
“When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
“When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
“When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.”
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 9:03 AM
The Mental Health Advisory Board used the same kind of strategy to hide the plans for spending $13 million on a local Psychiatric Health Facility.
Naming and shaming draws public attention and protest. Providing listening and support one on one could detour around any regulations, arguably make enough impact to quell the librarians.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 9:20 AM
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 10:25 AM
As usual,critics with questions or denunciations are invited to call in to my radio show where this matter will be discussed at greater length. They rarely do, but the opportunity is there. See times and numbers above.
It’s clear however that criminalizing poor people outside engaged in survival behavior and repeatedly restricting the space that they’re allowed to use is at the very least a way of making folks unwelcome. Given the high death rate for homeless folks each year, it also impacts their health and safety since the ability to gather in groups and shelter oneself, or even to rest, impacts those conditions. This seems to me so obvious as to be beyond dispute, but those who defend the evil laws and procedures that perpetuate and aggravate these conditions needs some rationale, so they find it where they can.
MORE ON THE BOARD MEETING
These issues were a key factor in the dissent on the Library Board last night around approving a Sleeping Ban in the library (aside from it’s being a break not just with traditional Santa Cruz library policy, but a break with library policy historically nationwide (as articulated by several former librarians who spoke).
The Board made no objection to the public-excluding procedures used around missing information, missing agendas, strange itemizing as action items under “staff reports”, and an unequal treatment of public comment (only allowed for one “staff report” item).
David Terazzas seemed particularly clueless and unhelpful–a Ryan Coonerty in training–at this meeting. Neither he nor Beiers provided any information prior to the meeting. Beiers redeemed herself in a small way by expressing a dissent on the Sleeping Ban issue, which led to a general retreat on that issue. However, more broadly she empowered the library to impose much harsher penalties on “rules violations”.
For those familiar with the Downtown Ordinances, we know how this kind of authority has been beern abused.
The only legitimate basis for being asked to leave the library (much less suspension) is actual disruption that interferes with other patrons. This should be and probably is decided on a case-by-case basis. However the new powers granted staff provide much more room for mischief. Patrons uncomfortable with the sight or scent of homeless people may now feel empowered to create a gated zone, regardless of the wishes of the staff–given the modified suspension procedures and new “unattended property”and “bad smell” rules. “It’s the rule!” after all.
I don’t necessarily think that’s what the library staff were trying to do or want to do in the future, but the rules passed may allow for that. A “rules violation” is much different than a patron complaining about being interfered with in a real and tangible way that can’t be resolved peacefully at the time. “Rules violations” are used by control freaks to impose a repressive kind of order and exact punishments when there are no real problems other than someone squeaking “you’re not obeying the rules”.
Draconian authority to enforce rules is an evil thing. It also creates a darker kind of climate which improperly and unwisely empowers people in positions of power or makes them subject to malicious manipulation.
Since no record of the actual complaints, suspensions, repeat problems, was made available to the Board last night, I’m following up with a Public Records Act request. PHONE At last night’s meeting, the public was told to “go on line” to read the agenda packet (which didn’t contain the actual complaint history in any detail nor how effective suspensions were).
CONTACTING THE FUHRER
Another member of the public complained about getting stonewalled when he previously asked for a copy of the prior agenda and minutes–on an issue entirely unrelated to the Spank-the-Homeless issue–told by Teresa Landers, Library Boss, that he’d have to wait 10 days and make a written public records act request because of “staff problems”.
Teresa is the head cheese at the library (Director of the Libraries) apparently responsible only to the Library Joint Powers Board (the group that met last night). Not sure who hires and fires her or what her salary is–might be worth looking into. She told me she’s been around for 3 1/2 years.
She seemed to be the driving force behind these changes–but that was only my impression and I only spoke with her briefly. Still she seemed quite adamant. Full disclosure: working library staff members that I’ve seen at the front desk of the main library were supportive of her changes when she called for their opinions. As with City Council’s staff “experts”, she seemed good at leading the Board around.
