NEW BATHROBESPIERRE’S BROADSIDE SHOW TONIGHT 6-8 PM Free Radio Santa Cruz ! Archived…if you missed it

The ever lovable Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides, which has been playing “flashback” shows from earlier years, will be returning to the 2015 era tonight at 101.3 FM and with commentary and coverage of segments of last Tuesday’s Shitty Council meeting, street interviews, Keith McHenry on the Blue Box 2 from the hearing last Thursday in defense of street performers…and more!

If you missed the show (because the message is going out so late), it will be archived at shortly after broadcast.

Call in with any comments, carping, or cutting-edge analysis at 831-423-4833.

Robert Norse

HUFF ‘n Stuff will brave the mid-day cold to huddle together tomorrow 11-11 at 11 a.m. (!) at the Sub Rosa

HUFF agenda is likely to be brooding over:

+++  Berkeley’s Upcoming SleepOut on 11-16 and the Berkeley City Council meeting’s planned attack on the homeless (See
+++ The on-going struggle to focus federal attention via the DOJ and HUD oversight to finally force City Council to pay attention to basic homeless survival rights this winter before the suffering toll grows from El Nino.
+++ Support for other allied student and community struggles (Tuition/Police Abuse by UCSC activists, the Beach Flats Community Garden by activists there,  Tenant organizing).
+++ Transformed Support for the Freedom Sleepers Movement to account for freezing and wet weather ahead.
                                                            …and more!   Come to the Freedom Sleep Out Tonight, then wake up merry and bright for the HUFF follow-up!  What fun!

Back to the Barricades with Freedom SleepOut #18 Tuesday 11-10

Title: Fighting the Power: Freedom SleepOut 18 Coincides with Key Council Meeting
START DATE: Tuesday November 10
TIME: 3:00 PM – 3:00 AM
Location Details:
809 Center St.–In and outside City Hall and ultimately–if peaceful protesters are driven there–to the edges of the sidewalk under high-intensity klieg lights with First Alarm Security Guards patrolling. The protest officially begins at dusk, and goes through the night, but some activists will be at City Council to support Beach Flats Garden and tenant activists.
Event Type: Protest
Contact Name Robert Norse
Email Address rnorse3 [at]
Phone Number 831-423-4833
Address 309 Cedar PMB 14B S.C. CA 95060
Mayor Lane and his City Council continue to ignore the looming shadow of the Department of Justice and HUD with likely federal court attacks on the Sleeping Ban and federal fund cutoff’s for criminalization of the homeless.

Other Council members have declined to support and Lane has as yet not agendized his proposed modification of the Sleep Deprivation Ordinance revealed in a lengthy facebook lament at .

My reaction to Lane’s piece is at ,

Freedom Sleepers continue their Tuesday night Sidewalk Safe Sleeping Zone — “safe” apparently from sleeping tickets, which continue to be given out regularly elsewhere in the City. The next one is November 10th, beginning in and around City Council’s afternoon meeting.

Agenda Items ##16, 17, and 18 concern HUD funding for housing, the Beach Flats Garden project, and the airbnb Summer Rentals issues–all of which impact unhoused folks and their allies

Last week cops and bureaucrats expanded the roped off area outside City Council to further isolate and distance homeless protest from the Study Session of City Council. In addition, the entire grassy area from the City Council chambers to the sidewalk was–for the first time–marked a “no go zone”–This eliminated the prospect of unhoused people resting there during the day–something grudgingly allowed though harassed by roaming First Alarm “security” thugs.

Inside, the Council heard a three hour police panhandling and PR session celebrating their follow-up on the blatantly anti-homeless 2013 Citizens Public Safety Task Force recommendations. What are the costs, consequences,and effects of the anti-homeless laws spurred by this Task Force “public safety” concerns? Who knows? Police didn’t tell us.

There were no citations at the Sidewalk Safe Slumber Zone that followed, though the night was colder and the number of sleepers fewer.

For an account of the night see “Temperatures drop at the 17th Freedom Sleepers Community Sleepout” at

More background:

Items /#16, 17, and 18.

#16 covers some HUD funding–which may be impacted by Santa Cruz’s anti-homeless laws and HUD’s supposed new “end criminalization” requirements.

