HUFF reappears a its usual spot as the Stay-Away Orders begin….Review of the sorry City Council meeting; …Small Claims Demands Reach Council…Homelessness Marathon to Do It’s Annual Flurry from Florida Next Wednesday…and Recycling Rabbledybabble! Come, learn, and drink lots of coffee.
Yo, HUFFsters! Sub Rosa won’t be open, so we’ll be moving to the Bagelry a block or two away (Cedar just off of Laurel). See ya there! 11 AM this morning.
Speech by Robert Norse to Community and City Council 2-10-15
Three homeless people have filed four claims against the City for being awakened at night and given citations for sleeping between the hours of 11 PM to 8:30 AM at night. This in a city where homeless camping is not only effectively illegally but regularly persecuted with seizure of homeless survival gear, tough treatment of homeless sleepers, and a habitual refusal to acknowledge basic human rights for the poor outside without options. Thnere has been a massive expansion of such citations. In two days the city’s additional Stay Away penalizations will be intensified against homeless people sleeping where they must—in the many areas overseen by Dannette Shoemaker’s Parks and Recreation Department…
…We will be helping victims of this law sue for sleep deprivation damages. The four current claims request $2500 per incident of sleep deprivation. Each time an officer violates a homeless person’s privacy, health, and safety–we shall help them hold the offender responsible. If at first we failm, we will try again and again. We’ll be there until it is no longer necessary and you have repealed this inhumane and abusive law, which materially injures people…
TO READ THE FULL TEXT OF THE SPEECH (SLIGHTLY MODIFIED), AND/OR VOLUNTEER TO HELP, GO TO: https://www.indybay.org/
HUFFsters: If you’ve looked over the e-mails of the last week, let me know what you think. I’m wondering what we should focus on as an action this week. HUFF will, of course, be huddling Wednesday 2-4 at 11 AM at the Sub Rosa Cafe at 703 Pacific. Coffee and caffeinated tongues will flow freely!
Recent proposals for action have included a HOMELESS CLEANUP (to buff up the homeless image against anti-homeless propaganda), a PERFORMANCE PEN CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE PROTEST (outside the bracketed color zones),
I favor prep for an action around STAY-AWAY’S (perhaps a protest to the staff or Terrazas’s Public Safety Committee), a follow-up on DISABLED DISPENSATIONS on Pacific Ave. and elsewhere, and/or SMALL CLAIMS COURT publicizing around the Sleeping Ban.
Other prospects are a STRIKE 4 AT THE SCPD (demanding the release of Azua’s citations, so we can check racial categories), FINAL HOUSING FOR VETS (Becky’s proposal to unite anti-war, pro-vet, and pro-dignity-for-homeless sentiment by demanding a more local vet cemetary), SIMPLE HOUSING (some follow-up on Elisse/Raven’s proposal of last fall), VIDEO DEFENSE FOR THE HOMELESS (against violence and police harassment), VOLUNTEER OUTREACH (Major focus on getting more volunteers)… MAPPING THE MOSQUITOS I could go on and on.
If someone wants to volunteer to spearhead this (Pat has been sick), we could add Cafe HUFF to any of these.
Food Not Bombs continues to need volunteers–at its Saturday and Sunday meals 4-6 PM near the Main Post Office. HUFF fliers are there–and we need activists to sign up people for SMALL CLAIMS COURT there. As well as at the Monday Red Church meal 6-7 PM at Cedar and Lincoln. Sin Barras (the anti-prison group): Check their facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/
On the more “appeal to the conventional” side….A City Council meeting is coming up Tuesday 2-9. Phil Posner has a “Camp of Last Resort” forum 7 PM at Louden Nelson on Wednesday 2-4. The BEARCAT public forum (not at City Council but at Louden Nellson) is coming up 2-10 7 PM–I think. On 2-5, Brent Adams’ Warming Center Project is holding a beer benefit Thursday at 402 Ingalis St. 11:30 AM – 10 PM;
I’m also including HUFF notes from the last meeting below. These are fragmentary and rough.
