Meanwhile the NIMBY Task Farce for Anti-Homeless Hysteria (deceptively termed the Citizens Task Force on Public Safety) is shitting out its final recommendations that likely include: getting the District Attorney to prosecute Sleeping Ban citations (rather than the City Attorney as is currently the case), pressuring judges to deal harshly with “repeat offenders” (i.e. survival sleepers), driving needle exchange (already banned in the City) even further away, implementing a non-“best practices” model for that exchange (while simultaneously claiming to be implementing safe practices).

Casual destruction of homeless bedding and property by Cal Tran authorities and other agencies continues to be reported by cold and gloomy homeless elders.

Where are the Santa Cruz attorneys?

Updates from the Palo Alto Daily Post

> 1. Daily Post update – HOMELESS EVICTION: A federal judge in San Francisco yesterday turned down a bid by 10 homeless people to block the city of Albany’s plan to evict them and others living on a bayside landfill known as the “Bulb.” Judge Charles Breyer said that the homeless people and a nonprofit group that joined them in the case had “failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits” of their lawsuit, which was filed last week.
>
> 2. NEWS – Car camping ban draws legal threat:  lawyer says new law goes too far
by Breena Kerr Daily Post Staff Writer

>
> A group of attorneys are warning the city of Palo Alto that they will sue on behalf of homeless people who have been prohibited from camping in their cars under a new city law.
>
> In a letter sent to City Attorney Molly Stump, lead attorney Carrie LeRoy says that the car camping ban essentially prohibits people who live in their cars from entering the city for fear of being cited.
>
> No Citations Yet
>
> Although Palo Alto police say they do not intend issuing citations for car camping until early next year, the fine can run up to $1000 or six months in jail
>
> LeRoy, a Palo Alto-based attorney, said she represents car campers James Russaw, Suzan Russaw, Fred Smith and others. She indicated that she thinks Palo Alto should modify its policy and enact parking restrictions that are punishable by a ticket rather than misdemeanor charges, or make the ban only applicable to residential areas, as the cities of Mountain View and menlo Park do.
>
> LeRoy said in an email to the Post that she had two people with her as co-counsel, William Abrams and Paul Johnson, both of whom are professors at Stanford Law School.
>
> “Enforcement of the (ban) will cause the poorest and most vulnerable among us to los the only protection that they have from exposure to the elements and to ensure some measure of personal safety,” the letter said. “…Sleeping in a vehicle affords better protection for homeless persons’ health and safety than living or sleeping outdoors on streets, sidewalks, benches, or the ground.”
>
> LeRoy said that the disabled, chronically ill or elderly are especially vulnerable under the new law.
>
> Forced out?
>
> “Enforcement of the (ban) will exacerbate serious health issues and disabilities among plaintiffs, who will be forced out of theier vehicles or Palo Alto altogether to avoid criminal liability,” LeRoy’s letter states.
>
> “The (ban) criminalizes the homeless in their daily lives and activities and is unconstitutional,” LeRoy wrote in her letter.