Agenda-likely items: Next steps in the Small Claims Court Sleep Deprivation Saga; LibraryWatch, ShelterWatch, or CourtWatch–which way to go?; Right 2 Rest Updates and Support Demo; Keeping Up the Pressure on Police Violence Locally; Parks and Rec Stat Gathering and Crunching…with a Copwatch and Homeless Zine meet also slated for 1 PM after the HUFFmeet. The usual coffee and crunchables are likely to be available.
Author Archives: huffsantacruz
Bigoted Band Blasts Rights for the Poor in Sacramento & Update on Right to Rest Law
California Cities Band Together To Preserve Their Right To Treat Homeless People As Criminals
by Alan Pyke
Posted on April 7, 2015 at 3:43 pm Updated: April 8,
FOLLOW AND POST MORE COMMENTS AT:
http://thinkprogress.org/
A group of California towns is fighting for their right to criminalize homelessness as state lawmakers weigh new protections for the destitute on Tuesday.
The League of California Cities (LCC) is opposing a new statewide “Right to Rest” bill protecting homeless people’s right to sleep and eat in public. The bill would pre-empt local ordinances that impose fines and jail terms for homeless people over their use of public spaces for non-criminal activity. Such local efforts to make homelessness illegal have cropped up all around the country in recent years, even as homelessness advocates have piled up evidence that it is far cheaper to provide permanent housing to the homeless than it is to lock them up.
The “Right to Rest” law, which gets its first hearing before a Senate committee on Tuesday afternoon, is inspired by a rapid uptick in law enforcement targeting of the unsheltered and a new understanding of how many California towns have laws that criminalize homeless people’s day-to-day activities. Law students from Berkeley found more than 500 separate anti-homeless laws in a review of just 58 cities’ codes, and concluded that California cities are twice as likely as other American towns to ban homeless people from sleeping in their cars.
Their report found that arrests for vagrancy offenses have surged as arrests for disorderly conduct slipped, “suggesting that homeless people are being punished for their status, not their behavior.” That attitude was on full display in San Rafael, CA, earlier this year when Mayor Gary Phillips closed a city park favored by the homeless because “I want to break the cycle so this is not a place for them to hang out.”
The bill up for a hearing Tuesday is broadly written, but intended to “end the criminalization of the non-criminal activities of life exercised by homeless people” in public spaces. Its author notes federal findings that laws like the ones LCC is working to defend are ineffective at protecting the public interest and even exacerbate homelessness by adding criminal records and institutionalization to an already long list of challenges. The LCC’s legislative letter against the bill argues that it would undermine the basic definition of property rights that “are the foundation of our social order,” and grant special rights to anyone defined as homeless. The group has asked member towns to send letters of opposition to the senator sponsoring the bill.
“Right to Rest” is just one piece of homelessness legislation facing the state this session, and looking at it in connection with the others makes the LCC’s position harder to understand. Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins (D) has proposed a sweeping overhaul of the state’s financing system for affordable housing that would inject hundreds of millions of dollars into construction and upkeep of buildings that could keep the working poor off the streets.
The LCC supports those Atkins bills, and claims that its opposition to “Right to Rest” is consistent with that affordable housing stance. LCC spokeswoman Eva Spiegel told ThinkProgress that the group supports Atkins’ ideas because they correspond with a national consensus “that the key to helping the homeless get back on their feet is through a combination of housing and supportive services.”
But the criminalization law “creates another excuse for not making the commitment to house and serve the homeless,” Spiegel said. Spiegel declined to clarify exactly how decriminalizing homelessness would distract from the holistic efforts that LCC supports.
It isn’t an obvious connection. Criminalizing homeless people’s sleeping habits, minimal property holdings, and access to fresh food doesn’t do anything to facilitate their getting into permanent supportive housing. Cities that have committed to the criminalization path have sometimes found themselves on the wrong end of the courts, as in the case of Fort Lauderdale, FL and Dallas, TX.
If the goal is to devote more resources to housing and counseling solutions that are proven to be effective, criminalizing people’s behavior when they don’t have access to a house may actively get in the way. One study has found that it costs over $30,000 per year in law enforcement and health care expenses to leave a homeless person on the street and criminalize her behavior, but barely $10,000 a year to put him into a permanent housing unit.
California cities fight homeless rights bill
League of California Cities opposition to Right to Rest Act latest in long history of classist edicts, rights groups say
April 7, 20155:00AM ET
by Renee Lewis
An influential league of California cities is opposing a bill that would allow people to rest in public areas — a position that homeless activists argue is consistent with the group’s history of supporting abuses against marginalized groups.
The Right to Rest bill, which moves to a state Senate hearing on April 7, would allow homeless individuals to sit, stand, eat or rest without it being a criminal offense.
Municipal laws in California targeting these behaviors have skyrocketed in past years, a recent report showed, with researchers identifying over 500 restrictions in California municipalities — nearly nine laws per city, on average.
The League of California Cities, an association of California city officials that work to influence policy decisions, drafted a petition last week against the bill, arguing that it doesn’t provide a solution to homelessness and would “undermine the ability of all others to access clean and non-threatening public spaces.”
For rights advocates, that’s tantamount to calling the homeless dirty and threatening.
The League “hides or puts a veil over the race and class issues that are really behind this … but it always seeps through,” said Paul Boden, executive director of the Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP).
“Bottom line,” Boden said, the League is saying, “‘We don’t want to see these people, and we want to preserve our authority to pass and enforce these laws, so if too many come around to make us uncomfortable, we can use these laws to get rid of them.’”
The homeless are not the first marginalized group targeted by the League in its over 100-year history, according to documents provided by the Western Center on Law and Poverty (WCLP), an organization that works on the behalf of low-income Californians.
Past League targets for the removal from public space or even entire municipalities include Chinese, Japanese and African Americans, as well as “any person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated, or in any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object,” according to the documents.
To counteract the League of California Cities’ opposition to the bill, WRAP, WCLP and other social justice groups sent a letter to Jim Beall, chairman of the California Transportation and Housing Committee, who will oversee this week’s hearing on the bill. In it, the advocacy groups placed the group’s resistance to the Right to Rest bill into a long history of antipathy toward the downtrodden.
“The League of California Cities has an unfortunate history of being on the wrong side of civil and human rights history in some critical times in our past and their opposition to SB 608 continues this historical pattern,” the letter said.
The League has supported sundown towns, Jim Crow laws, Chinese exclusion and Japanese internment, the letter added.
Opposition to the bill by the League “falls on the same kinds of scare tactics used throughout the last century to ban certain ‘undesirables’ who were deemed to be an ‘economic blight’ or danger on the street,” the letter said.
The League rejected allegations that its opposition to the bill was based on an effort to discriminate against a certain group of people. Its communications director, Eva Spiegel, emailed Al Jazeera that the League has a “longstanding commitment to human rights and inclusivity,” that is reflected in its racially and politically diverse board.
“We reject any effort to falsely characterize the league’s opposition to SB 608 as reflective of an organizational philosophy to discriminate against certain groups,” Spiegel said. “This is completely inaccurate and fails to appropriately reflect the comments in our letter.”
Spiegel said the League opposes the bill because it “does nothing to help the homeless get off the streets” and that the solution is to provide affordable housing. She cited California’s 2011 removal of over $1 billion per year in affordable housing. She said that has “had a devastating and well-documented effect of the ability of cities, non-profits, and others to build this much needed housing.”
Homeless advocates agree that cuts to funding for affordable housing are largely to blame for the modern crisis of homelessness, but they disagree that the bill would accomplish “nothing” in getting people of the streets.
Even if there was affordable housing available, having a criminal record makes it more difficult for homeless individuals to find employment and housing. And aggressive policing pushes the homeless out of city centers, farther from the services intended to help them.