1-28-15
11:20 a.m. Sherry, Gail, Jacks, Cal, Kip, Kevin…(Janice, Becky, David, Gail, James-in-the Rain and Elisse joined later—not everyone was there all the time)… Kip has a few ideas:KIP’S IDEAS ON THE AGENDA: PERFORMANCE PENS (at top of the Agenda)…HOMELESS CLEAN SWEEP…to counter what they’ll counter… Kevin–they let him sleep i the park, and a park worker said this good morning…Harvey West Park…he was alone…VAN CAMPING…Sherry got notice from Rainbow Gathering Hawaii–kitchen person arrested and given 24 hours…because they do’t have a permit and gathering…annual state… Cal wanted to know gender pronouns: U.S. Foresty 800-832-1355.. Say you disagree with forestry service, under constitution right to publicly assemble. Sunday night about 8 outside Grafix on Pacificc Ave…boy and a girll and non-lifethreatening inuries, both shot…hand and shoulder–bartender at Poet and Patriot…Brent and Tampico heard pop pop…
Kip notes he sees vans and paddywagon mornings… Jacks seems them on Westcliffe now where not seen …harassing street performers waiting for their hour to be up…security guards and cops, Kip notes. Trying to get people to understand…. Cal notes Peaceful Warrriors Seminar in Berkelley on the 7th…for Direct Action…. Cal did a march fromFruitville to Oakland—MLK’s speech protesting violence–Oscar Grant… FNB, HNJ, Housekeys not Handcuffs…all peace…Chris arrives.
Cal remembers police arassment: friend hanging out on a beach–druk friend arrested for prowling—2 weeks ago…
PERFORMANCE PENS: How to properly demonstrate against the ordinance…need numbers–timing is important…shows on the 8th and the 15th who will be showing up to town….Wants to see the community too come out and exercise their right to ask for things…any request for anything…a Hug is considered aggressive panhandling–statement…sign cannot have a question regarding a request.
David Silva has arrived. with Tickets book….on particular days collectively outside the box–play music, requesting things that are technically illegal to request, the more ludicrous these requests the better… If with more than one person unless you’re playing music….fliers would be good…police likely to leave it alone and enforce after the crowd hasdied down.. Not sure oof how to engage with the commuity… Instruments being confiscated…need the media…
Elisse shows up… with goodies…Spang Outside the Box Protest… FNB 4 PM on Saturday meeting…
Homeless Clean Sweep…Kip notes something to counter anti-homeless: document that nothing is changed by Stay-Away orders…mess is there, and cleaning it up… Hard to present information so that it’s very clear to the public… Follow-up to City Council…
Becky arrives.. Follow someone around with a camera….Brent said bathroom was totally clean… Getting together with environmenalists..
Elisse: 70% of the homeless born here or grown up here–removed from their homes by economic pressures. 1000 people: simple housing….for folks with debt–funded by … Becky says HUFF position is anyone moved around be given a motel voucher..
I move we do the Small Claims Court.. Becky notes show the dollar and cents stuff to compare the cost… David and Becky stopping by FNB after 5 PM…can do a 15 minute at 5:15 p.m. Janice sarasbati_1999@yahoo.com Resolution to support Small Claims Court stuff passes…
Ellisse asked why River St. Shelter people did gates etc.–so many drugs sold on the property–they couldn’t do anything about that… Janice notes they never tried to sell drugs to her… Janice–got to stop making people its permanent clients. I propose tabling and polling out there. Cal might be interested; Elisse will think about it. Cal has no car.
12:40 p.m. Van Camping: Kip friend sleeps in her car fed up with it…. Becky says insist on a voucher if harassed… Janice: why not a public parking lot where you don’t have to move around…designated…have it in Paso Robles–public parking lots…in Los Angeles County…
Becky: HUfF position is calling for a nighttime carpark and campground.
