Category Archives: Bathrobespierre’s Broadsides Radio Show

180/180 Program–Hope or Hoax? Unanswered Questions

Posted on by

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 13:22:52 -0500
From: phil.kramer1@gmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: UPDATE: “Homelessness” Leadership Council formed

Greetings!
We’re excited to report that the Leadership Council has been formed. The selection process was difficult because so many people – nearly 80 – expressed an interest in joining. This was a good problem to have, though we then had to focus on establishing a group that balanced stakeholder and geographic criteria with the need to have a workable size. We believe we’ve come close to accomplishing this with the twenty-five people who have been initially selected to kick off this important new community working group.

The group selected comprises a broad base of stakeholders, representing all parts of Santa Cruz County, from the San Lorenzo Valley to Watsonville, and places in between. There may be additional and ongoing efforts to recruit specific stakeholders to fill any gaps, but that will be a decision for the new “council” to make. For now, this group of twenty-five committed community members will hold their first meeting on March 13. One of the agenda items for this meeting, as promised, will be to review feedback gathered from the Summit, and a discussion on what to do with this valuable input.

And, we’re making fairly good progress on the other “next steps” that were outlined in the previous update (Jan. 17), though we’re running a little bit behind our original ambitious timetable.

  • We are ready to move forward on education and advocacy work and want to invite all of you, especially everyone who expressed an interest in community (public) education and advocacy, to join us on Thursday, April 18 at 7pm at United Way in Capitola for a discussion on both these topics and areas of interest. Please RSVP if you plan to attend by emailing info@smartsolutionstohomelessness.org.

  • Significant progress has been made on engaging the business community. On Friday, Feb. 15, twenty-three business people gathered at United Way for a discussion on “The Business Case for Smart Solutions to Homelessness”. This group plans to meet again, to work on identifying specific areas where they can have the greatest impact. There is great potential for synergy and partnership, with the leadership council, as a few of the business leaders are also on teh newly formed council.

  • A great number of you also expressed interest in volunteering. While we’re not able to provide a comprehensive list of all volunteer opportunities here, or to personalize them based on your area of interest, here are a few excellent resources and opportunities to get involved, including the huge one-day event in Santa Cruz called Project Homeless Connect, on Tuesday, April 9. Click here to sign up.

A great resource for a multitude of volunteer opportunities is The Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz. And, here are just a few of many other volunteer opportunities with organizations that work on issues related to homelessness:

If there are other volunteers you’d like highlighted in the future please email info@smartsolutionstohomelessness.org.

We look forward to working with all of you on our shared goal to reduce and end homelessness in Santa Cruz County. By working together as a community we can make it happen!

Sincerely,
The Summit Planning Team

©2013 Smart Solutions to Homelessness | c/o United Way / P.O Box 1458 / 4450 Capitola Road, Suite 106, Capitola, CA 95010

This email was sent to rnorse3@hotmail.com. To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list. View this email on the web here. You can also forward to a friend.
Unsubscribe

Powered by Mad Mimi ®

—
Philip Kramer
Project Manager
180/180
www.180santacruz.org
phil@180santacruz.org
(831) 334-4976
——————

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Robert Norse <rnorse3@hotmail.com> wrote:

Who’s in the group?

——————

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 18:41:36 -0800
Subject: Re: UPDATE: “Homelessness” Leadership Council formed
From: phil.kramer1@gmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com

Hi Robert,
I don’t have time to type in the 25 people right now. When the group meets for the first time we’ll ask them about how they want to present or publish their names and affiliation.

Thanks, Phil

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Robert Norse <rnorse3@hotmail.com> wrote:

Phil:  This sounds neither transparent, accessible, nor respectful to the many people who came to the early December meeting.  People who put their energy into this affair need to know who has been chosen by the chosen few, don’t ya think?  And before the event, not after.  Looks like your paid position here has left Occupy far behind.