Advocates told Al Jazeera that the League’s position on the bill is based on a desire to remove the homeless from public space in the interest of promoting business.
The League’s petition said that a law asserting the rights of people to rest and carry out life-sustaining behaviors in public areas without criminalization would “create social disorder,” adding that the bill “creates a special set of exemptions and privileges for one group of people.”
Advocates said the bill asserts the rights of every Californian to rest, sleep, share food and pray in public.
Boden said that those who argue the bills would create a special exemption for the homeless overlook the discriminatory manner in which those laws are policed.
“This bill says … if you’re forced to sleep outside that doesn’t mean you’re committing a crime — it means we’re having a housing crisis,” Boden added.
As part of the movement for homeless rights that has brought together over 170 social justice groups, similar bills aimed at protecting the right to sit, stand, eat or rest in public have been introduced in state legislatures in Colorado, Oregon and Hawaii.
All of the bills are facing similar opposition by municipalities and business district improvement groups, Boden said.
The Right to Rest bill, which moves to a state Senate hearing on April 7, would allow homeless individuals to sit, stand, eat or rest without it being a criminal offense.
Municipal laws in California targeting these behaviors have skyrocketed in past years, a recent report showed, with researchers identifying over 500 restrictions in California municipalities — nearly nine laws per city, on average.
The League of California Cities, an association of California city officials that work to influence policy decisions, drafted a petition last week against the bill, arguing that it doesn’t provide a solution to homelessness and would “undermine the ability of all others to access clean and non-threatening public spaces.”
For rights advocates, that’s tantamount to calling the homeless dirty and threatening.
The League “hides or puts a veil over the race and class issues that are really behind this … but it always seeps through,” said Paul Boden, executive director of the Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP).
“Bottom line,” Boden said, the League is saying, “‘We don’t want to see these people, and we want to preserve our authority to pass and enforce these laws, so if too many come around to make us uncomfortable, we can use these laws to get rid of them.’”
The homeless are not the first marginalized group targeted by the League in its over 100-year history, according to documents provided by the Western Center on Law and Poverty (WCLP), an organization that works on the behalf of low-income Californians.
Past League targets for the removal from public space or even entire municipalities include Chinese, Japanese and African Americans, as well as “any person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated, or in any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object,” according to the documents.
To counteract the League of California Cities’ opposition to the bill, WRAP, WCLP and other social justice groups sent a letter to Jim Beall, chairman of the California Transportation and Housing Committee, who will oversee this week’s hearing on the bill. In it, the advocacy groups placed the group’s resistance to the Right to Rest bill into a long history of antipathy toward the downtrodden.
“The League of California Cities has an unfortunate history of being on the wrong side of civil and human rights history in some critical times in our past and their opposition to SB 608 continues this historical pattern,” the letter said.
The League has supported sundown towns, Jim Crow laws, Chinese exclusion and Japanese internment, the letter added.
Opposition to the bill by the League “falls on the same kinds of scare tactics used throughout the last century to ban certain ‘undesirables’ who were deemed to be an ‘economic blight’ or danger on the street,” the letter said.
The League rejected allegations that its opposition to the bill was based on an effort to discriminate against a certain group of people. Its communications director, Eva Spiegel, emailed Al Jazeera that the League has a “longstanding commitment to human rights and inclusivity,” that is reflected in its racially and politically diverse board.
“We reject any effort to falsely characterize the league’s opposition to SB 608 as reflective of an organizational philosophy to discriminate against certain groups,” Spiegel said. “This is completely inaccurate and fails to appropriately reflect the comments in our letter.”
Spiegel said the League opposes the bill because it “does nothing to help the homeless get off the streets” and that the solution is to provide affordable housing. She cited California’s 2011 removal of over $1 billion per year in affordable housing. She said that has “had a devastating and well-documented effect of the ability of cities, non-profits, and others to build this much needed housing.”
Homeless advocates agree that cuts to funding for affordable housing are largely to blame for the modern crisis of homelessness, but they disagree that the bill would accomplish “nothing” in getting people of the streets.
Even if there was affordable housing available, having a criminal record makes it more difficult for homeless individuals to find employment and housing. And aggressive policing pushes the homeless out of city centers, farther from the services intended to help them.
Advocates told Al Jazeera that the League’s position on the bill is based on a desire to remove the homeless from public space in the interest of promoting business.
The League’s petition said that a law asserting the rights of people to rest and carry out life-sustaining behaviors in public areas without criminalization would “create social disorder,” adding that the bill “creates a special set of exemptions and privileges for one group of people.”
Advocates said the bill asserts the rights of every Californian to rest, sleep, share food and pray in public.
Boden said that those who argue the bills would create a special exemption for the homeless overlook the discriminatory manner in which those laws are policed.
“This bill says … if you’re forced to sleep outside that doesn’t mean you’re committing a crime — it means we’re having a housing crisis,” Boden added.
As part of the movement for homeless rights that has brought together over 170 social justice groups, similar bills aimed at protecting the right to sit, stand, eat or rest in public have been introduced in state legislatures in Colorado, Oregon and Hawaii.
All of the bills are facing similar opposition by municipalities and business district improvement groups, Boden said.
California eyes Right to Rest Act to stem criminalization of homeless
State becomes the fourth to consider legislation enshrining right to basic acts of survival in public places
Homeless America: ‘Everyone should be able to pee for free with dignity’
UN says 2.5 billion lack toilets globally, and activists say many homeless in the US struggle to find restrooms
Calif. laws increasingly target homeless, sparking calls for Right to Rest
Study finds 77 percent jump in arrests for vagrancy offenses since 2000; campaigners face deadline to find bill sponsor
Critics slam Indianapolis mayor for veto of Homeless Bill of Rights
The proposal would do ‘nothing,’ said the mayor, but others say the homeless need protection from police discrimination
Opinion: The growing criminalization of homelessness
How developers and politicians create urban ‘social hygiene’ campaigns
UPDATE ON RIGHT TO REST LAW
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:18:10 -0700
Subject: Right To Rest Hearing update
From: pboden@wraphome.org
To: pboden@wraphome.org
Hey All
Great turnout, powerful speaking truth to power and 75 or so of some of the best people you’ll ever want to meet!!!
While our bill did not pass out of committee it is definitely not dead.. No vote was taken, so SB 608 will either move by the end of this month or be put on hold till next years session.
Campaign organizers are working with Sen Liu’s office on next steps and we will report back with more clarity as soon as we have all the information we need
In the meantime you can check out the hearing through the links below: Starts at about 13 minutes in and ends at 1:46
For those who weren’t there and/or those who would like to re-live our awesome testimony yesterday, here is the link to the streaming archive:You can also download audio here:
Peace
paul
Getting HUFFy again at 11 AM 703 PACIFIC April 8 at the Sub Rosa
HUFF toddles on looking over the latest attack on Medical Marijuana and its impact on low-income folks here, surveys the Right 2 Rest scene in Sacramento after today’s protest and Senate Housing and Transportation Committee vote, scopes out a Thursday Back-to-the-Library Cafe HUFF at 9:30 AM 4-9, considers Armory closing on or around the 15th, and considers new strategies for an independent campaign against police militarization re: the homeless. Report on the Monterey sit-lie protests, Berkeley’s Ambassador-Host homeless beating, and more! All with coffee and crunchables.