As a special treat, city attorney John Barisone was there, helping to smooth over the wrinkles in the “eliminate the unworthy” from library use.
Teresa’s e-mail is landerst [at] santacruzpl.org Her phone number is 831-427-7706 X7612 (hours 8 AM to 5 PM).
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 10:28 AM
To whom It May Concern:
Please provide access to all copies of complaints against patrons at all branches of the Public Library system from Jan 1, 2012 through the present as well as any records, e-mails, statements, written, audio, or visual regarding library policies impacting library rules that might result in a warning or suspension of library access. This would include communications to and from the public, public officials, police, security agencies, and any other group or person around this issue.
Please also provide access to copies of all agendas and minutes of the Board’s meetings through 2012.
I prefer e-mail access to these records. In the event this is not possible, I would like to see the records prior to deciding which ones I need to copy.
Please advise me whether a hard copy of the minutes of the prior meeting and agenda packet was available at each of these meetings.
Further, please advise me as to whether action items were listed as such on the agendas.
Finally, please advise me as to whether a public comment was provided for each agenda item (as it was not at the December 3rd meeting, except for the one “staff report” item on the rule changes).
I would suggest you publicly announce all these conditions will be corrected at the next meeting or face a Brown Act complaint.
If you have any questions regarding this request, feel free to call me.
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 2:34 PM
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 3:43 PM
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 5:50 PM
Here’s why I think the comparison is unequal and a joke Mr. Norse:
1) The nazis also killed drug addicts. If that were the case in Santa Cruz?..there’d be nobody left to be passing ordinances against.
2) Last I checked, the Jews weren’t a population that was 100% dependent upon community support for their existance.
3) Last I heard, the Nazi’s weren’t funding food programs and shelters and counseling and other services to sustain Jewish existence.
Nuff said. You go right along with your odious comparisons. I think they do more damage to Santa Cruz-Homeless relationship than darn near any other single thing I can think of in Santa Cruz. But hey, you think you’re doing some good, and I think you’re sinking your own ship for me? I call that a win-win, so keep up the good work sir.
…but the “Santa Cruz enforcement is similar to Nazism” metaphor you and Colby have introduced is a joke to any right minded person.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 7:30 PM
This is currently under discussion at the Library Board where I live. One commenter on an IndyMedia post has mentioned that San Diego and another city take a principled proactive approach and give the person with the offending odor a coupon for a shower at a local facility. Also note that foul odor can be a medical condition, and in light of many city facilities requesting a fragrance-free environment from their patrons, it may make it impossible for someone with an affliction such as “Stinkfoot” (Bromhidrosis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_odor#Medical_conditions) to use public facilities.
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 7:46 PM
Copy the following to embed the movie into another web page:
|download video: frank_zappa___stinkfoot_1.mp4 (9.6MB)|
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 9:25 PM
Tuesday Dec 4th, 2012 11:36 PM
A certain bigoted group of Santa Cruz residents, especially in public forums like the Sentinel comments sections, call for cleansing the homeless from our community. They say, “kick the bums out”. This kind of cleansing is not qualitatively different from the ethnic cleansing pursued in the former Yugoslavia and by the Nazis and their satellite nations in WW 2. Ethnic cleansing is the last step before genocide.
What happens when those who wish to purge Santa Cruz of the homeless are met with resistance from a homeless population that just won’t budge? I imagine increased harassment, violence and finally a mob. When organized by a neoliberal state with fascist leanings like our local government this is cleansing akin to ethnic cleansing just short of genocide. Thus I suggest that people be careful when slinging hate speech around, because it may lead to serious consequences.
Wednesday Dec 5th, 2012 8:58 AM
Thursday Dec 6th, 2012 3:07 AM
Thursday Dec 6th, 2012 4:14 AM
Thursday Dec 6th, 2012 10:51 AM
This kind of violence is reportedly happening via police officers according to reports I’m getting at the Red Church on Monday nights:
Please keep your eyes open, your cameras handy, and take the time to post what you see.