Janice’s Concern: JD Miini Storage and 41st Ave….with them quite a few years…Loitering banned, only allowed there for 20 minutes, no-smoking areas (she lit incense), pets in vehicle, hallway and unit doors must be open at all times…Janice harassed Only she got that letter…..management was there in a golf cart…she was looking at her fluids, considered “working on her van…” new management…Becky: they can’t put in new conditions……got letter last Saturday…..Becky and Janice may get together if Janice looks over lease with specifics.
MHCAN Concerns–Sherry: positive people need ot be there so that outside problems in the neighborhood don’t happen…1051 Cayuga. across the street from the Fire Station on New restrictive proposals: …They’ll cut one of her days off and close off where they …people who give her occasional use permit– they were going to have a Board meeting on Monday but woman was sick…. Janice back 3 months and is still on the waiting list. Elisse wants to collect data on how many beds .
Janice 61-year old woman having problems with mechanics..
Elisse will meet with Micah on Friday–wants to start to do some organizing heself–get his opinion…wants to build a group for homeless and poor–working to organize themselves and start dialogues with people whoa re housed and willing… Continue reading
I include here a few notes on what happened to me there regarding the right to record as well as the search for my records. I record for these written reports as well as my twice-weekly Free Radio Santa Cruz show Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides at 101.3 FM and freakradio.org Thursdays 6-8 PST and Sundays 9:30 AM to 1 PM. More info there, and in archived shows at http://radiolibre.org/brb/ .
Nervous Norse in the Front Row
Friday Jan 30th, 2015 1:54 PM
City Council audio equipment was, as usual, spotty. Accordingly I sat up front near but not technically “attending” my trusty tape recorder (because not within arms length). I advised Sgt. Bush, the sergeant at arms, that the uncertain nature of the equipment meant I’d be making my own recording, not dependent on the city’s speaker system and decision when to keep it on and when to turn it off.
HISTORY OF HARASSMENT
In the past, Bush has arrested me for leaving a tape recorder there and replacing it when he removed it. That “disrupting a meeting” charge, filed by Mayor Robinson, was never filed by the D.A. Last fall I filed a claim for damages against the City for false arrest, which was denied. I now have until April 1 to take Robinson personally to Small Claims Court, which I’m hoping to do.
For many meetings following, Bush would confiscate my recorders, requiring me to squat next to the tape recorder while it was on in order to comply with Robinson’s (and now Lane’s) “decorum” rules. Lane made squatting next the tape recorder a violation of the new “decorum” rules, so on January 27th I sat in the first row–not quite “attending” the machine, but near enough to it to grab it if some officious cop should attempt to grab it.
SENTRY DUTY AGAINST THE SERGEANT
Which is what Bush several times tried to do. Bush informed me he’d be removing my recorder if I left it there. I did so anyway, and when he moved to take it, I intercepted it and retrieved it. When he resumed his sentry position by the side door, I replaced the machine. He again moved to take it. I again intercepted. This time he advised me that he’d take it from me. I told him that to do so he’d have to arrest me.
For the rest of the meeting, I nervously had to keep one eye on Bush and one eye on the tape recorder. After two assaults on the helpless machine, Bush took no further action Still, I was unable to make notes, move about the room, or speak with others, cause I felt I had to be ready to spring up and seize the machine before it could be confiscated–if that were tried again. I was able to hold up a sign visible on the TV (“Tanks, No Thanks!”) along with many others in the audience.
Still I must admit that having to guard my tape recorder from a cop on pain of exclusion from the meeting and arrest for “disruption” (as provided for under Lane’s new decorum rules– See “Council Armors Up” at http://www.indybay.org/
MORE INFORMATION REQUESTED
The same day I filed this Public Records Act request with the City:
From: rnorse3 [at] hotmail.com
To: npatino [at] cityofsantacruz.com
CC: kvogel [at] cityofsantacruz.com; citycouncil [at] cityofsantacruz.com…
Subject: Public Records Act: re SCPD Contracts with Other Agencies
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:15:09 -0800
Nydia: Please make available for viewing or (preferably) in e-form (as usual) all contracts the SCPD has made with any other agencies since 2010 that involve the delivery or furnishing of goods, services, or money.