Back and Forth Battle in Sacramento on Right to Rest Law
NOTE BY NORSE: HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) has endorsed the Right to Rest law currently up for a vote tomorrow in the state Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. The Bill can be viewed at http://wraphome.org/work/
HUFF members have asked Santa Cruz City Councilmember Micah Posner to sponsor a local Right to Rest law, which he’s asked for more info on. Meanwhile Parks and Recreation and SCPD continue to ticket at a merry pace around “illegal” sleeping (i.e. outside at night) and being in a park after dark. The only walk-in emergency shelter in Santa Cruz will close in mid-April. The Homeless (Lack of) Services Center [HLOSC] still fails to give each person that signs up on the Waiting List for the Pall Lee loft and/or the River St. mini-Shelter a copy of their accepted application, indicating they are on the list and so exempt from camping citations under MC 6.36.055. Reports of prison-like conditions at the HLOSC with the new “security fencing” and “ID card” systems are becoming more regular.
On the positive side, there has been no reports yet of “stay-away” orders being given by cops, after an infraction ticket, for more than a day. On the negative side, virtually all infractions given out to Parks and Rec in the last few months have been given to apparently homeless people for non-crime crimes (as mentioned above) and regular stay-away-for-a-day orders with each citation.
Some of the audio [very choppy because of broadcast problems] from last Tuesday’s “Big John” watch, involving discussion of First Alarm Security Guared harassment of homeless people around the Public Library was played last night on Free Radio Santa Cruz at http://radiolibre.org/brb/
HUFF will be meeting Wednesday–with items on the agenda including demands that police abandon selective enforcement of the “nuisance” ordinances against the homeless, suspend or eliminate all use of tasers, shoot-to-kill directives, choke holds, CS gas, and other abusive practices. Reliable reports that cops confronted two Food Not Bombs activists with drawn guns at a private home in what seemed another example of “normal” over-reaction by police. The SCPD may feel empowered by hubbub the SCPD and supporters continue to exploit around the now two-year old deaths of homeless-hostile cops Loren Butchie Baker and Elizabeth Butler. A complassant City Council which recently voted down an attempt to return the BEARCAT armored personnel carrier “rescue” vehicle. The City Council Public Safety Committee meeting has declined to hold hearings on the verified stats showing class profiling by police especially in the downtown and park areas as well as race profiling by Officer Bradly Barnett.
HUFF members have asked Santa Cruz City Councilmember Micah Posner to sponsor a local Right to Rest law, which he’s asked for more info on. Meanwhile Parks and Recreation and SCPD continue to ticket at a merry pace around “illegal” sleeping (i.e. outside at night) and being in a park after dark. The only walk-in emergency shelter in Santa Cruz will close in mid-April. The Homeless (Lack of) Services Center [HLOSC] still fails to give each person that signs up on the Waiting List for the Pall Lee loft and/or the River St. mini-Shelter a copy of their accepted application, indicating they are on the list and so exempt from camping citations under MC 6.36.055. Reports of prison-like conditions at the HLOSC with the new “security fencing” and “ID card” systems are becoming more regular.
On the positive side, there has been no reports yet of “stay-away” orders being given by cops, after an infraction ticket, for more than a day. On the negative side, virtually all infractions given out to Parks and Rec in the last few months have been given to apparently homeless people for non-crime crimes (as mentioned above) and regular stay-away-for-a-day orders with each citation.
Some of the audio [very choppy because of broadcast problems] from last Tuesday’s “Big John” watch, involving discussion of First Alarm Security Guared harassment of homeless people around the Public Library was played last night on Free Radio Santa Cruz at http://radiolibre.org/brb/
HUFF will be meeting Wednesday–with items on the agenda including demands that police abandon selective enforcement of the “nuisance” ordinances against the homeless, suspend or eliminate all use of tasers, shoot-to-kill directives, choke holds, CS gas, and other abusive practices. Reliable reports that cops confronted two Food Not Bombs activists with drawn guns at a private home in what seemed another example of “normal” over-reaction by police. The SCPD may feel empowered by hubbub the SCPD and supporters continue to exploit around the now two-year old deaths of homeless-hostile cops Loren Butchie Baker and Elizabeth Butler. A complassant City Council which recently voted down an attempt to return the BEARCAT armored personnel carrier “rescue” vehicle. The City Council Public Safety Committee meeting has declined to hold hearings on the verified stats showing class profiling by police especially in the downtown and park areas as well as race profiling by Officer Bradly Barnett.
Rebuttal to League of California Cities – Lies!!!
Hi All
Just to give everyone an idea of what the kind of bullshit we can expect tomorrow – Letter from League of Cities and our response
March 30, 2015
Honorable Jim Beall
Chair, Transportation & HousingCommittee California State Senate
State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: Right to Rest Act of 2015, SB 608 (Liu) – Sponsor & Support
Dear Senator Jim Beall,
Wearewriting,asthesponsorsofthebill, insupportofSenateBill608,introducedby Senator CarolLiu,whichadvancestheprinciplethattheactsofresting,sharingfoodandpracticing religionarenotcriminalactsandthatneitherlibertynorpropertyshouldbetakenfromsomeone whoparticipatesintheseactivitiesinpublicprovidedthattheydonotviolateotherlawsof conduct.
Homelessness Is Extensive and Increasing
Homelessness is the most brutal and severe face of poverty, experienced daily by137,000 individuals in California.1 This represents 22% of the nation’s homeless population. Inrecentyears, there have been increases in the numbers people experiencing homelessness.
Homelessness not only has grave human consequences, it also creates challenges for local governments,bothruralandurban.Accordingtoa2011reportbytheU.S.ConferenceofMayors, mostcitiescontinuedtoseeincreasesinhomelessnessdespitetherecoveringeconomyandreport thatpeopleexperiencinghomelessnessweredifficulttoserve.2 Thereportfoundthat:
· Among households with and without children, unemployment led the list of causesofhomelessness cited by city officials. This was followed by lack of affordable housing.
· Because no beds are available for them, emergency shelters in two thirds of the survey citiesmust turn away homeless families.
Buthomelessnessisnotonlyaproblemthatexistsinurbancommunities.Thoughhomelessnessis more difficult to measure in rural communities, it does exist and the barriers to escaping
1 Link to HUD Press release regarding 2012 homeless population (based on PIT headcounts) released 12/10/12http://portal.hud.gov/
2 Hunger and Homelessness: A status report on hunger and homelessness in America’s Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, available at:
http://usmayors.org/
homelessness can be even more pronounced for rural residents.3 According to a report by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 41 percent of people who are homeless live in smaller towns or cities, including rural areas.4 Nationally, approximately 10% of homeless services clients live in rural areas, and 20% are in suburban areas.5 These data exclude people who did not or could not access targeted homeless assistance services because they live in rural areas. Homeless shelters are virtually nonexistent in rural communities and most health and socialservices accessible to indigent persons are located in areas with larger and denser populations.
Families with children have been one of the fastest growing groups of homelesspeople, representing over 40% of the nation’s homeless in 2009 according to the National Coalition for theHomeless. In California, child homelessness is high. The National Center on FamilyHomelessness has given California a rank of 49th worst in the number of homeless children and 48th worst in the percentageofchildrenwhoarehomeless.6 AccordingtodatacollectedbytheMcKinney-Vento Educational Programs more than 527,000 California children experience homelessness last year in California. Of the 2,200,000 children living in poverty in California, thirteen percent are homeless.7Itshouldcomeasnosurprisethathomelessnessisincreasingamongfamilieswithchildren,as poverty among families with children is also on the rise.According to the Public Policy Institute of California, afterreachinga low of about 16%in 2001, the child poverty ratein California has been trending upward with nearly 1 in 4 children living in poverty in California (23.2%) in 2010.8
Municipal Response to Homelessness Violates Rights and Entrenches Homelessness
In a report released by UC Berkeley School of Law, the large majority of homeless Californians resideincommunitieswhereitisnowillegaltorestinpublic.9 Withnoprivateplacetorest,these arelawswhichpeoplewhoarehomelesswillinevitablybreak.Restisanecessityoflifewhichno person,housedor unhoused,canavoid,andwhileit isnot acriminalact,agrowingnumber of municipal laws allow for a citation and imprisonment if someone is found to be resting. QualitativeresearchandtestimonycompiledbyWesternRegional Advocacy Project has found that people who are cited, fined and arrested for the “offense” of resting are less likely to be able to securehousing,andthereforemorelikelytoremainhomeless.UCLAlawprofessorGaryBlasihas demonstratedthatthesetypesofordinancesdonotreducecrime,andmayviolaterightsofthose targeted with the ordinances.10
3 Rural Homelessness NCH Fact Sheet #11Published by the National Coalition for the Homeless, August 2007 available at:http://www.nationalhomeless.