Or call in to my radio show.
Thursday Dec 6th, 2012 5:57 PM
This kind of violence is reportedly happening via police officers according to reports I’m getting at the Red Church on Monday nights.
The only people who actually speak to you are winos too drunk at the time to even know what happened, but like ADDICTS, it couldn’t have been their fault they turned and tried to walk away or acted combative according to the police. Seriously hostile words are certainly germane to being drunk and stoopid on the street to the best of my recollection of why I’ve punched drinkers out before myself.
“The police beat me up for no reason” is almost always a crock of shit story if one just asks simple questions.
But Robert “KNOWS” the answers, and puts them in the mouths of people which is why NO ONE should speak into his recorder at all. He’s simply a propagandist who has NO INTEREST in the veracity or safety of his sources (Ask about his dry snitching me as a potential building squatter) and he makes “Collages” of conversations which he puts on the air, with his un-verified commentary, as if it’s the truth.
Just like MSM news… and just as false.
Robert fails the “Edit Sober” test. His victims were drunk, and so is he… With disinformation.
Friday Dec 7th, 2012 11:12 AM
“Anderson’s injuries were so severe that he had to be flown by air ambulance to a San Jose hospital. On Wednesday, Salinas police Officer Miguel Cabrera said Anderson is no longer in a coma. He’s still recovering at the hospital, Cabrera said”.
The article further states that Anderson was beaten “nearly to death”.
Now, here’s Robert Norse:
“This kind of violence is reportedly happening via police officers according to reports I’m getting at the Red Church on Monday nights”.
Really, Robert? So you say that Santa Cruz police officers are beating people nearly to death at the Red Church, and that these people are being airlifted to San Jose in comas? This is a major scoop, Robert. You realize that, don’t you?
Friday Dec 7th, 2012 6:08 PM
We know that police departments don’t do that sort of thing, right? Oh, wait, Oakland just had an oversight guy with the power to spend and fire appointed because the OPD can’t control its violent force. And I think I heard something about the LAPD Ramparts scandal too.
Please post specifics of anything you observe or experience here.
( alex [at] alexdarocy.com ) Saturday Dec 8th, 2012 12:23 PM
In this video I shot of Deputy Police Chief Steve Clark in February, Brent Adams briefly questions Clark about the “Code Blue” program of organized police violence against the homeless, which Clark states in the video, resulted in charges being leveled against the police, which then created an opportunity for him to join the force when he was first starting here.
(The discussion begins at minute 4:00 of the video)
Saturday Dec 8th, 2012 6:48 PM
NOTHING like this is happening, and you know I know. There’s a WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER STUFF like kids growing up in a town where they KNOW (rightly or wrong) that they’re never gonna raise a next generation of family here so they become alkies and junkies and crackheads and, just as programmed by AmeriKKKan society, blame and attack anyone they see as responsible for those circumstances.
Guess who gets attacked? Or Junkie action as seen on Depot Hill a few weeks ago. Most of those people have lived here for years if not all their lives.
As far as the SCPD goes.. The thuggery is institutionalized now. The targeting people for tickets… A security guard standing nearby while one tries to have a private conversation on Pacific or on a bench by the library with a friend. They changed the “invisible lines” by the newsstand at Walnut in regard to where one may smoke last night and gave someone a ticket.
Harassment… Dissuasion… As I mentioned above DON’T EVER turn your back on them or they’ll tackle you down for fleeing (and if you have ANY alcohol in you TSOL 4 U).
But NOTHING EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLING “Code Blue”. A moniker unknown to me until recently.
Did Robert Norse think that nifty degrading phrase up?
Those guys were OUT-OF-UNIFORM BLACKSHIRTS, and a local merchant blew them up… Because they, AS INDIVIDUALS, were way out of line.
The SCPD as a police agency is Out of Line now. They’ve been politicized to the point where they no longer function correctly as protectors of the community, but are driven to select who is defined as “community”, and if anything, the officers on the SCPD, by their very involvement in that sort of law enforcement “normality”, are individually ethic-less and corrupt.