Thanks, Robert
The point was to determine whether the SCPD has been getting equipment and money indirectly from federal war enthusaists like Homeland Security, but doing so through third party agencies, It apparently did this in the case of the Bearcat through the City and County of San Francisco (see “Public Records Released by the SPCD on the Bearcat” at http://www.indybay.org/
I encourage Bearcat opponents and those concerned with militarization and SCPD abuse more generally to parse the documents–both those already posted and those which I may obtain in the coming days. They’re supposed to respond by February 6th or thereabouts, if I understand the 10-day rule correctly.
Merced Homeless Threatened
Sunday Jan 25th, 2015 4:37 PM
Caltrans says this homeless encampment is on public (State of California) land. If these homeless people can’t live here (on the people’s land), where can they live?
The residents in the encampment, some of whom have lived there for over a year, don’t have any place to go. There are no safe and legal camp sites for the homeless in Merced. Several of the residents are elderly and some are sick and unable to move their property, even if there was some place to take it.
Marilyn showed me inside her shelter today and it is obvious that she is not going to have her property moved by tomorrow morning. The notice does say that “any personal property not disposed of will be stored for ninety (90) days.”
Supporters of the homeless will be at the encampment on Monday morning to video the Caltrans operation and make sure that homeless people’s rights are not violated.
01/26/2015 9:54 AM
01/26/2015 6:16 PM
The California Department of Transportation on Thursday posted notices at an encampment near Kelly Avenue and Highway 140 on the east side of Merced ordering the homeless illegally camping there to leave before crews clear the area Monday.
The notice went up on the same day that volunteers assisted the county’s Continuum of Care in counting the homeless in Merced County, a count required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Though the official numbers from the count aren’t expected to be released until next month, the Continuum of Care member heading the tally said there are more homeless people in the county than last year at the same time.
Those living in encampment near the Bradley Overhead, an overpass maintained by Caltrans, said Thursday they may have been able to find other shelter if they’d been given more notice.
Gail Henslee, a 60-year-old woman who’s lived in the encampment for two months, said a few days is not long enough to move. “We have nowhere to go, and they don’t care,” she said.
The notice says the area will be cleared because of illegal camping and dumping. Homeless advocates estimate that 25 people call the encampment home.
Henslee said she’s called a lawyer to study her options, but in the meantime admits she won’t have any choice but to leave before the camp is cleared out beginning at 8 a.m. Monday. She said she didn’t know about the plans to clear the camp until a Caltrans employee warned her earlier this week.
Entering a local shelter, such as the one D Street, is not an option for her, she said, because staff there would not allow her to bring her 11-year-old dog.
Being forced from one place to another is nothing new, said Brent Shirley, who has lived in a makeshift structure near the overpass for about six months. “There’s no closure for all of this – none,” the 52-year-old said. “It’s just a vicious cycle we’re all living in.”
A handful of tents and makeshift shelters make up the encampment, which can be seen by drivers who travel the highway to and from Yosemite National Park.
Caltrans spokeswoman Angela DaPrato said the California Highway Patrol will assist in the removal early next week, when crews will throw out anything left behind. Those in the encampment can identify possessions they plan to come back for, according to the posted notice, and Caltrans will store the items for up to 90 days.
Representatives from the Merced County Human Services Department were on hand Thursday to speak with those living near the overhead after the notices were posted.
Renee Davenport, who headed up the tally for Continuum of Care, said she appreciated that Caltrans held off from destroying the camp until after the count. She said several people in the camp are elderly or suffer from medical conditions that keep them from working.
Davenport said she is doubtful that many of them would get housing relatively soon, because the system does not work quickly.
Moving them from the encampment is not a long-term solution, she said. “They’re just going to go somewhere else in the street.”
The encampment has been there for about two years, Davenport said. It started to receive extra attention after the $41.2 million Bradley Overhead project was completed in November.
There were 768 homeless people in Merced County, including 21 children, based on the 2014 Homeless Count and Survey.