R

Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 20:40:58 -0800

Subject: Re: UPDATE: “Homelessness” Leadership Council formed
From: phil.kramer1@gmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com

CC: ctconnor@pacbell.net; spleich@gmail.com; gailpage@gmail.com; becky_johnson222@hotmail.com; lrevans@ecocentricdesignco.com; jeanpiraino@gmail.com; compassionman@hotmail.com; alex@alexdarocy.com; kimisheo@hotmail.com; killerleslie@yahoo.com

Whoa! Not appreciated Robert. I think it’s only fair that I ask the Leadership Council how they want their names and information shared. I’m helping the group through the process of formation and organizing, that doesn’t mean I make decisions for the group.

Phil

On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Robert Norse <rnorse3@hotmail.com> wrote:

Phil:

First you write that you “don’t have time to type in 25 names”.  It’s hard to believe you don’t have a list of those names that can be cut and pasted.

Then when that seems flimsy, you move on to suggest that you need to seek the permission of people who were publicly at a meeting.   Skepticism turns to cynicism turns to amusement.

Come on, Phil.

I’m not too enthused about a project that ignores 95% of the homeless population to please merchants who want to eliminate from public view the most irritating group (and then likely ignore or criminalize the rest).  And that ignores attacks on the survival camps of homeless people who are being attacked daily by police and TBSC vigilantes.

Enough with the excuses.  Show respect for the people who spent their time attending the last conference.  Let’s have the list of who the “chosen few” are.

And,while we’re at it, please provide transparent figures on your salary and how much money has been coming in to this project and from what sources.

R

Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 17:36:11 -0800
Subject: Re: UPDATE: “Homelessness” Leadership Council formed
From: phil.kramer1@gmail.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
CC: ctconnor@pacbell.net; spleich@gmail.com; gailpage@gmail.com; becky_johnson222@hotmail.com; lrevans@ecocentricdesignco.com; jeanpiraino@gmail.com; compassionman@hotmail.com; alex@alexdarocy.com; kimisheo@hotmail.com; killerleslie@yahoo.com

Dear Robert,
You brought up a number of points that I’ll try and answer here. As of March 1st I’m working as a volunteer for the Smart Solutions effort. There will be a new person hired by the United Way in the very near future to take on the staffing role for the project.

Since the entire project in a volunteer effort, a couple of folks I checked with who have been quite involved suggest that I wait until the first meeting and let the group decide about publicizing the membership list. Since that group of about 25 people will be making decisions for the project, that seems like the right way to handle it. I am happy to let you know that I am one of the members of the new leadership group, representing the 180/180 campaign. I am also happy to give you an idea as to the makeup of the initial group (which could be expanded after the initial meeting). There are currently 6 “formerly homeless” or self described “advocates”; 5 representatives from local government; 3 from the business community; 3 from faith-based organizations; and 5 representatives from “service provider” organizations.

I think you made an incorrect assumption about the Smart Solutions project. It does not favor any one particular approach to addressing homelessness in the community – it simply stresses broad community engagement and evidence-based practices that are cost effective. It is erroneous to state that this approach only focuses on 5% of the homeless population. Most communities using this approach have elements of their overall plan that addresses the homelessness of a wide majority of homeless persons in their communities.

Regarding your request for transparency, since I’m a volunteer for the Smart Solutions effort at this point, I can report that I receive exactly $0. For approximately one year prior, I was paid a modest part-time wage by a local nonprofit organization to organize the Smart Solutions project but this is no longer the case.
Thanks,
Phil

From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: phil.kramer1@gmail.com
CC: ctconnor@pacbell.net; spleich@gmail.com; gailpage@gmail.com; becky_johnson222@hotmail.com; lrevans@ecocentricdesignco.com; jeanpiraino@gmail.com; compassionman@hotmail.com; alex@alexdarocy.com; kimisheo@hotmail.com; killerleslie@yahoo.com; rboysen@cityonahillpress.com; gperry@santacruzweekly.com; citycouncil@cityofsantacruz.com; huffsantacruz@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Questions About the 180/180 Program in Santa Cruz
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 22:39:36 -0800

Phil:

One has to admire your temperate tone.