I was merely providing some background info that pertains to why people now might want to compare the reign of the SCPD to that of the Nazis. Considering the fact that the “Code Blue” days were 30 years or so ago, and that current Deputy Chief Steve Clark was hired as a result, I see the events as still relevant.
Saturday Dec 8th, 2012 9:43 PM
Sunday Dec 9th, 2012 3:41 PM
I don’t know much about your city council because I live in Freedom, but I can’t imagine they’re anything like Nazis.
So please refrain from disrespecting a whole generation, my brethren, who sacrificed so you could say what you say here.
Sunday Dec 9th, 2012 5:49 PM
Sunday Dec 9th, 2012 6:04 PM
This exercise in the Theatre of the Absurd, flashing Sieg Heil salutes at City Council, and calling people bigots, Nazis, Fascists if they disagree with you, has real emotional impact on people who have lived through actual bigotry, actual Nazis and actual Fascists.
Bandying these powerfully symbolic words around is incredibly insensitive and selfish. There are other more appropriate ways to express your dismay with the PD and City Council. Try using them. It would advance the dialogue immeasurably.
Sunday Dec 9th, 2012 6:32 PM
It’s not about an SCPD officer ticketing a homeless person for smoking. It’s about a culture of hate given authority by a city government which has whittled away relentlessly at civil rights. The city’s anti-homeless campaign, whipped up with anti-homeless hatred by the Sentinel, is happening within the context of our federal government taking off the gloves with its own citizens with terrible brutality reminiscent of fascist states like the Nazi regime while it pursues endless imperial wars abroad.
Sunday Dec 9th, 2012 10:22 PM
I’m guessing that your use of the terms “Nazi” and “fascist” are epithetical, and one is expected to interpret them not literally, but in that sense, slurs directed at people and governmental bodies for whom you have a great deal of contempt.
Sound about right? Why not say so? I mean, I’ve heard Robert described as a “fucking asshole” before, and, not knowing much about his sex life, and being certain that he isn’t the anus of another living being, I assume that this is a coarse slur, and nothing more.
Doesn’t change the fact that your choice of words is very insensitive, and I think, ultimately fails to help accomplish your goals.
I suppose one could argue that all the fucking assholes around could be offended by the casual use of the term to describe Robert, but they’re fucking assholes. So who cares what they think?
Monday Dec 10th, 2012 10:06 AM
I’m a Jew, and your “soldier” schtick doesn’t impress me as relevant, and I DO understand the semantics of Colby and Norse’ usage of the term.
Scale notwithstanding within American society (and it only took how many years for the Nazis to rise to power?), your version of Nazis (a term I object to mostly because it’s fixed in time with images frozen to match) and your Holocaust stopped at WWII. Because you’re the typical American Jewish narcissistic sociopath with an agenda of remembering the past but NOT looking at the presence of Fascism and authoritarian totalitarianism in modern society.
Why just last night I saw a flock of 5 or 6 cops, including Brass… The same ones I saw Robert badgering earlier in front of Forever21 (a sweatshop operation with factories in the US employing US citizens) stand for over an hour in front of PacificWave doing nothing and watching all the cars NOT STOP at the stop sign at Cooper & Pacific without hailing a single one down and THEN they swarmed a car that DID stop, that had music playing not loudly at all and a window open. They were swarmed like wanted criminals because they had music playing in their car that could be heard outside the car. Again, not loudly… . OF COURSE there were CHICANOS in the car.
Bet you didn’t know Chicanos are one ‘tribe’ of the New Jews being singled out for scapegoating in Rich White Santa Cruz’ SHOPPING MALL along with the houseless, and anyone deemed by APPEARANCE to be “Not Shopping”.
Monday Dec 10th, 2012 12:51 PM
Nazi… I mean it literally as in “American Nazi”.
Here’s what happens when they get a grip on your society:
Did you know that it’s said 50% of the Greek Police voted for the Fascist Party in this last election?