4 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2013). The 2013 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) toCongress.
5 Hard to Reach: Rural Homelessness & Health Care, National Health Care for the Homeless Clinicians’ Network Newsletter, October2001, available at: http://www.nhchc.org/wp-
6 America’s Outcast: State Report Card on Homelessness, National Center on family Homelessness, found at:
http://www.
7 Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program, Title VII-B of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act as Amendedby the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Analysis of 2005–2006 Federal Data Collection and Three-Year Comparison, National Center forHomeless Education, June 2007. Number of children includes the estimated number of children ages 0–5 who are not yet enrolled inschool. American Community Survey. (2006).
8 Child Poverty: Just the Facts, Public Policy Institute of California, available at:http://www.ppic.org/main/
9 http://wraphome.org/?p=4042&
10 Has the Safer Cities Initiative in Skid Row Reduced Serious Crime? By Gary Blasi (of Counsel at WCLP) and Forrest Stuarthttp://wraphome.org/downloads/
Homelessness Has Dire Human Consequences
The consequences of poverty for people who lack housing are significant. Homeless families are twiceaslikelyasmiddle-incomefamiliestoreportthattheirchildrenhavemoderateorsevere healthproblemssuchasasthma,dentalproblems,andemotionaldifficulties.11Manyofthese families and children have experienced trauma prior to becoming homeless, and homelessness can exacerbate the consequences of trauma or re-traumatize a child.12 Homeless children are sick four timesasoftenasmiddleclasschildrenandhavehighratesofacuteandchronicillnesses.In addition they suffer from emotional or behavioral problems that interfere with learning atalmost threetimestherateofotherchildren.Homelesschildrenbetween6and17yearsstrugglewith high rates of mental health problems with 47% experiencing anxiety, depression, or withdrawal, as compared to 18% of other school-age children. Homeless children get sick twice as often as other children.13
The health consequences of homelessness are not limited to children. On average, homeless adults have8to9concurrentmedicalillnesses,commonlysufferingfromskinconditions,respiratory infections, tooth decay, foot problems, vision disturbances, and trauma. Chronic diseases, suchas hypertension, diabetes, and asthma, are prevalent among people without homes and are more difficult to manage. Preventive tests are underutilized because of time and funding constraints and because patients tend to present with acute care needs that require immediate attention.
The human experience of homelessness is profound.Whether a child, adult or elder, the lack of privacy and social isolation experienced by people with no home can lead to significant bouts of depression and have long-lasting impacts on self-worth and emotional wellbeing. Theprevalence ofhomelessnessinthe21stcenturyisaresultofaninexcusablefailureofoureconomicand politicalsystemthathasnotonlyledtoviolationsofinternationallyrecognizedhumanrights14, but also impacted the public health of entire communities.15
United Nations Finds California’s Approach to Homelessness in Violation of Human Rights Law In recent outreach conducted by the Western Regional Advocacy Project of over 850 homeless people in 13 cities, 82 percent said they were harassed, cited or arrested for sleeping, and 77 percent for loitering. Thisincreasing penalcode aggression towardshomeless people mirrorsa steadydeclineinhousingstockandfundingforaffordablehousing.Ina2011visitfromaUnited Nations Special Rapporteurthe cruel and degrading conditions faced by homeless persons withoutaccesstoadequatesanitationwerecitedandaletterwassenttoSacramentoMayorKevin Johnsonwhichwarnedthatthecityisviolatingthehumanrightsofhomelesspersons.16
Of her visit, she said “I was especially shocked by what I saw in Sacramento, California, where the citydecidedtoshutdownortorestricttheopeninghoursofpublicrestrooms,forcinghomeless people to improvise other types of solutions to be able to exercise the right to sanitation.Open
11 National Survey of Children’s Health available at:http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/
12 Facts on Trauma and Homeless Children, National Traumatic Stress Network Homeless and Extreme Poverty Workgroup, availableat: http://www.nctsnet.org/nctsn_
13 Ibid.
14 A letter from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights to Mayor Kevin Johnson, availableat:http://www.scribd.com/doc/
15 Public Health Impacts of Homelessness: A Podcast, Centers for Disease Control, available athttp://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/
16 http://www.scribd.com/doc/
defecation, open urinationhave been criminalized [sic]. So what happens is that someone can be criminalized just because he/she does not have a place to do his physiological needs.”
Number One Cause of Homelessness – Lack of Affordable Housing
The following facts documenting the decline in affordable housing stock that hasdirectly correlated with the increase in homelessness, included in the Western Regional Advocacy Project report Without Housing:17
· Between 1978 and 1983, HUD budget authority shrank from $83 billion to little more than $18billion in 2004 constant dollars, and since then has never been more than $32 billion except forin 2009 and 2010 because of Recovery Actfunding.
· HUD Funding for new public housing units has been zero since 1996. Meanwhile, since 1995,360,000 housing units have been lost. HUD estimates that approximately 100,000 units are soldor destroyed each year.
· Since 1995, 360,000 project-based units of Section 8 housing have been lost and another 900,000 of these units have contract set to expire before 2014, accounting for the long waitlists for housing assistance. As a result, current funding for the voucher program meets the needs of only one-quarter of homelessfamilies.
· From 1976-1985, a yearly average of almost 31,000 new Section 515 rural affordablehousingunits were built, from 1986-2005, the average yearly production was 8170, a 74 percent reduction and in 2011 only 763 units were built.
Ontopofthelossofpublichousing,affordablehousingconstruction and Section 8 vouchers, rental markets have the lowest vacancy rates in a decade causing rental costs to remain high throughout the recession’s slow recovery.18
Perhapsmostdistressingabout,andverymuchrelatedto,theincreaseinhomelessnessand dramatic decrease in federal funding for affordable housing and support for low-income renters caughtinthistightrentalmarketisthatthefederalgovernmentisspendingmoreonhousing subsidies today than it ever has, but these subsidies overwhelmingly benefit wealthyhome owners. Federal expenditures on home ownership mortgage deductions in 2012 were $131 billion, whiletotalfundinginfederallow-income housingassistanceprograms wasunder$50billion.19The biggest tax benefits go to high-income homeowners who’ve taken out big mortgagesforexpensive homes.
Simplyput,weknowthesolutiontohomelessnessanditisnotcitationsorjailtime.Acitationfor sleeping or standing on the street, instead, creates a criminal record and outstanding fees that contribute to a person’s inability to establish financial solvency and good credit necessary to secure
17 Without Housing, Western Regional Advocacy Project, available at:http://www.wraphome.org/
18 Can the Recession Bring an Age of Improving Expectations for Affordable Housing? Metro Trends Urban Institute, available at:http://www.metrotrends.org/
19 Who Gets the Biggest Housing Subsidies? Metro Trends Urban Institute, available at:http://blog.metrotrends.org/
arentalagreement.Itisnotthesolutiontohomelessness,itistheopposite.Homelessnessisa consequenceofpovertyandinabilitytoaffordhousingandcanonlybecurtailedbyshiftingour priorities to address these root causes.