Numerous HUFF members went to your 180/180 December sitdown with a lot more positive hopes and expectations than mine.  The general consensus following the meeting was that your program:

(a) had no interest in fighting the destruction of homeless camps and/or the provision of emergency shelter for homeless folks displaced by that pogrom.   For a fraction of the money spent on social services and costly housing, large survival campgrounds with adequate sanitary facilities could be established that would actually meet the needs of people here and now.  Why not lobby for this?  Ah, because the liberal NIMBY element wants nothing to do with it and we must be “smart” and consider what “is possible” rather than what is right and what is necessary.

(b) relied on the faulty notion that the dealing with the visible  (that is, “the most vulnerable”), most troublesome to businesses, and most costly to social services homeless (5% at most) would somehow encourage more money to be spent on the remaining 95%.   In fact, it’s just as likely that the money “saved” would be diverted to other projects.   Municipalities want to get rid of hard-core cases that run up hospital costs, frighten tourists, and clutter up the streets visibly.   But why not simply drive the rest out of town with more police sweeps, “no sleep” laws (on public property and in public libraries), sitting bans, vehicular harassment, and other favorite Santa Cruz tactics?

(c) had no interest in supporting strong civil rights legislation like Ammiano’s Homeless Bill of Rights, which would allow a larger fraction of the homeless to actually shelter themselves until there’s a meaningful change in the national, state, and local priorities.  Nor was there any interest in those victimized by serious political persecution.  Linda Lemaster was made a figleaf poetry speaker and denied any meaningful forum for talking about her upcoming trial. Could it be that Martinez, Lane, and other fear offending the new right-wing Council cretans running the show and seeing their funding cut or challenged?

(d) accordingly also tended to shut up and shut down any discussion of these more immediate shelter/housing issues (as illustrated by what happened at the WILPF meeting when Ed Frey tried to raise the issue).  This results, of course in the kind of elitist censorship, lack of transparency, and bureaucratic doubletalk that I’m surprised you seem to be indulging in.

(e) bleeds and diverts support from protest and alternate encampment projects that actually aim to deal with real homeless survival issues for the majority of homeless people.  This happens both because such projects fly against the agenda of right-wing pressure groups, city council staff, SCPD, and (in part) the social service bureaucracy–who can’t even seem to squeak up when fanatics are creating a health hazard by frightening City Council into banning needle exchange in the city limits, conflating trash, dirty needles, and “illegal camps”.

(f) raises suspicions that keeping the membership of the “leadership council” secret is a way of limiting access and participation to those who share the very financial special pleading that is going on here, to the broader detriment of the homeless community.

(g) seems sadly consistent with your personal policy of ignoring important questions like how much money has been taken in, from what sources, who is managing it, how much has been spent, and on what?   Your salary last year?   Activists are not as naive as they used to be, Phil.  You may have forgotten the lessons learned at Occupy, but I trust that others have not.

Still waiting for answers.

Thanks, Robert

Three Flyers & Two Petitions from HUFF [6 Attachments]

Posted on by
[Attachment(s)from Robert Norse included below]

These are recent flyers I wrote.

Two for the 180/180 program presentation by Councilmember Don Lane and Monica Martinez at the Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom in Santa Cruz last Tuesday (2-19) which ignored all other abuses against the homeless to panhandle for more money for the very limited Housing First! program.  HUFF supports Housing First, but not at the expense of watching police destroy homeless survival camps and ignore the need for immediate facilities.

More recently, I wrote two flyers to distribute to homeless people at the Monday “Red Church” meal.  The flyers are self-explanatory.

I’m also including a rather weak “we’d like needle exchange somewhere in the city” petition presented by Councilmember Micah Posner.  It’s in two pages.

IF YOU HAVE DIFFICULT DOWNLOADING THE ATTACHMENTS, LET ME KNOW AT rnorse3@hotmail.com, and I’ll send you the text.

Needle Exchange Petition p. 1. – pdf
Needle Exchange Petition p. 2. – pdf
Flyer 2-16a. – pdf
Flyer 2-16b. – pdf
HLOSC Flyer. – pdf

Still Unanswered Questions for Councilmember Posner

Posted on by
Micah:

While I appreciate the quick response time, your willingness to address issues isn’t encouraging.

I’m not asking you whether you agreed previously to answer these questions.  I’m asking you questions as a City Councilmember who I believe has an obligation to be publicly responsive.  I believe the nature of your election campaign also led supporters to believe you would be clear and direct in your answers rather than “I didn’t promise”, “I’m working on it”, “somewhere down the road”, etc.