Here’s a Straight Press attempt to debunk the story that fails to prove it’s point that, in large numbers, Police DON’T Luv Fascists: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/are-greek-policemen-really-voting-in-droves-for-greeces-neo-nazi-party/258767/
The American ‘Bastion of Democracy” is quite the same
But I don’t call them Fascists. Like “Pig” it just reinforces their machismo self-image.
I prefer to call them Fascia… as in something with Fascist symbolism made from FAGGOTS of wood.
It’s interesting to note that the underpaid and certainly under-trained False Alarm people the city has patrolling and observing the xmas shoppers in the evening are having to bear the brunt of the blowback from a VERY HOSTILE COMMUNITY. Many of the people I know are beginning to resist the illegitimate citations being handed out like so many Fascist Xmas cards to non-shoppers on Pacific.
..and the next time that over-age overweight Fascist patrolling the library on Weekdays glares at me while I’m working at my computer at the library there WILL BE a disturbance when I ask the librarian to get him to stop staring or leave. Besides he smells bad… Like “Bacon” crisping.
Monday Dec 10th, 2012 3:58 PM
And that Worst Alarm guy can stand there and stare at you all day if he likes. For all I know, he can videotape you too. That’s how this works. The problem is that you like these freedoms until someone exercises them in a way you don’t like.
That, I believe, is at the heart of authoritarianism. No?
Monday Dec 10th, 2012 9:46 PM
No he can’t. Do it to a woman and you’d be charged with stalking anywhere in Santa Cruz and the same applies to males staring at males. The fuckwad already called the police twice on me for no reason whatsoever and two times the police and I came to the conclusion I wasn’t doing anything at all and left.
Third time’s a charm. I figure a faceful of oven cleaner might keep him there until the police and ambulance arrive. Stalking is a SERIOUS crime where the right to self defense is known to be perfectly rationale and appropriate.
We can let the courts figure it out considering I have good record of the first two contacts and a recording of my conversation with them about his abuse of authority, and False alarm’s going to have to find another Fascist wannabe to patrol for them. Because THAT guy is going to need a seeing eye dog.
“You’re doing exactly the same thing as the others, Ray. Golden Dawn and fascist sympathizers in the Greek Police force do not implicate anyone in Santa Cruz of anything.”
You just… aren’t… living… up to you nick bud.
Pay attention. The people who are experiencing it say it is, and in MY case with stories from pre-war Europe my grandparents and relatives told me still like yesterday in my ears, to me, you have no credibility whatsoever to say it doesn’t implicate out local fascia (faggots of wood turned to fascist symbols).
You say “Nada” and I say “Nazi” with great misgivings (albeit the owner of Morris Abrams who outed the “Code Blue” goons would perhaps not be so kind) preferring the word FASCIST.
Historically, as far as the end results to the victimized, there’s really precious little difference.
My grandparents… chased across Central Asia to the Baltic and then to Europe by the pogroms never used the word ‘holocaust’ either. It was just another mass pogrom, much like the pogrom against the state of California’s displaced workers, and Santa Cruz’ city government and it’s armed faggots (pieces of wood turned to fascist symbols) are certainly in the cohort of agencies statewide involved in harassment and selective enforcement in a major way.
If you die in the cold because you can’t find shelter from the wind and rain due to police ticketing of you every time you sit somewhere out of the weather but ‘private’… or thugged by some overamped on anti-homeless propaganda kid (The Santa Cruz Sentinel needs to be burned to the ground ASAP) with no future blaming it on YOU because they see you as a threat to their survival as I was a month or so ago, that’s BLACKSHIRTING, and the people responsible for CREATING THAT CIRCUMSTANCE locally NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
FWIW, after being jumped by three kids while I slept last month, the police officer DID NOT WANT TO let me file a complaint. When I INSISTED. He wrote up an attack by three people on a sleeping victim as “Misdemeanor Battery” instead of a felony.
That way not only don’t they have to investigate, but it doesn’t show on their statistics that the Houseless are subject to extreme violence else the STATE might investigate…
I call “Coverup”.
