Title: | Constricting and Restricting Public Assembly Back at City Councl |
START DATE: | Tuesday December 10 |
TIME: | 2:15 PM – 2:45 PM |
Location Details: | |
Santa Cruz City Council Chambers Exact time is uncertain, but the laws are items #14 and #15, directly after the Consent Agenda. To be safe, show up at 2 PM. |
|
Event Type: | Meeting |
COUNCIL MEETS AT 2 PM The Council will again be convening at the unusual time of 2 PM. Probably because the Coronation of incoming Mayor “Rattlesnake” Robinson (so termed because of close collusion with the anti-homeless and vicious Drug War policies of Take Over Santa Cruz.For those interested there traditionally been a post-coronation cakes-and-drinks celebration across the street in the Civic Auditorium to which the public is invited. This has been a chance to mingle with those in power and spend a little time indoors before returning to the freezing streets. THE NEW LAWS The staff report can be found at http://sire.cityofsantacruz. Quite simply, the law rewrite criminalizes protests that have more than 50 participants (previously the “allowed” maximum was 100). permit requirement has now tightened apparently so that 50 rather than 100 people require a permit. Marching in the street is no longer provided for except through costly street closures. Permits must be applied for 5 days rather than 36 hours in advance. PRIOR HISTORY Repressive authority from Birminghan Alabama in the 60’s the murdering generals in Egypt in 2013 have all used “permits” as a way of suppressing dissent. I encourage indybay readers to examine this ordinance themselves. Like the Sidewalk Shrinkage ordinance severely reducing space for public performance, political tabling, panhandling, vending, and art display, this ordinance passed its first reading without police testimony that the current law has any problems. Kathy Agnon, the Permitmeister, presented a very sunny account of the proposed new laws. She however didn’t provide any documentary evidence indicating a history (either anecdotal or otherwise) of such problems. PUBLIC RECORDS–STILL NOT PROVIDED For the texts of the old and new laws, go to http://sire.cityofsantacruz. The texts of the proposed Public Assembly-restricting new laws is also available at http://sire.cityofsantacruz. If you value your right to publicly assemble and march in any cause, this ordinance should have a big red warning light attached to it, considering the make-up of the Council. GLOOMY PROSPECTS AHEAD Considering the phony hysteria generated around “public safety” that is likely to be front and center on “Rattlesnake” Robinson’s January agenda, further restrictions on the right to gather to demand redress of grievances is the last thing we want right now. MORE OF THE SAME PSUEDO-PUBLIC SAFETY Obstructive commercial signs have sprouted on the Pacific Avenue sidewalks in spite of the balleyhooed “trip and fall” pretext used to criminalize laying out a blanket. This “danger” as well as the Robinson-Comstock-Mathews “upscale aesthetics’ concerns also prompted the constriction of tabling, vending, and performance space, and the expansion of “forbidden zones” now encroaching on 95% of the sidewalks downtown for non-merchant activity. HARASSMENT REPLACING TICKETING Hosts and police have given out few if any citations, but harassment has stepped up. Some cops are now claiming that craftspeople are allowed to display their jewelry/art for donation only 6 times a year and must thereafter get a business license.. So may it be with this “Parade Permit” ordinance–last hauled out notoriously to ticket Whitney Wilde, Curtis Reliford, and Wes Modes for “walking in a parade without a permit” on a DIY New Years event 3-4 years ago. I have been in at least several dozen marches down Pacific Avenue in the last few decades, probably more, and none of them had a permit. Nor were there citations, arrests, and/or prosecutions to my knowledge. But enabling police, the city attorney, and compliant bureaucrats with restrictive laws is not a good idea. Defending the traditional freedoms Santa Cruz peaceful protesters have enjoyed ultimately requires exercising them. For the first time “political signs” were “allowed” in the Xmas parade last Saturday (though I’ve always ignored such clearly unconstitutional restrictions). The ordinance coming up tomorrow on the afternoon agenda empowers more repression and makes spontaneous protest more risky, They need to be sent back for a public process of discussion–with those directly affected and with the public at large. Earlier info on the first reading at http://www.indybay.org/ |