As a Councilmember, you have the power to refer these questions to the appropriate staff and get them answered more quickly and easily (and with less staff time spent than forcing the public to go through Public Records Act requests).

To summarize the unanswered questions:

Real Change meters:  How many new ones in the last year?  How much money generated?  How often vandalized and repaired?

Police policies around homeless sweeps:  Do police instruct homeless people on a legal place to go?  Any spcific instructions, reports or written documents around this practice?  How much money and police time has been spent in the last year on this?  (And, for good measure, how much do they anticipate spending this year?)
Property confiscations:   Is property found vacant at homeless camps destroyed–yes or no?   How much property is currently in police impound from the sweeps?   What agency does the dumping, how frequently, at what cost, and how many trips have been made?
Targeted enforcement to determine if most of these offenses are charged against homeless people whose address is recorded as “transient” or 115 Coral St:  A report on police enforcement downtown of MC 5.43  (The Move-Along Law), MC 6.04 (The Smoking Ban), MC 6.36 (The Camping/Sleeping/Blanket Bans), MC 8.14 (Homeless Dog Ban), MC 9.10 (The Panhandling Ban), MC 9.20 (The Chalking Ban), MC 9.36 (The “Offensive Music” Ban), MC 9.40 (The ‘Amplified’ Sound Ban), MC 9.50.012 (The Sitting-on-the-sidewalk Ban), MC 9.50.020 (The Sitting on Most Public Property Ban), MC 13.04 (The “Entering Forbidden Zones Designated as No Trespass” Ban),  And whether the police make any exception for disabled people (not to do so arguably violates the ADA).
SCPD Freeze-out on Bike Distribution:  How many bikes have reached non-profits from the SCPD in the last half year, either through the Bike Dojo or anywhere else?
Documenting That You Have or Haven’t Made These Requests:  Sounds like this won’t be necessary since you don’t indicate any willingness to do any of them, but it would be more candid to actually make it clear that you are refusing to make these requests of staff.  So  I  ask again, are you?
Thanks,
Robert

From: MPosner@cityofsantacruz.com
To: rnorse3@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 22:48:20 -0800
Subject: Re: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

Dear Robert,
I don’t recall agreeing to do the below with the exception of number 2. I’m going to take up to 4 weeks to accomplish that, given where the city staff are at right now.
I mailed in my endorsement of the homeless bill of rights.
I am mostly working on supporting the police and other city staff and preparing to create a narrative around public safety through compassion and civility that can counteract the kind of fear based scapegoating that is sure to reach a fever pitch in the weeks to come.
Hopefully, HUFF can be part of this very different version of a reality for Santa Cruz.
Micah

On Mar 5, 2013, at 8:06 PM, “Robert Norse” <rnorse3@hotmail.com> wrote:

–Forwarded Message Attachment–
From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: micah@peoplepowersc.org; mpleaner@gmail.com
Subject: FW: Local Civil Liberties Issues
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 19:11:28 -0800

I’m going to a HUFF meeting tomorrow and would like to give an update on these questions and the ones in the companion e-mail.   Feel free to show up there and respond personally, or provide some written guidance.

Thanks,

R

From: rnorse3@hotmail.com
To: mposner@cityofsantacruz.com
CC: huffsantacruz@yahoogroups.com; steve@santacruzhub.org
Subject: Local Civil Liberties Issues
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:26:57 -0800

Councilmember Posner:

At the HUFF meeting, members asked you numerous questions.  This is a follow-up to those questions and to my previous e-mails and phone calls as well as your responses.  If you find the number of specific questions daunting–please indicate which of these you will  prioritize.  I believe they are all important and actually only don’t require extensive work on your part.


1  Have any new insulting “Imagine Real Change” meters been set up in the last year?  How much money has actually been generated by these meters since they were put in?   How often were they vandalized and repaired?