#17 involves the latest sell-out to the Seaside Company, offering a 3-year lease proposal that would only cover 2/3 of the Community Garden–in spite of the pleas and demands of hundreds of people two weeks ago.

#18 involves real estate owners moves to okay airbnb summer rentals

§ Granny Units (ADUs) or vacation rentals: 2:30 pm (?) Item 18. Introducing an ordinance amending portions of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code to limit short term/vacation rental use of Accessory Dwelling Units [ADU’s]. Tenant activists note that allowing ADU summer rental use:
§ removes affordable housing units from the local market;
§ caters to out-of-town visitors instead of local housing needs;
§ creates businesses within residential neighborhoods;
§ violates the intent of ADUs to increase long-term, small-scale rental housing.

Freedom Sleepers hope that some Beach Flats Garden supporters will join the Sleep-Out in solidarity.

Last week CPVAW asked for emergency shelter for women outside to be created along side of the anti-homeless RV measure coming back on November 24th. Assistant City Manager Scott Collins, cheerleading for the “no RV parking for the poor” resolution upcoming, cut short discussion time and cut off speakers.

Coming Up December 13th–a special Freedom Sleepers Presents event featuring attorney Tristia Bauman from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, survivors from last year’s “disperse and destroy” raid on the San Jose homeless Jungle, and more! Scheduled for the Resource Center for Non-Violence at 6:30 PM.

In spite of two unanimous Council votes early last summer directing staff to open TWO 24-hour bathrooms, Public Works has only opened one (at the Soquel St. garage). And they are still complaining this essential service remain only a “pilot project” in spite of very few problems–according to the workers there (and even the staff report itself).

Meanwhile the Freedom Sleepers continue to provide a portapotty each Tuesday night, given the City’s refusal to either open the promised Locust St. facility or keep the City Hall bathrooms open at night.

A festive Portapotty Parade is in the works for 6 PM after the afternoon Council meeting. The mobile comfort station has been with the Freedom Sleepers for 18 weeks now.

The usual coffee and crunchables will be available at times during the night and for breakfast in the morning.

The Right To Sleep is the Right to Live.

Continue reading

Back to Occupy: A Free Radio Look Back at Police Repression and Mayor Lane’s “Response” 9:30 AM Sunday 11-8 at 101.3 FM

The Sunday show will be another Flashback–perhaps the last for awhile, as I’m going to be playing new and more current material next Thursday for the 11-19 6:30 PM show.

Specifically, Sunday’s show tomorrow will run two old shows back to back–the December 8th, 2011 show [] recorded immediately after the police crushing of the San Lorenzo campground and the earlier destruction of the Occupy Octagon.  This will be followed by the January 5, 2012 show []  which featured a live question-and-answer session with then-Mayor Don Lane.

Both shows can be independently downloaded by going to the links above.

Comments can be phoned in to 831-423-4833 and will be broadcast next Thursday (11-19) if technically feasible.

Free Radio Santa Cruz still has no studio–hence the fact we’re broadcasting and playing old shows.  And we’re still offer a sweet 500 bucks to whoever can find us one!   That pays for at least 150 cups of coffee!  Call me if you have any ideas, info, or inspiration!

Bathrobespierre Robert

Flashback Free Radio–Verdict in the “Don’t Sing Downtown Downtown” Verdict and More on Peace Camp 2010

Another follow-up Flashback on Free Radio Santa Cruz Archival 9-30-2015  Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides show:     Verdict in the “Can a Heckler Shut Down a Political Song?” case… Sandra Leigh interviews me and Curbhugger Chris on PeaceCamp2010 and more.

Show can be heard anytime at .

Are these messages helpful to you HUFF e-mail readers?   Let me know.


HUFF it up later today–if you dare 11 AM Sub Rosa Cafe

Moving from Freedom SleepOut #17 to HUFF Chat-and-Sip #1608 (we’ve been meeting weekly since 1989 or perhaps before).    Agenda prospects for:  tonight’s City Commission for the Prevention of Violence to Women’s discussion of safe sleeping zones for women to (perhaps) be forwarded to the next Shitty Council meeting; RV Parking and Safe Zones on November 24th agenda; Panhandling laws coming up for challenge?; Blue Box 2 Case 8:30 AM 11-5; whatever the cold wind blows in…along with hot coffee and other drinkables.