Davenport said this year’s count found more homeless people, but she declined to report the exact numbers. Urban Initiatives, the nonprofit that oversees Continuum, said it expects to be able to report the numbers in February.
Volunteers will continue with a homeless survey Friday. The questionnaire is an attempt to better track the demographics of the homeless, with questions designed to find out how many of them are men, women, children, veterans, HIV positive, mentally ill and so on.
Those leaving the camp will have to find a place to stay other than the warming shelter that’s been used during the past couple of winters. The Merced County Rescue Mission said this month that it was not planning to open the shelter, which is essentially a tarp tent filled with beds and space heaters.
Also this week, during a regular meeting, the Merced City Council instructed city staff members to look at the cost of opening a public building or taking over control of the city’s warming shelter. About $7,200 in Department of Housing and Urban Development money during the past two years has gone toward the purchase of the tent and the equipment inside, as well as paid the utility costs, according to the city’s Housing Department.
City staff members said a report could be ready in the coming weeks.
FOR PHOTOS, VIDEO, AND COMMENTS, GO TO
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/
01/26/2015 9:54 AM
01/26/2015 6:16 PM
MERCED
The work started shortly after 8 a.m. in the mud and grass field near where Kelly Avenue meets the Bradley Overhead. Caltrans posted notices on Friday that ordered the homeless to leave the area by Monday morning.
California Highway Patrol officers, who were on hand to provide security, said the people in the camp peacefully complied with the notice. One man who lived in the camp was taken away by an ambulance after he complained of chest pains.
Many of the residents of the camp were still packing up when the crews arrived. Steve Mentz, 51, hurried to secure his dogs and try to save as much of his structure as possible.
As he left the camp, he said he didn’t know where he would spend the night, as he’s been run off before. “They’re making it where there’s nowhere to go,” he said.
A resident of the camp for about eight months, Mentz said he’s legally blind and hoping to get disability benefits soon. He was aware of the looming destruction of the camp, he said, but didn’t have anywhere else to go because the shelters in town don’t allow pets.
Renee Davenport, a member of the Merced County Continuum of Care, said many of those living in the encampment have stories similar to Mentz’s. She said some have drug problems or suffer from mental illness, but several of those living in the camp are elderly or disabled and can’t work.
She said the breaking up of the camp highlights what she sees as a lack of services for homeless people in Merced and the county. “To do this in the middle of the winter – and there’s no warming shelter – there’s no excuse,” she said.
Davenport was in the camp Monday morning helping people pack up.
People who left the camp would have to find alternate housing from the warming shelter that Merced County Rescue Mission opted not to open this year. About $7,200 in Department of Housing and Urban Development money during the past two years has gone toward the purchase of the tent and the equipment inside, as well as paid the utility costs, according to Merced’s Housing Department.
Merced City Manager John Bramble said his staff is still looking into the cost and feasibility of opening a public building or taking over control of the warming shelter tent.
That same day, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro announced groups that work with the homeless throughout the central San Joaquin Valley received about $10 million to help those without shelter. Merced County’s Continuum got seven grants worth $579,193.
Back in Merced, Caltrans crews took down some of the makeshift structures in the camp by hand, folding up tarps and bagging trash. The buildings made with wooden pallets snapped and splintered as they were knocked over by heavy machinery. Some of the homeless got help moving from friends with cars, while others pulled their belongings on a cart behind a bicycle.
A handful of people arrived to the camp with signs saying the homeless there were being “persecuted.”
According to the last year’s homeless count by the Merced County Continuum of Care, there are 476 homeless people in Merced. Continuum conducted the 2015 count this month, but has not reported the numbers yet.
Caltrans agreed to store possessions for up to 90 days for those who lived in the camp. Anything else left behind was destined for the dump.
Angela DaPrato, a spokeswoman for Caltrans, said the department had been planning to clear the camp for a few months but waited until after the holidays and last week’s homeless count to go through with the plans.
She said the cleanup would continue Tuesday and crews were not certain how many more days it would take. “They didn’t anticipate how much work it would be,” she said.