2.  What is the response of the City Attorney to your question about whether the SCPD is being advised to respect the White v. City of Sparks decision protecting artists and writers selling their work downtown?  
3.  Please request a staff report on police policies around homeless sweeps–i.e. whether homeless people who they accost  in the middle of the night are given a legal place to go sleep.  Ask for the specific instructions given to beat officers, any written documents or reports around this practice, and how much money and police time is being spent on this.
     Additionally please request a report on property confiscation:  what the policy is, whether survival material found at camps left vacant during the day are stored or destroyed (the latter is what is being reported to me),  how much property is currently in police impound or storage, and how many trucks full of homeless property have been taken to the dump for destruction–by what agency, how frequently, and at what cost?

4.  I’d also like to see a report on the “addresses” of those cited in the downtown core around such ordinances as the Sitting Ban, the Panhandling Ban, and the Performing/Tabling Ban  (where ‘Ban” means severe restriction).  This would go a distance towards indicating whether the chief targets of these laws are homeless or disabled people.   The City, of course, faces legal vulnerability here, which would be a good motivator to halt such practices.

5.  What is the status of your public support for Ammiano’s Homeless Bill of Rights?

6.  Please ask to see the direction given SCPD officers in the downtown core regarding enforcement on MC 5.43.020 (“Move-Along Every Hour if you’re a political tabler, panhandler, artist, or performer”) &  MC 9.50.012 (Sitting Ban).

7..  Are any bikes being delivered to non-profits from the SCPD, either via the Bike Dojo, the Bike Church, or any other mechanism?  The response that this issue is “under discussion”–which has been the City’s line for the last year while poor people via non-profits are being denied bikes is not a helpful one.  Please provide specifics regarding how many bikes have been delivered in the last six months and then passed on as was previously the case at the Bike Church.

Please clarify  when and to whom you have made these information requests and send me a copy in writing of such communications.
Thanks,
Robert Norse

Santa Cruz Library Board Votes On Sleeping Ban Tonight

Posted on by
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/03/04/18733085.php

Sleeping Ban Back For All Santa Cruz Libraries: Decision Tonight in Aptos
by Robert Norse ( rnorse3 [at] hotmail.com )
Monday Mar 4th, 2013 9:33 AM

The Library Joint Powers Authorities Board meets tonight (Monday March 4th) at the Aptos Public Library at 7695 Soquel Drive to give another tool to the Homeless Haters.

Item 8F on the Agenda of the Library Joint Powers Authority Board is a deepening and darkening of the Patron Code of Conduct and Suspension Policy Update to reestablish a clear Sleeping Ban in all public libraries in Santa Cruz and the surrounding county.

MORE TOOLS IN SEARCH OF VICTIMS
The Agenda is posted at http://www.santacruzpl.org/media/pdf/ljpb/20130304_agenda.pdf . The relevant pages are 26-28.

There are no complaints on file as far as I can determine in the current monthly update of problems involving people sleeping in the library (pp. 45-48, 54-55). There are two complaints of people sleeping in the library parking lot (presumably the one in the back of the library) with their stuff “spread out”. It seems unclear why there is a need to make rules harsher in what has been one of the few remaining legal public places for homeless people to be unmolested.

A story on an Iowa library banning sleeping (pp. 49-50) has the usual omission of whether city law bans homeless people sleeping in public places generally–which Santa Cruz law does–and whether it has utterly inadequate shelter space (ditto with Santa Cruz).

Recently Berkeley has adopted a similar NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) policy regarding bringing property into the library (necessary for homeless people who have no place to store their stuff and need to bring it with them). See http://www.berkeleyside.com/2013/01/02/has-it-gotten-harder-to-be-homeless-in-berkeley/ and the comments that follow.

Currently if someone is blocking the stacks, or snoring, or impeding traffic through being sprawled out, all these issues can be (and presumably have been) addressed without sending around the “sleep police”. There’s currently a burly First Alarm Security guard who has been patrolling the library and surrounding grounds who creates what some regard as an intimidating presence (in all candor, some don’t).

EXTINGUISHING THE LIBRARY AS A SHADOW OF A SANCTUARY
In an unexpected pushback against the county-wide attack on homeless people (ranging from destruction of campsites to crackdowns on Pacific Avenue), the Board voted 5-4 in early December to specifically delete the Sleeping Ban from library policy. With nasty changes in personnel (MacPherson, Friend, Mathews, to name only a few), the blast of bigotry is chilling.