SB 608 Makes Room for More Humane & Successful Conversation About Homelessness
SB 608 establishes that a person shall not be cited, arrested or harassed for resting in a public space that is open to the public, regardless of their housing status.20 SB 608 defines rest as, “the state of not moving, holding certain postures that include, but are not limited to, sitting, standing,leaning, kneeling, squatting, sleeping, or lying.” SB 608 also establishes that a person without a home shall have an equal right to move freely, eat, have personal property, solicit donations, be legally self- employed, practice religion, share food, or occupy a vehicle that is legally parked in a public place without citation, arrest or harassment.
We know that criminal sanctions for resting do not work, for businesses or for homelesspeople.21Thereareexamplesoflocalitiesusingeffectivesolutions,likeAlamedaCountyemployeeswho had a number of homeless people living outside the County building, and made a targeted effort to get those people housing subsidies, moving them safely off the streets. We need this conversationatthestatewidelevel,somoreofthesuccessfulstrategiescanbeshared,andthe counterproductive ones avoided.
SB 608’s Protections for Homeless People Will Create Significant Savings
Thecurrentcostofenforcinglocallawsthatresultinthecitationandarrestofpeoplewhoare resting in public spaces in California costs these municipal governmentshundreds of millions of dollars. It includes the cost of law enforcement, jail, and court costs, 22 as well as the human cost of homelesspeoplebeingdeprivedoflibertyandpunishedfornothavinghomesinwhichtorest. The cost of housing homeless people is less than the cost of jailing them, 23 so there are opportunity costs as well: Rather than housing people, enforcement of resting laws creates criminal records that can bar homeless people from housing, jobs, and treatment.24 The savings wouldbe significant. California spends $849,396.44 per night on jailing homeless people, or $310,029,700 annually.25 Of the 1,388 respondents in a recent survey of people who are homeless, 78% had been cited for sitting or lying down,26 so the scope of enforcement is not small. SB 608 would stop cities from counterproductively enforcing laws against resting in public.
20 SB 608 defines homelessness as those individuals or members of families who lack a fixed, regular & adequate nighttimeresidence (Page 4 of the following site: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/
21 Several studies have found that sit/lie laws do not help businesses and make it harder for homeless people to get housing and jobs: City Hall Fellows, Implementation, Enforcement and Impact: San Francisco’s Sit/Lie Ordinance One Year Later (2012); Berkeley Law Policy Advocacy Clinic,Does Sit-Lie Work: Will Berkeley’s “Measure S” Increase Economic Activity and Improve Services to Homeless People?(2012).
22 In September 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that the Fourth Amendment’s protection ofpossessions and the 14th Amendment’s due-process prohibit confiscation of personal property by government, regardless of thehomelessness of the owner. http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/
23 The Lewin Group, Costs of Serving Homeless Individuals in Nine Cities: Chartbook, November 19, 2004, available athttp://www.rwjf.org/files/
24 National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, Criminalizing Crisis: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities 32(2010).
25 Memo to Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski from UC Berkeley Law Policy Advocacy Clinic, April 16, 2013 (attached). 26 Western Regional Advocacy Project, California Results, NATIONAL HOMELESS PEOPLE’S CIVIL RIGHTS CAMPAIGNSURVEY (April 2013).
SB 608 Deserves Your Support
The human indignity of homelessness impacts over hundreds of thousands of Californians and their communities, but it doesn’t have to. SB 608 will not reduce the number of people whoare homeless,butitwillprotectpeoplelivingonthestreetfromthecitationsandimprisonmentthat willonlyworsentheirconditionandopportunitiestoescapehomelessness.SB608invitesusallto seekreal,lastingandhumaneresponsestohomelessness.27Thecostsforpreventingtheviolation ofpeople’sbasichumanrightsmustbeweighedagainstthecosts,bothfiscalandqualitative,of notdoingso. Wearegratefulforyourconsiderationandurge your ‘Aye’ vote forSB608.
Sincerely,
JessicaBartholow
Western Center on Law & Poverty
Judith Larson
JERICHO
Members of the Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing Honorable Kevin de León, President pro Tempore of the State Senate
Heading into April with HUFF 4-1 11 AM Sub Rosa: No Foolin’
HUFF agenda candidates: Follow-Up on the BigJohnWatch at the Library; Lobbying and Updates on the Right to Rest Law coming up for Transportation Committee Hearing; Creating a Santa Cruz R2R law; Supporting the First Friday Sitting Ban Protest in Monterey; Non-Report from Berkeley’s People’s Park; …and too much other stuff–as usual. We supply the coffee; you supply the frenzy.
Standing Up Against Attacks on the Homeless in San Jose and Santa Cruz
NOTE BY NORSE: Palo Alto activist and vandweller Chuck Jagoda has forwarded this alert from Sandy Perry of CHAM, San Jose’s Community Homeless Alliance Ministry. Note that the homeless woman is still unnamed, nor do we hear the names of those responsible. An activist called me to say that earlier KGO reported this as a CalTrans incident that put the woman in the hospital.
HUFF will be serving food and coffee at 9:30 AM in front of the Main library Tuesday March 31st to continue gathering reports of the abusive ticketing of homeless people trying to sleep at night. We will also be monitoring the activities of abusive First Alarm personnel, such as “Big John”–a beefy guy who reportedly has elevated harassing homeless people in the library to a regular practice if not a sadistic art.
Parks and Rec Czarina Dannettee Shoemaker told me at a P & R “public input” session on how to address parks in the general plan that she would not be able to support a permit for homeless people camping in the parks–as sought by activist Phil Posner for his Camp of Last Resort in spite of the hundreds of acres of open space available, particularly in the Pogonip. Previous reports by writer and politico Steve Pleich had indicated she “hasn’t said ‘no'”.
Please pass on any reports of stay-away orders issued since mid-February of this year, particularly those for longer than one day as well as abusive behavior by First Alarm security guards. We are also urging people to file claims against the City every time they get a Sleeping Ban, Blanket Ban, or camping citation. Pleich and lawyer Judi Bari intend to apply for a restraining order against the law on April 20th.
Right 2 Rest supporters of legislation at the state level will be going to hearings in state legislative committees this month. Contact HUFF for more information.
HUFF will be serving food and coffee at 9:30 AM in front of the Main library Tuesday March 31st to continue gathering reports of the abusive ticketing of homeless people trying to sleep at night. We will also be monitoring the activities of abusive First Alarm personnel, such as “Big John”–a beefy guy who reportedly has elevated harassing homeless people in the library to a regular practice if not a sadistic art.
Parks and Rec Czarina Dannettee Shoemaker told me at a P & R “public input” session on how to address parks in the general plan that she would not be able to support a permit for homeless people camping in the parks–as sought by activist Phil Posner for his Camp of Last Resort in spite of the hundreds of acres of open space available, particularly in the Pogonip. Previous reports by writer and politico Steve Pleich had indicated she “hasn’t said ‘no'”.
Please pass on any reports of stay-away orders issued since mid-February of this year, particularly those for longer than one day as well as abusive behavior by First Alarm security guards. We are also urging people to file claims against the City every time they get a Sleeping Ban, Blanket Ban, or camping citation. Pleich and lawyer Judi Bari intend to apply for a restraining order against the law on April 20th.
Right 2 Rest supporters of legislation at the state level will be going to hearings in state legislative committees this month. Contact HUFF for more information.
CHP Tractor Runs Over Homeless Woman
(KGO) – Officials say that a homeless woman was injured after getting run over by a CHP tractor that was working to clear out a homeless encampment in San Jose.