FOR PHOTOS AND COMMENTS, go to http://www.mercedsunstar.com/
In a preview of protests scheduled for the next Council meeting and thereafter, “Push-Back” Pat Colby and fellow HUFF activists set up a table with coffee, brownies, petitions, orgami paper cranes and fliers on Pacific Avenue on Martin Luther King Day. This was the first in a series of demonstrations raising awareness of poor people being turned into criminals at night for sleeping, smoking, being in parks, sitting down near a building, recycling, playing a guitar for donation outside the bracketed performance pens on Pacific Ave, gathering in a group along the levee, etc.
Protests are resuming next Council meeting against police abuse in Santa Cruz. This focuses on the Bearcat, but, many are also concerned about the traditional and recently escalated denial of basic homeless human rights as well as the local SCPD’s racial and class profiling, cover-up of force actions, and other abuses.
EVEN MORE IMPORTANT NON-BEARCAT POLICE ISSUES
Specific SCPD abuses are documented at http://www.indybay.org/
Fundamental changes needed in the SCPD: http://www.indybay.org/
CAFE COLBY RIDES AGAIN
A tip of the hat to Cafe Colby (aka Cafe HUFF) that hit Pacific Avenue yesterday outside the vacant Sway offices linking the facile Martin Luther King Day holiday with real demands for justice for homeless people. She, Sherry, Raven, & other activists broke up the usual lockstep walk-and-shop trances of the downtown with petitioning, coffee, and brownies. Pat Colby reports it’s likely to become a weekly event.
DECONSTRUCTING STAY-AWAY STUPIDITY
High up on Colby’s priorities is the Stay-Away law passed at City Council in the evening and as yet undocumented in detail on indybay. Read the law at http://www.indybay.org/
According to Davis’s analysis, in the last year, the majority of infractions and Stay-Aways are for sleeping, “camping”, being in a closed area or smoking. The majority of those given the additional punishment of stay-aways are homeless people. These facts were ignored by City Council, which instead voted for Councilmember Terrazas’s “gather more stats for next September” direction to the staff.
No estimate was made of the cost of this increased level of criminalization of the homeless.
No analysis was made of the effectiveness or consequences of over 1000 1-day Stay-Away orders already given out since July 2013 by police and rangers. though that date was provided by Davis.
A long-threatened lawsuit by attorney Judi Bari and Homeless Persons Legal Assistance Project loner Steve Pleich is due to hit the courts this week to freeze the Stay-Away law in its tracks.
For More Commentary Go to: https://www.indybay.org/
Coming up on the HUFF agenda: Colby’s Cafe HUFF–a Weekly Experience?, Back to the Bearcat Next Tuesday?!, Homelessness Marathon On the Horizon, Recycling Ripoff–the HUFF response?, Stay-Away Standoff–the Next Steps, Azua-ology–the Homework; and more…. Coffee and whatever tidbits people bring in…
Sorry this message didn’t get out sooner, but it’s a rare Wednesday morning that HUFF won’t be pulling up a chair to chatter and chow down with whatever coffee and crunchables are available. Main item is what to do around the galloping criminalization of homeless folks here as evidenced by last night’s Council Shameful Spectacle. Specifics: Fightback Training, Latest Public Records Act Info (Officer Bill Azua’s Stats), Bearcat B.S., and more…
The “decorum rule” changes proposed at City Council today are part of a long ongoing process of marginalizing, discouraging, and discrediting actiivsts. When the community got righteously angry at the SCPD last-minute hurry-through of its armored personnel “rescue” vehicle and some members turned their back on the Council (quite legally and legitimately), Mayor Lane went into crisis mode. As a strong media critic of his and his Council around their homeless abuses, I’ve been punished for the last year with an absurd “unattended recording device” rule which required me to sit next to my machine or risk having it confiscated. Lane needs to abolish this rule and restore the prior “leave it where you want but don’t disrupt” process. But he won’t. In the following correspondence, I outline and Lane ignores my concerns and suggestions.