Punching Back at the Panhandling Prohibition

NOTES BY NORSE:  Santa Cruz’s anti-homeless panhandling law–Municipal Ordinance 9.10–was one of the first in California in 1994 to enact a wide swath of location and time prohibitions.  Prohibitions that have nothing to do with aggressive or abusive behavior.  They were enacted along with the “no sitting” law and prohibitions against protests in downtown Santa Cruz.  It was done at the behest of then Councilmember, former Supervisor, and Bookshop Santa Cruz owner Neal Coonerty to remake the downtown in a more conservative and business-friendly image.   With the connivance and consent of current Council member and former Mayor Cynthia Mathews.   It also happened around the time that protests demanding suspension of the Sleeping, Blanket, and Camping Bans were mounting with early pro-homeless decisions in the Tobe case.
These anti-poor laws were expanded numerous times in the decades that followed.   They criminalize holding up a sign silently at night and any sparechanging on 98% of the sidewalks in downtown, business, and beachfront districts.  Also banned: doing so with a backpack, doing so in a group of two no matter how peacefully or silently, doing so while in possession of a dog (but not a cat, mercifully exempting Gizmo, the beloved Pacific Ave. habituee), and other such clearly unconstitutional restrictions.
The only time any section of the nasty SCMC 9.10  was taken to court, attorneys won damages and forced City Council to make changes in the law.  Unfortunately these were just for a minor section–that which involved prohibitions against “profane” [written] language.  A local man –John Maurer–was fed up with harassment from a fanatic SCPD “Community Service” Officer–for leaving his property to use the restroom and getting ticketed for it.  He inserted in his cap “Fuck the Pigs” and was then cited for that for bad language panhandling.   See  “Powdering The Crooked Nose of The City’s Anti-Homeless Panhandling Law” at
Some examples and background: Men Cited Downtown on Sunday – One for His Dog, One for ?” .  Relevant sections of the panhandling law can be found at Downtown Ordinances“.
If you see police, “Hosts, or security thugs hassling panhandlers, musicians, vendors, or other poor locals, please video, audio, and post reports on .


Supreme Court Free Speech Ruling Challenges Anti-Panhandling Laws

Last year, 76% of cities banned panhandling in some locations.

<span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">NEW YORK, NY - MAY 18: A homeless woman rests while panhandling along Eighth Avenue in Manhattan on May 18, 2015 in New York City. As many parts of once seedy New York City have been transformed into family and shopping friendly environments, 8th Avenue near the Port Authority bus station is one of the last hold-outs to old gritty Manhattan. Last week a man was shot by police after he attacked numerous people with a hammer along a stretch of the street. There is a high police presence along the street and fights and arrests for vagrancy are common.</span> Spencer Platt via Getty Images

NEW YORK, NY – MAY 18: A homeless woman rests while panhandling along Eighth Avenue in Manhattan on May 18, 2015 in New York City. As many parts of once seedy New York City have been transformed into family and shopping friendly environments, 8th Avenue near the Port Authority bus station is one of the last hold-outs to old gritty Manhattan. Last week a man was shot by police after he attacked numerous people with a hammer along a stretch of the street. There is a high police presence along the street and fights and arrests for vagrancy are common.

DENVER (AP) — Cities trying to limit panhandling in downtowns and tourist areas are facing a new legal hurdle because of a recent Supreme Court ruling that seemingly has nothing to do with asking for money.

Federal judges in at least three states have cited a June ruling by the high court on the size of church signs as a reason for overturning anti-panhandling laws or sending cases disputing those laws back to lower courts for review. One of those cases – in the western Colorado city of Grand Junction – has spurred Colorado communities including Denver and Boulder to suspend or change their laws restricting where and when people can panhandle.

The reason is something called content discrimination. The Supreme Court ruled that the town of Gilbert, Arizona, did not have the right to limit the size of signs put up to direct worshipers to services at a small church because the town didn’t set the same limits for real estate or political signs. The same issue has been raised in lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups challenging anti-panhandling laws.

U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello ruled on Sept. 30 that it was unconstitutional for Grand Junction to bar people from asking for money after dark and near bus stops and restaurant patios because they singled out a kind of speech – asking for money – for special treatment without a compelling reason.

Arguello had concluded earlier in the case brought by the state ACLU that the law was discriminatory but said the Supreme Court church signs ruling made it clear that laws that limit speech on broad topics, not just particular viewpoints, also amount to content discrimination. She let stand parts of the law that prohibit panhandlers from threatening people.