The CHP reports that a loader-tractor was clearing a homeless encampment on Story Road at about 10 a.m. today when the accident occurred. The loader was tearing down a tent when someone warned the operator that there was a person still inside the tent.
Officials say the woman suffered minor injuries, and she was treated at the scene.
Four Months after the Closure of the “Jungle”:
STILL NO PLACE TO GO FOR SILICON VALLEY’S HOMELESS
Sponsored by CHAM and H.O.M.E.L.E.S.S., a group of homeless people,
advocates, and people of faith will gather at the former site of the
“Jungle” homeless encampment at 12 noon on Cesar Chavez Day, Tuesday
March 31.
We will speak out about the injury of a homeless woman last Friday while
Caltrans was bulldozing her tent in a “clean-up” near Story Road.
Thousands of Silicon Valley’s homeless still have no place to lay their
heads tonight, almost four months after the Jungle was destroyed by the
City of San Jose on December 4. In fact, the situation will get worse on
Wednesday, when the County winter shelter program discharges an
additional estimated 270 homeless out onto the streets.
People who were evicted from the Jungle have moved and been
displaced over and over with no end in sight. Some moved to the
Walmart parking lot, then Roberts Road, then south of Tully, then to
Phelan at the railroad tracks, then to north of Tully, then to Monterey
Highway, then to Almaden Road, and they are still moving.
When questioned by the Board of Supervisors on March 24, County
officials stated that there are some 5300-5400 homeless for whom there
is no housing or shelter available. When asked for their plan to address
this situation, they responded, “There is no proposal at this time.”
Having no proposal to house or shelter the homeless is not acceptable in
the richest area in the world. A five-year plan is not acceptable, because
people have no place to go right now. They are persecuted with endless
nightmare evictions, harassment, criminalization, and frequent seizure of
their personal belongings.
Cesar Chavez dedicated his life to organizing for justice for the poor, and
San Jose’s homeless and their allies are building a movement for the
same cause.
We call for an immediate commitment by elected officials to affordable
housing for the homeless and for all people in need in Silicon Valley.
While housing is being built, we call for establishment of legal
campgrounds with appropriate sanitary facilities and trash disposal.
Finally, we call on the state legislature to enact SB 608, the “Right to Rest
Law”, that would outlaw discrimination against homeless people in public
places.
JOIN US AT 12 NOON TUESDAY, MARCH 31
PLACE: THE FORMER “JUNGLE” ENCAMPMENT, SENTER & STORY ROAD, SAN JOSE
Please allow time for parking on Twelfth Street, near Kelley Park, or at
Walmart.
Late But Still Standing: HUFF meets as usual 3-25, Sub Rosa !
Preoccupied with yesterday’s irrelevant City Council meeting and the impotent “protest” there, I apologize for not putting out the “HUFF will meet” teaser. But we’re meeting. Same place: 703 Pacific. Same time: 11 AM.
Possible topics: Guiding the homeless through Small Claims Court; Right to Rest legislative support: report on Monday’s Conference call; Following Up from the City Council/Board of Supes debacle, Lobbying Local “Human Rights” Organizations, “Big John” watch at the Library, and more! Coffee with or without cream.
HUFF staggers forward tomorrow at 11 AM
Back from the Berkeley protest against new anti-homeless laws there, two HUFFsters wandereed in after midnight. This morning a HUFF meet is till planned at the Sub Rosa. On the agenda; Next City Council Meeting, Berkeley Solidarity, Charting the Stay-Away’s, and more if anyone’s awake or present.
[huffsantacruz] Monterey, Venice, and Berkeley Protests Against Anti-Homeless Laws & Practices
|
|||
Community Members Continue to Protest the Sit-Lie Ban in Monterey
by Alex Darocy
Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
Individuals with Direct Action Monterey Network (DAMN) and other community members returned to Alvarado Street in Monterey on March 13 for a second sit-in. They are protesting a law that went into effect in October that makes sitting or lying on commercial sidewalks a crime from 7am until 9pm. DAMN’s first demonstration against the sitting ban was held on February 13, exactly one month prior, and they say they plan to return again next month for a similar action. The idea to schedule the protests monthly was a calculated decision. The phrasing of the new law states that if an individual receives a warning from the police to stop sitting, they must not sit on the sidewalk again for one month, or they can be cited and or arrested.
“Join us as we sit and lie in solidarity with the homeless, travelers, and all people targeted by police and their brutality,” an announcement for the March 13 event read.
DAMN members are not using the word “brutality” lightly. As recently as two months ago they received a first hand account of police officers in Monterey physically beating a homeless person who had been lying on Alvarado Street’s sidewalk.
Those sitting during the demonstration held protest signs, and after reading them, one of the first people to pass the group said loudly, “Next thing you know, you can’t walk!”
A few minutes later Jason Coniglio, the owner of My Attic Bar & Lounge, asked them if they weren’t unfairly targeting his business, since they had already demonstrated in front of it once before.
One of the demonstrators then asked him if he had spoken out against the sit-lie law, and Coniglio did not respond.
Another downtown business owner spent a good deal of time sharing his list of complaints about street people with the group of demonstrators. One of his claims was that over the years he had offered jobs to a number of different people who he had seen panhandling, and none had ever taken him up on the offer of work.
In May of 2013, when the Monterey City Council was first considering a sit-lie ban, Monterey Chief of Police Philip J. Penko authored the staff report that explained a sit-lie ban proposal was brought to them because for several months city staff had received complaints about “a decreased sense of safeness” in downtown Monterey, around Fisherman’s Wharf, and long Roberts Road and Garden Road. Fred Meurer, who was City Manager at the time, told council members that the bulk of complaints came from the Old Monterey Business Association membership. The council decided at that time not to study the concept further, but increased pressure from the business community and the police led to a sit-lie ordinance being passed in 2014.
During DAMN’s first sit-lie protest on February 13, there was a strong police presence on foot monitoring the group’s activities, but not so for the second protest, and so far no one has been warned by police to stop sitting at the demonstrations.
The next sit-in is planned for April.
For more information about Direct Action Monterey Network, see:
https://solidaritymonterey.
http://www.facebook.com/
Alex Darocy
http://alexdarocy.blogspot.
§
by Alex Darocy Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
§
by Alex Darocy Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
§A Downtown Monterey business owner speaks to the group
by Alex Darocy Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
§Alvarado Street
by Alex Darocy Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
§
by Alex Darocy Saturday Mar 14th, 2015 1:56 PM
Berkeley Barks Back: Human Rights Protest Tuesday at Berkeley City Council
|
|||
Note by Norse: Berkeley has long held off the worst anti-homeless ordinances. Far worse laws are entrenched in Santa Cruz since 1994 and have gotten exponentially worse.
Our latest obscenity is the Stay-Away-at-a-Policeman’s-
Santa Cruz’s laws on sitting and panhandling are harsher by an order of magnitude at least than Berkeley’s current and proposed laws. Our laws ban sitting on 99% of the sidewalks in business and beachfront districts and ban all panhandling at night, even if peaceful and only involving a silent sign. MC 13.08.090(b) banning “disorderly conduct on park property” makes it a misdemeanor to “by threatening or abusive or profane language, willfully molest or unreasonably interfere with the use of a city park or bench by any other person.”
Why such a discrepancy between Berkeley and Santa Cruz? Both are university towns with liberal reputations,. Berkeley is bigger and lies in a larger urban area where activists can more easily congregate to oppose the reactionary riptide. Berkeley also seems to be able to enlist–at least in part–many social workers and service providers, who remain starkly silent in Santa Cruz as nasty law after law is proposed and passed.