On January 8th, Lane did advise me he was putting new decorum restrictions on the agenda.
On January 10th, after reading them, I wrote back:
Don:
I suggest you withdraw your proposed decorum amendments and simply remove the “unattended audio devices” ‘rule’ entirely. It has never prompted any disruption at City Council other than that evoked by the Mayor.
I also suggest withdrawing the stuff about “obstructing aisles” and “furniture” since those issues would be gone once you remove the “unattended audio devices”. It’s pretty clear that this is a direct attempt to maintain a rule without good reason.
Or perhaps you have a reason for making it a potential crime to leave an “unattended audio device”? I’d be interested in knowing your reasoning.
I also recommend withdrawing your new definition of “disruption” as being “when a mayor insists on imposing a rule and has to stop the meeting to do so”. It flies in the face of the 9th Circuit’s opinion in my case that “disruption” means disruption, not imagined disruption, or the violation of some rule.
Responding to legitimate protest with harsher restrictions is in my view unwise and will ultimately cost the city administration as well as the rest of us.
Please postpone Council consideration of these changes until you sit down with some of the activists to discuss your specific concerns and how they can be equitably met.
I would hope we could discuss this matter and come up with a solution that meets everyone’s concerns. I think that would save all of us lots of time and trouble.
Robert
P.S. In the meantime please make available any documents that involve complaints, concerns, or documents regarding the new decorum rule changes you’re proposing. This would include any documents referencing obstructing city council aisles, furniture, recording devices in the chamber, and/or concerns about Council “disruption”.
Don responded the same day with this:
Thanks Robert
I look forward to hearing your comments at the council meeting.
I have forwarded your PRA request on to Nydia for formal processing– and I can tell you that I have no documents along the lines you requested. I have this information filed in my own memory: that when you and your proxies have been sitting adjacent to the lectern I have seen many community speakers show very visible concern about people sitting in that spot and on several occasions I have seen people flinch or recoil as you move toward or handle your recording device near the lectern. I know how committed you are to community participation at council meetings so I hope you will support eliminating one impediment to that participation.
Thanks for considering.
Don
I responded on the same day with this e-mail:
Don:
I’m still trying to understand why you support the “unattended audio devices” rule at all. That was the first question I asked you.
What purpose does it serve? Can you cite any disruptions caused by my regular recording over the last dozen years?
As you know, the rule was unenforced for 13 years until a singularly repressive and anti-homeless Mayor took power. I have been a homeless advocate and strong Council critique for nearly three decades, and I think it’s pretty clear this “rule” targets my radio work. Do you deny this?
You note some find it uncomfortable to have me sitting near the podium. I did too. It’s awkward to have to guard my recorder throughout the meeting. And should be unnecessary, as well. I wouldn’t have been up there at all, except an armed police officer kept shutting off my “unattended” recorder and outrageously confiscating it. That was after I was falsely arrested on April 1st.
I found it sad that you neither objected to the arrest or the subsequent confiscations, nor took action to stop it when you had the power as acting Mayor. This kind of behavior by the Council is petty and unnecessary.
It’s also unprecedented. Can you cite any other local legislative body that requires you to “sit next to your recorder or risk having it confiscated” or requires it to be placed in a special zone?
It seems to me a rather arrogant and pointless assertion of authority for its own sake.
Your proposed “permission zone” for recording devices runs afoul of the basic First Amendment right of any member of the public, and particularly a reporter, to record–even if they step away from their machine to read an agenda, chat with a friend, use the restroom, or take a break outside.
How does the placement of a small inconspicuous device actually disrupt the meeting?
As I mentioned before, I’d be happy to make any reasonable accommodation. How about it?
As I advised Mayor Robinson, I’d be happy to be careful not to interfere with others at the podium–as I have been throughout the years–in recording. Wouldn’t this satisfy your concerns? In this case no furniture, signs, additional recorder “attendants” would be necessary.
I know how committed you are to community participation and media access at Council meetings, so I hope you will restore what has been a problem-free arrangement for the last decade or more.