While the language seems genteel (“Refrain from sleeping in the library”), it is backed by a Draconian Policy of Enforcing Suspension.

That policy, made much harsher late last year, specifies that First Violation results in a reading of the rules, 2nd Violation a 1-day suspension, 3rd Violation a 30-day suspension, and 4th Violation up to 6 months. No formal hearing process for anything under 31-days (appeal to the mercy of Teresa Landers, the woman who pushed these policies). Even more telling, in all cases, a person so charged has only 1-day to file a written request for an appeal, or the appeal will not be considered. (See p. 31 E, 7: “To submit a written appeal, the patron must complete the “Appeal of 30-Day Suspension” document. The patron must return the completed form to the suspending library within one working day from the date the suspension is issued.”).

None of the incident reports are actually included in the Agenda. It took me over a month to get past such reports with a Public Records Act request.

There are no exceptions for children falling asleep. The law provides broad opportunity to be selectively enforced–either based on the desires of the staff to be “dutiful”, but also the prejudices of certain library users who want to “clean up” the library.

This looks like a slamdunk for the Bigot Bunch, but e-mail them anyway:

LINE-UP OF PERPETRATORS

Contact the following Board members

Citizen Dick English
117 Union Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Home: 831-539-3299 rpenglish [at] sbcglobal.net

Citizen Martha Dexter
117 Union Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Home: 831-600-8834 mmdexter [at] gmail.com

Citizen Nancy Gerdt
117 Union Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Home: 831-335-3130 ngerdt45 [at] gmail.com

Councilmember Cynthia Mathews
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Office: 831-420-5020
Fax: 831-420-5011 cmathews [at] cityofsantacruz.com

Councilmember David Terrazas Chair
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Office: 831-420-5020
Fax: 831-420-5011 dterrazas [at] cityofsantacruz.com

Councilmember Jim Reed
225 Navigator Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Home: 831-461-0222 jimreedsv [at] gmail.com

Councilmember Michael Termini
Vice Chair
City of Capitola
420 Capitola Avenue
Capitola, CA 95010 Office: 831-476-6206 michael [at] triadelectric.com

Supervisor Bruce McPherson
County of Santa Cruz
701 Ocean Street, Room 500
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Office: 831-454-2200
Fax: 831-454-3262 bruce.mcpherson [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us

Supervisor Zach Friend
701 Ocean Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Office: 831-454-2200
Fax: 831-454-3262 zach.friend [at] co.santa-cruz.ca.us

THE STRUGGLE CONTINUES
More background on this struggle can be found at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/12/29/18729056.php (“Lost in Lander’s Library Labyrinth…” and http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/11/30/18726836.php (“Library to Consider Restrictive New Policies”).

There will be a meeting noon tomorrow at Laurel Park next to Louden Nelson Center (Tuesday March 5th) to discuss a Sanctuary Campground for the homeless. A second meeting on the subject will take place the next day at the Sub Rosa Cafe (703 Pacific) at noon after the HUFF meeting (10 AM to noon).

Responding to the Destruction of Homeless Survival Camps in Santa Cruz

Posted on by
“Less is More” Leslie responds to an anti-homeless article from the Boulder Creek Bulletin  titled “Local Environment Gets Impacted by Homeless in SLV [San Lorenzo Valley]; Law Enforcement Sweeps Shanti Towns & Encampments”.

The original article is posted at http://www.mountainbulletin.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Issue_2_Vol_2_BC_Bulletin.pdf  (pp. 1 & 3).

Leslie’s reaction:


What Kind of Community Do We Have?

Perusing the very local newspaper produced in Boulder Creek, my ire was aroused by a top of the page headline on the trash produced by “the homeless” in the community.  I am moved to ask, “What kind of community do we have here in the San Lorenzo Valley?  Does it only care about trash, or does it care about people?”

I want to try to tell my homeless neighbors up in the redwood forest here that they are not alone.  Not everyone wants them to disappear without a trace.  In my small circle of acquaintances in town, one had a family living in a motor home in their back yard, and another was helping his son “get back on his feet” after a car accident by having him live on his property in a small outbuilding.  We have folks who need a little help, and we have compassionate community members helping them by offering them a place to sleep at night.  We have church and community programs helping in organized programs as well.