You aren’t only un-observant bud… You’re out of the loop.
Oh… and I’m NOT “You guys”. I have nothing whatsoever to do with any of the other posters here. And I stick by that “American Jewish narcissistic sociopath” statement whether or not your insignificant self approves
Tuesday Dec 11th, 2012 4:50 PM
Tuesday Dec 11th, 2012 6:21 PM
Copy the following to embed the movie into another web page:
|download video: your_fascist_superhero_-_nuisance_laws.mp4 (27.3MB)|
Namely the police-industrial complex of the city and, of course, the Commercial Property Interests.
Good viewing and the dialectic is kept simple enough for even a Fascist to understand.
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 7:58 AM
Wait a minute. You’re telling me that after all your railing against the Police State and against the SCPD for being fascists, Nazis and who knows what else, that you are now upset that they didn’t respond forcefully enough when you needed them for law enforcement on your behalf?
Are you serious? Really?
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 10:44 AM
He should not expect the police to treat his complaint the same as others who have called them?
Should the SCPD check Indybay first to see who they should respond to for service calls?
Should we all, who don’t pass their ‘smell test’, shut up and never call the police?
We should let the SCPD do all the thinking and all the decision making?
Thank you for making the case that we are living under Nazism here in downtown Santa Cruz.
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 12:13 PM
What? Did yo think I was some sort of Nihilist Anarchist or somesuch Troll-like delusion?
Sorry to disappoint you.
BTW, had a discussion with someone wearing “Brass” yesterday. Told me indirectly to demand more services. I refused a trip to the hospital for the bloody nose and blacked eye. THAT made the misdemeanor/felony difference.
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 12:29 PM
10> I’m tougher than the backstop at a shooting gallery. ie. I wasn’t dying.
1> If I took that trip, my possessions… My sleeping bag, my clothing, my bike etc, would have been left at the scene and most likely be stolen, or confiscated by the city with a recovery time…. unknown.
…and we’re back to some thorny issues regarding certain problems unique to displaced workers and the homeless in general aren’t we?
It’s incredibly hard to get ‘justice’ EVEN IF the PD is compliant… when you’re a law abiding citizen but have no domicile.
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 12:55 PM
It’s just very hypocritical to spew that much invective against a governmental body and then cry Uncle when miscreants wake you up sleeping outdoors..
Mind you, the cops didn’t even ticket Ray for sleeping outdoors. Which is a big part of the Santa-Cruz-is-a-police-state argument, right?
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 1:19 PM
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 1:42 PM
So the SCPD, after not taking his complaint of abuse seriously, should have ticketed Ray for telling them that he was sleeping, even though they did not themselves find him asleep?
I wonder what you think should happen to a homeless woman who calls the SCPD after being raped while sleeping “illegally” ? I guess if that ever happens, she should feel lucky if she doesn’t get a ticket? Would this encourage or discourage those who are vulnerable and at risk to call the police after a violent attack? Which should be the SCPD’s priority, addressing violence, or addressing people who are sleeping?
You, sir or madame, are the voice of fascism that fuels the SCPD and the local police state, one that discriminates against the homeless.
“To call Ray a critic of the Santa Cruz PD is like calling Adolf Hitler a critic of the Jews.”
Ever heard of poetics? Ray uses a lot of it.
I’d also like to remind everyone that Ray has self-identified as having a personal link to Judaism, which further adds context to Watcher’s comments, and the Hitler reference.
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 4:22 PM
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 4:41 PM
Wednesday Dec 12th, 2012 10:44 PM
Arguing with folks who wish to dismiss or minimize the escalating abuses and violence against homeless people–institutionalized in the curfews, police sweeps, modified library rules, and “quality of life” laws–is really a waste of time.
The real issue is how do we mobilize to expose, resist, and discourage this kind of hate crime.
I encourage people to keep a close eye on the library and report on how librarians (and their security guard pals) are treating homeless-looking folks there. Please be accurate and specific in your reports. Time, place, specific names, details, etc.