After the Grand Junction ruling, Boulder quickly got rid of panhandling restrictions along its pedestrian mall, Longmont suspended its enforcement of panhandling laws and the Denver City Council is considering removing its restrictions on when and where panhandlers can solicit money but plans to keeping its ban on threatening behavior. Colorado Springs also suspended portions of its law at the urging of the ACLU before the Grand Junction ruling.

Appeals courts also have sent challenges to anti-panhandling laws in Worcester, Massachusetts, and Springfield, Illinois, back to lower courts to reconsider them in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Decisions on both are still pending.

The debate over panhandling laws comes at a time when more cities have sought to restrict where people can ask for money. The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty says 76 percent of cities banned panhandling in some locations in 2014, a 20 percent increase since 2011. Many cities say the laws are meant not to discourage giving to people in need but to protect residents and help keep their communities safe.

Mark Silverstein, legal director of the ACLU of Colorado, thinks most panhandling laws nationally have been written so broadly that many of them also will have to be changed because of the ruling. His lawyers plan to tell cities in Colorado about the changes they think are needed.

“The government can’t pass a law to ban all speech that’s annoying or irritating,” he said.

Some constitutional experts think the sign ruling also could have implications beyond panhandling including government regulation of advertising, securities and communications.

While some see that as a good thing for free speech, others, like Yale Law School Dean Robert Post, see potential problems. He said the ruling was written so broadly that it applies to commercial speech and could be used, for example, to try to block the Federal Trade Commission’s sanctions against misleading advertisements.

In Worcester, city officials plan to fight to keep limits banning panhandling near bus stops and ATMs as well as standing in medians for any reasons.

“We see it (panhandling restrictions) as one important piece of the puzzle of dealing with the opioid crisis in the country,” city solicitor David Moore said.

Springfield also doesn’t plan to give up on its restrictions that bar going up to people and directly asking for money in the city’s historic downtown, where tourists flock to see Abraham Lincoln’s house. Panhandlers are still allowed to hold signs soliciting donations, city corporation counsel Jim Zerkle said. The city has filed arguments in favor of keeping the law.

In Denver, it’s not clear how much of a difference the proposed changes will make on the street. The city says it’s averaged about 300 panhandling citations a year since its law took effect in 2000 and roughly two-thirds of those violations involved aggressive behavior, rather than violating the time and place limits it’s considering scrapping.

On a recent day, William Jones, 69, was one of several panhandlers set up along the city’s 16th Street Pedestrian Mall not far from one of the parking meters the city installed to raise money for the homeless and discourage panhandling.

Jones, a Navy veteran who has worked breaking horses, as a restaurant cook and in construction, said he does not care for the aggressive style. He sat on his walker with a sign, saying good morning people and waved back at a passing bus driver and an outreach worker from a homeless shelter.

“I don’t make a lot of money, but I make a lot of friends,” he said.

Flashback Show Today at 9:30 AM for Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides: Interviews from and About the 2010 Homeless Protest Encampment: PeaceCamp 2010

Streaming today on and broadcasting at 101.3 FM:   PeaceCamp 2010—weeks after being driven from the Courthouse to the Sidewalk Near City Hall, Elisse Cadman and Ed Frey in the Studio, Sgt. “I’m Not Harassing” Harms gives a view from the SCPD, and more !

Archived at if you miss it live.

Still broadcasting archives as we struggle to put together a current show–without a studio!  Contact us at 423-4833 or if you are interested in the $500 reward for finding us a small space where we can set up a studio for a year.

Radio Show Change for Today’s Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides: Flashback to Earlier Homeless Struggles in Santa Cruz

Due to a defective file for the otherwise interest 8-29-10 show, I have replaced the show with two shorter shows: one from 9-16-10 and the second from 9-23-10.

These can be accessed directly in the HUFF archives at  and .

The first show is an interesting reflection on the Waiting List exception to the Santa Cruz Camping Ordinance–likely passed because Los Angeles and San Diego had dumped their nighttime bans and the ongoing PeaceCamp 2010 protest continued nightly at City Hall.

The second has as lovely co-hosts then-Council candidate Steve Pleich and PeaceCamp 2010 bottom liner Curbhugger Chris Doyon.