Let me know. While there are far more important matters we are both concerned about, the issue of media access is an important one to me.
Robert
P.S. I’m also concerned with your new definition of “disruption” which seems to ignore the court case which the City lost when the 9th Circuit clarified that “disruption” means real disruption not simply a rule violation. Has there been some more recent court decision changing this?
Don responded on Sunday January 11th:
I guess I’m still wondering what the problem is with you and everyone having a place to leave a recorder unattended that is a bit of distance away from the area where other people are speaking. You still seem unable to explain why this arrangement will keep you from recording the proceedings– which you are entitled to do and which I intend to support your doing.
Prior to enforcement of the “unattended” rule, you were regularly stepping up to the lectern to move or remove or replace your recorder. This may not noisily disrupt the meeting– it was simply a persistent and annoying interruption for many. My experience is that you are not a particularly perceptive judge of which activities cause small disruptions in our council meetings since you are regularly doing those activities even as you say you are concerned about avoiding disruptions.
Sorry this situation has made you so sad. I believe this new arrangement will spare us both some future sadness.
Don
I replied the same day:
Don:
I think I’ve clarified why I find the “unattended recorder” rule so ridiculous. You haven’t stated why you support it and what you found wrong with the usual process I’ve used over the last decade or more. But I’ll try again…
Why should members of the public and media be compelled under threat of exclusion to place their recorders in a particular spot? It is simply a massive unprecedented restriction which seems to be a masking justification for an untenable rule. Your observation of me in a position I was forced to be in by the previous mayor to “attend” my recorder does not outline any problem with the pre-Robinson approach.
I haven’t placed my machine on the lectern for years. I have been careful to place at least 2′ away from speakers on the railing–which is the optimum place for me to record with the equipment I have. The City Clerk’s office noted no correspondence indicating any phone, e-mailed, or written complaints.
It seems you are not serious about any kind of reasonable discussion or accommodation. The process you use is similar to the one you used in creating the “performance pens” on the Pacific Avenue sidewalk or approving the BEARCAT: no meaningful prior discussion with concerned and impacted people, just the wham/bam/slam City Council approach that rubberstamps Staff recommendations.
While I appreciate the courtesy of your last-minute correspondence, it doesn’t take the place of all important real preliminary discussions. These are the substance rather than the shell of a democratic process–which is what we see at City Council.
For the reasons mentioned before, I again encourage you to withdraw these proposed constricting rules. At until do so until you’ve actually talked to the people impacted–and done so with notice and not at the last minute in the face of a done deal.
You also have not answered most of the questions I’ve raised. Perhaps because there are no reasonable answers. Of course, those in power often feel they don’t have to.
Robert
Don concluded:
Robert
And I have clarified why the rule makes sense. I guess we disagree about this.
You seem oblivious to how your own behavior in council meetings is disruptive. Because your legitimate free speech activity is protected does not mean that everything you do is appropriate or protected.
I will protect your free speech rights as I will protect the rights of everyone that comes to speak– but I will not give you license in council meetings to do whatever you feel like doing without regard to how effects others.
Your handling of your tape recorder at and adjacent to the lectern pre-dates the previous mayor. That annoying and interruptive activity is something I am trying to bring to an end.
If you know of others that seem to be impacted by this proposed rule please let me know. I contacted and corresponded multiple times with the one person I know that is likely to be immediately impacted– that would be you.
That correspondence is now ending.
I answer many questions you ask… and am always treated with a “not good enough” or “I have some more questions” You could pretend that this represents me being unresponsive or you could consider how I see it from my end: badgering and attention-seeking behavior from someone who can never be satisfied.
Don Lane, Mayor City of Santa Cruz
My final e-mail the same day:
Don: Until you actually address the basic question, naturally you will find me unsatisfied.
To repeat, that question is simple:
What was wrong with the previous arrangement that a dozen previous mayors and Council’s used?
For me, your failure to address this issue (and to actually bring the issue up for meaningful discussion before you send a done-deal package to City Council) is telling point here.
Sorry you choose to take this road.
Robert