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 8:34 AM
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 9:07 AM
Yes, and preaching to the choir is far more productive…
Sorry, but not letting people use the library as a dorm doesn’t quite rise to the level of ‘hate crime’, even in a hyperbolic world.
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 9:30 AM
As I stated earlier, the over-aged security guard who saunters around the library grounds on weekdays like he owns the place and DIRECTLY INTERFERES BY HIS OVERBEARING AND UP-CLOSE PRESENCE with MY PRIVATE CONVERSATIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY while sucking the taxpayer’s teat for a paycheck and calls the police for illegitimate reasons (as the police verified for me in a recorded conversation) smells like cooking Pig, and that odor is offensive to vegetarians… housed or allegedly “Dorming” at the library.
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 3:30 PM
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 5:12 PM
Number of comments about napping = a pile
Number of comments about desal spending = a few
Does anyone know the desal:library cost ratio, offhand? Just curious.
Thursday Dec 13th, 2012 9:10 PM
That may be your ratio issue. Someone removed comments.. Funny. Yours (G) is still there
Friday Dec 14th, 2012 10:39 AM
This is a comment you made on a different article, and it sounds like the one you are talking about:
Friday Dec 14th, 2012 11:53 AM
Friday Dec 14th, 2012 3:38 PM
Then again, maybe there were observant posts about desal, that were removed by the mysterious powers that indy (I’ve always asserted moderation corrupts, any moderation).
Tuesday Dec 18th, 2012 3:58 AM
For a copy of the request see http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/11/30/18726836.php?show_comments=1#18727166 above.
If anyone has gotten a complete copy of the library rules, please post them here, so we can all be good law-abiding folks. And perhaps serve as a shining example to the privileged rulesmaker T. Landers.
Tuesday Dec 18th, 2012 5:47 AM
What better agency to force transparency on than a library!
Wednesday Dec 19th, 2012 6:53 PM
Let’s get to the roots toots… Ms Landers IS NOT the person driving the policy changes. She’s just the manager-in-the-middle and albeit the appropriate person to go to for information and documentation, those changes are driven by political demands responding to sociological issues essentially set in motion by the city of Santa Cruz’ failure to develop a viable community for EVERYONE who lives here. To the best of their ability.
The library gets the ‘fallout’ from the city’s “Nuclear” policies about their displaced workers and other low income Santa Cruz residents. Poor people go to libraries when there’s nothing else to do or anywhere else to go.
I call “Nuclear Option” too. Fuck FOIA & Library… RICO Act & City of Santa Cruz… drag their influence over an allegedly independent library board into court and subpoena the dox.
Thursday Dec 20th, 2012 4:29 AM
Thursday Dec 20th, 2012 7:37 AM
Read the last post I put up troll. The answer to WHY it’s RICO Act is right in there.
The city of Santa Cruz HAS SOCIOECONOMICALLY OVER THE LAST DECADE and a half INTENTIONALLY created the socioeconomic circumstances that, BY THEIR OWN FOOLISH GREEDY PLANNING, caused the “Mess” at the library.
Then they VILIFY THE VICTIMS OF THEIR POLICIES.
Got that fool? I’m calling you “Fool” because that’s obviously the median intelligence level for a ‘taxpayer’ in Santa Cruz who would have allowed them to do that to the disadvantage of ALL citizens here except the wealthy… Or maybe you’re just greedy, and vicious, and an unwitting tool of American Fascists who call themselves Santa Cruz “progressive liberal” ‘government.
There’s a RICO Act indictment or a dozen somewhere within that decade and a half… Gaa…run…teed. To bad the ACLU here is nothing more than a fan club.
The state or federal government could EASILY tear this city’s government apart just as surely as they tore the SCPD apart three decades ago, and Santa Cruz citizens would ALL benefit from that.
Thursday Dec 20th, 2012 7:48 AM
Friday Dec 21st, 2012 5:35 PM
Only the Feds can clean up this dirty little city now. All the local checks and balances have failed.