Activists in Berkeley hit the streets and demand real local police reform instead of largely limiting their concerns to symbolic targets like the BearCat armored personnel carrier, license recognition software, or “protection” from the NDAA. The most recent liberal coalition of organizations appearing faithfully at City Council to speak out against the BearCat have banned HUFF from their literature in a closed meeting without discussion, appeal, or notice.
Those interested in a possible caravan up to Berkeley on Tuesday March 17th, contact HUFF at 423-HUFF (4833). I hope to be heading that way with at least one vehicle. I’ll be hoping to interview someone from Berkeley on this issue tomorrow on Free Radio Santa Cruz at www.freakradio.org sometime between 9:30 AM and 1 PM.
Check the links in the three stories below to catch more photos, comments, and video.
Press Release: Rally and March Planned to Protest Effort to Pass New Anti-Homeless Laws in Berkeley
Osha Neumann Thursday March 12, 2015 – 10:07:00 PM
The Streets Are for Everyone Coalition (SAFE), is calling for an emergency march and rally on March 17 to protest efforts to get the Berkeley City Council to pass new laws targeting homeless people on the streets of the city.
The protest will precede a meeting of the Council at which it will consider a proposal by Councilmember Linda Maio for a raft of new ordinances, which would criminalize such innocuous activities as “lying on planter walls” and “deployment” of bedding on sidewalks and plazas during the day.
“Taken together with existing laws, these ordinances would essentially make it illegal for people who are homeless to have a presence on our streets and sidewalks,” said Osha Neumann an attorney with the East Bay Community Law Center. He has represented many homeless people who have received citations for, he says, “activities they engage in as part of their effort to survive.”
Professor Jeff Selbin is the director of Berkeley Law’s Policy Advocacy Clinic, which recently published a study about the growing enactment and enforcement of anti-homeless laws in California. He commented: “The evidence from around the state and country is quite clear: criminalizing people who are homeless doesn’t solve any of the underlying causes or conditions of homelessness; in fact, it only makes them worse. It would be inhumane, ineffective and expensive for Berkeley to double down on punitive laws that will only hurt our most vulnerable residents.”
Patricia Wall, Executive Director of the Homeless Action Center, expressed outrage that it was again necessary to fight for the rights of people who are homeless in the town with a supposed commitment to civil liberties. “Just under 2 ½ years ago,” she said, “Berkeley voters defeated Measure S, which would have criminalized sitting on the sidewalk. The same real estate interests that brought us that proposal are back again. And once again we need to show them that they don’t own this town, nor, hopefully, its politicians.”
Bob Offer-Westort of the San Francisco Coalition on Homelessness and former head of the “No on S. Campaign,” was astounded when he learned of Maio’s proposals. “Berkeley’s continuing failure to pay any heed to reason, research, or fellow feeling when developing homeless policy is mind-numbing. This city has a homeless commission, a homeless task force, and one of the best schools of social work in California. But our legislators can’t be bothered to lend an ear to either homeless people themselves, service providers, or policy experts, but legislation seems to be driven by a relentless cycle of panic and whim.”
The march will begin at 5 PM on the corner of Telegraph Ave. and Haste Street and proceed to the steps of Old City Hall at 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, for a rally at 6 PM.
Streets Are For Everyone Coalition (SAFE) : safecoalitionberkeley@gmail.
Homeless advocates plan march and rally to protest proposals to regulate conduct on Berkeley streets
By Tom Lochner tlochner@bayareanewsgroup.com
http://www.montereyherald.com/
Posted: 03/13/15, 5:03 PM PDT |
BERKELEY — Advocates for the homeless are protesting a new set of rules, proposed by Councilwoman Linda Maio, that they say would criminalize much of what homeless people do to survive.
Maio says her proposals “will go a long way to establishing clarity for law enforcement and ensuring that the entire public has access to the public streets and plazas unimpeded.”
Maio, whose northwest Berkeley district includes the commercially booming Gilman Street corridor, proposes several ordinances to regulate a slew of activities in commercial areas, ranging from cooking, panhandling and storing possessions, to urinating and defecating.
“Taken together with existing laws, these ordinances would essentially make it illegal for people who are homeless to have a presence on our streets and sidewalks,” Osha Neumann, an attorney with the East Bay Community Law Center, said in a news release from the SAFE (Streets Are For Everyone) coalition.
The group has called a protest march and rally before Tuesday’s City Council meeting.
Maio says her proposals “will go a long way to establishing clarity for law enforcement and ensuring that the entire public has access to the public streets and plazas unimpeded.”
Measures include:
UC Berkeley professor Jeff Selbin is cited in the SAFE news release as saying evidence from around the state and nation clearly shows that “criminalizing people who are homeless doesn’t solve any of the underlying causes and conditions of homelessness; in fact, it only makes them worse.”
Maio says she seeks “consistency in the enforcement of current ordinances,” to protect public infrastructure, facilitate maintenance, promote cleanliness and safeguard public access, among other goals.
She also wants a review of ordinances in other cities that address public urination and defecation and to ensure that public restrooms are available and well publicized, in collaboration with BART.
She also wants to survey business districts about the adequacy of enforcement of current ordinances; study whether
a six-foot right of way is adequate for pedestrian and wheelchair passage in high-traffic areas; and explore extending transition-aged youth shelter hours beyond winter months.
The regular council meeting will begin at 7 p.m. in the Old City Hall at 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way.
The march will begin at 5 p.m. at Telegraph Avenue and Haste Street and will proceed to Old City Hall for a rally at 6 p.m., according to the SAFE news release.
Contact Tom Lochner at 510-262-2760.
Why Criminalizing Poverty Sells
Carol Denney
Friday March 13, 2015 – 12:17:00 PM
Criminalizing homelessness is the most expensive, least effective way to address homelessness. Studies prove it, reporters note it, and common sense suggests it since paying for a year of low-income housing or even a college education costs a lot less than a year in jail. So why does it sell like crazy?
Nationwide we’re bristling with new anti-homeless and vagrancy laws according to a report by the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. California leads with way with an average nine such laws per city according to the UC Berkeley School of Law Policy Advocacy Clinic’s recent study. The laws typically criminalize standing, sitting, lying down, sleeping, having belongings with you which might define you as “camping”, sleeping in your own car, sharing food with others, asking for money or help from others, and other behaviors which are unavoidable, especially for people who have no place
to go.
Why are these embarrassingly heartless laws so easy to pass and so popular? The answer is that there’s currently a political cost to any politician who insists on the creation of low-cost housing as a priority. But there is very little political cost at present to passing yet another law, even an unconstitutional law, which burdens the poor.
Berkeley is a great example. Berkeley is a college town, notoriously liberal, consistently cast as comically out of touch with mainstream American politics in national press. But successive mayor after mayor has been more than willing to override community will, ignore the moral objections of religious and human rights groups, and go to bat in court for unconstitutional legislation on behalf of political groups who want the poor to just disappear.
In an interview with Berkeley author John Curl, Mayor Tom Bates referred to rent control in particular as “a no-win position” for him and “a death knell” for politicians generally. Berkeley citizens, in the absence of honest leadership on the issue of low-income and affordable housing, cite their own frustration with panhandling and homelessness as reason enough to vote repeatedly for laws of dubious constitutionality which target poor people on the street struggling with unemployment, evictions, and skyrocketing rents.
U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken issued a temporary restraining order in 1995 against Berkeley’s 1994 anti-panhandling law, noting that “some Berkeley citizens feel annoyed or guilty when faced with an indigent beggar . . . Feelings of annoyance or guilt, however, cannot outweigh the exercise of First Amendment rights.”
Poor and homeless people are notoriously ill-equipped to hire lawyers and mount legal challenges to the anti-poor laws generated primarily by merchant associations which, in the case of the powerful Downtown Berkeley Association (DBA), get mandated “membership” payments from all the businesses within its expanding downtown footprint. The DBA’s board is dominated by large property owners who were the primary funders of the failed anti-sitting law campaign in Berkeley’s 2012 election. There is not a single representative on the board from the poorly funded non-profits and law clinics who work with the poor and homeless people caught up in the endless web of the criminalization of poverty. Those are the groups who will show up in opposition to new anti-homeless initiatives. But they are much less likely to be as able as wealthy investment and property companies to toss large campaign donations the council’s way come the next election.
The Berkeley City Council knows that circling poor and homeless people endlessly through overburdened courts and jails over unpayable fines for innocuous offenses is dumb. They tend to be intelligent people who by now have had somebody toss a copy of Berkeley Law’s Policy Advocacy Clinic’s report on California’s New Vagrancy Laws or the No Safe Place report on the Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty (or both) on their desks. They may even have read the reports.
But it takes courage to say no to merchant associations’ and the University of California’s short-sighted effort to make homelessness and poverty invisible. Courage is in short supply in the Berkeley City Council chambers. For all the opining in January and February 2015 about the Black Lives Matter campaigns, and even though the majority of those affected are people of color and people struggling with disabilities, the anti-homeless laws slated for passage at the March 17th Berkeley City Council meeting seem to be proof that the war on the poor will go on without interruption.
Public Comment
Progressive in District 4 may as well elect an ultra-right conservative
(An open letter to the progressive voters of Berkeley)
On March 17th the Berkeley City Council will consider expanding the authority and practice of police, especially in downtown Berkeley. The council will consider authorizing the police to treat the down and out even more harshly than they are already treated.
Jesse Arreguin and Linda Maio have brought this authoritarian measure before council.
Here is one good description of the proposals, via Copwatch:
“1. Ordinance preventing panhandling within 10 feet of a parking pay station (akin to our ATM ordinance).
“2. Review ordinances other cities use to address public urination/defecation and return with recommendations for implementation; ensure public restrooms are available and well publicized. Involve BART in exploring possible locations.
“3. Ordinance preventing the placement of personal objects in planters, tree wells, or within 3 feet of a tree well.
“4. Ordinance preventing lying on planter walls or inside of planters.
“5. Ordinance preventing deployment of bedding, tenting, sleeping pads, mattresses, blankets, etc. on sidewalks and plazas from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
“6. Ordinance preventing personal items from being affixed to public fixtures including poles, bike racks (except bikes), planters, trees, tree guards, newspaper racks, parking meters and pay stations. Pet leashes exempt only as not prohibited in BMC 10.12.110.
“7. Ordinance preventing unpermitted cooking on public sidewalks.
“8. Survey business districts to determine adequacy of enforcement of current ordinances; develop an action plan for consistent enforcement as needed.
“9. Clarify if “no trespass” signs on private property extend to sitting against buildings.
“10.Assess adequacy of six-foot right-of-way to enable sufficient pedestrian and wheelchair passage particularly in high-traffic areas.
” 11.Refer to the budget process extending transition-aged youth shelter hours beyond winter months”
To that list we might add an item carried over from March 10th: Jesse Arreguin’s proposal to compete against panhandlers with donation boxes downtown, branded “positive change”. These new boxes would turn over donations to city bureaucracy, either directly or in the form of the Downtown Berkeley Association. The middle class will take a large cut of handouts meant for the very poor.
Quite simply, Jesse Arreguin and Linda Maio are launching a doubling down on the police attack on the down and out.
Our supposedly progressive District 4 councilman, the supposed inheritor of Dona Spring’s legacy, has joined with those who want to bum rush the poor and the crazy out of town, by means of police and court system violence.
Let us be clear on the morality of this maneuver:
Nobody likes being panhandled but proximity to a parking pay station has nothing to do with it. “10 feet from a parking pay station” is a feeble excuse to write tickets, to send random-down-and-out people to jail, to enrich the police forces, and to pretend for the sake of effete snobs that at long last Something Is Being Done.
And what of “personal objects in planters, tree wells, or within 3 feet of a tree well”? Here, Jesse and Linda propose to penalize poor people for owning a few things, and setting them down where they are out of the way.
What of an ordinance preventing stretching out on a planter wall, an architectural feature perfect for relaxing in public while not spending money for the benefit of local landlords?
Jesse Arreguin and Linda Maio have taken the view that if you aren’t giving money to Berkeley’s landlords then you have little business downtown and should certainly not try to make yourself comfortable or set anything down.
The measure goes on like this and only hypocrites and liars can find in this sorry excuse for legislation anything much more than an attempt to respond to a humanitarian crisis by penalizing the victims further.
Linda Maio once declared that she trembled with rage on the dais at the assertion she was less than a progressive.
For reasons that are hard to imagine, Jesse Arreguin is still presumed a progressive.
Listen, folks:
Nobody particularly enjoys an overly aggressive panhandler.
Nobody thrills to the “fun” of encountering a homeless mentally ill person in mid-crisis.
White people don’t like being name called racial names.
People of color don’t like being eyed with obvious suspicion and disgust.
Poor people don’t like getting brushed off the sidewalk by aggro khaki’ed business bros.
Nobody can stand dumb students who zombie through town deafened by ear buds and tunnel-visioned into their not-so-smart phones.
Women righteously resent the cat calls and the “b word”.
The list goes on and on.
Yet none of this justifies blue-suited men with guns and restraints violently punching down the most vulnerable.
None of this justifies our society’s failure to manage public restrooms and showers and shelter.
None of this justifies the equally offensive sneering and snarky behavior of rich theater patrons, ice cream seekers, and khaki-and-hemp swells about town.
Expanded police, and jail, and court system violence is not the answer and it will only make matters worse.
It is the height of malevolent cynicism that Linda Maio and Jesse Arreguin propose such state sponsored violence as a condition of meager improvements to social spending.
There will be protests at the March 17th council meeting and I have no idea if they will be large or small. Regardless, if Berkeley wants to keep going in this direction, our City Council will make Berkeley ground zero for a lasting confrontation. Berkeley will lead the nation, even if the council dais can not.
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
—
Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom – Santa Cruz
Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom – Santa Cruz
w. http://www.huffsantacruz.org/
e. info@huffsantacruz.org
p. 831-423-HUFF
.
__,_._,___
|
5:14 PM (16 hours ago)
 |
|
|||
Hey Bathrobey,
Spent this fine Saturday morning at the spectacular 7th annual Poverty & Homelessness Symposium at Cal. The event was sponsored by the:
Public Service Center
Suitcase Clinic
Street Spirit
Habitat for Humanity
Red Cross
Berkeley Service Network
Cheese n’ Stuff
Noah’s Bagels
Semifreddi’s
Cal Band
UC Jazz
Western Regional Advocacy Project
Write Home Project
Among many others, a couple of our council people put an item on the Action Calendar and many of us on Berkeley Commissions would not of even had a chance to speak out about it if we hadn’t moved up our monthly meetings to respond to the City Manager on budget issues. The action was hidden behind hundreds of pages of the Berkeley Sewer Plan.
Working with HAC, E.B.C.L.C. and others I and my comrades made sure this sneaky move was the top subject at the Symposium. What the council members thought was a very clever ploy turned out to be the worst mistake they ever could of made. Ah to feel young again!!!
So give me a ring if you like 510-684-5866 and we can talk.
Your comrade and friend,
Danny
Daniel J. McMullan III
Director/Advocate/Consultant
Disabled People Outside Project
East Bay/San Francisco, CA
Commissioner
Human Welfare and Community Action Commission
City of Berkeley
(510) 684-5866
Commissioner
Human Welfare and Community Action Commission
City of Berkeley
(510) 684-5866