Providers of homeless services have been promoting a new vision of service for the people that need the most help: permanent supportive housing for those chronic homeless, many of whom have untreated mental health issues or substance dependencies or both.  Many people support this model of providing help, but it is more expensive than another model that homeless advocates are now discussing.  If there were enough community support, either through charities, government, or private entrepreneurship, this community could house people in a campground where trash could be collected, sanitary facilities provided, and a sense of interdependency could be created, with peers helping peers.  Other communities have found that this helps people “get back on their feet.”

Currently, we have many paths leading nowhere.  People sleep in their cars.  People sleep in the woods.  Those who have drawn attention to the problem in creative non-violent political protest have been sent to jail or fined.  A fraction of the homeless population are sheltered at night in the city of Santa Cruz, another fraction in spare bedrooms and backyards all over the county.  The community can do better by coming together, finding those that agree with our project, creating new partnerships amongst those that are already caring for people in need, listening to our critical rivals, and finally by taking action.

Occupy Santa Cruz will be discussing a “Sanctuary Camp” this Saturday in front of the downtown Santa Cruz Post Office.  You may meet at 4 PM for a vegan meal shared by Santa Cruz Food Not Bombs, and stay for the General Assembly at 5:30 PM.  Decisions are made through a consensus process open to all.  I look forward to seeing you there.

NOTE BY NORSE:  A follow-up meeting will be held Tuesday March 5 at noon in Laurel Park next to Louden Nelson Center and another meeting noon Wednesday March 6 at the Sub Rosa Cafe at 703 Pacific Ave.–both locations in downtown Santa Cruz.

HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) meets 2-6 10 AM to noon at the Sub Rosa as well.

Encampments in Operation–Fresno-style

Posted on by
NOTES FROM NORSE:

The City of Fresno, though also attacking homeless encampments, has also been set back by successful lawsuits.  Plus the sheer volume of homeless people setting up camp in these houseless times because they have to.  In response Mike Rhodes and the Fresno Homeless Alliance has been providing TP and dumpsters as well as servicing to deal with the public health crisis that the City will not.  Santa Cruz activists, contemplating encampments here, might cast an eye Fresno-wise.

To: (lots of folks)
From: MikeRhodes@comcast.net
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 17:01:50 -0800
Subject: [FresnoHomelessAdvocates] We are out of TP

This afternoon I delivered the last 30 rolls of donated toilet paper to the homeless encampments in downtown Fresno.  As you may know, we have seven portable toilets in 4 different encampments and they go through a lot of TP.  I have hired a homeless guy to supply each of the portable toilets with TP each day.  He puts 3 rolls in a locked dispenser and keeps the portable toilets free of clothing and other trash.  It is really working out great, except that now we are completely out of TP. 
If you can help, please drop off packages of TP to my office at the Fresno Center for Nonviolence, 1584 N Van Ness (on the southeast corner of Van Ness and McKinley).  We are open Monday – Friday from 11 a.m. – 3 p.m.  You can also call the center at 237-3223 – Richard Gomez is often there before or after regular hours (and weekends) and can let you in to drop off the TP.
Alternatively, you can send a check to The Eco Village Project of Fresno, C/O Mike Rhodes, 4773 N Arthur Ave, Fresno Ca 93705 and we can buy TP in bulk at wholesale prices.  Either way works, but we need to do something soon.
Also, we have placed a couple of large trash bins at 2 of the homeless encampments and that is helping to keep them a lot cleaner.  Again, I’m hiring homeless people to do the difficult work of clearing the garbage from the encampments and putting it into the dumpsters.  This has been going on for a couple of weeks now and you can see a big difference in the encampments where we have located the trash bins.  You can help support this effort by sending a check to the above address.
Mike Rhodes
Editor
Community Alliance Newspaper
PO Box 5077
Fresno Ca 93755
(559) 978-4502 (cell)
(559) 226-3962 (fax)
editor@fresnoalliance.com
www.fresnoalliance.com

San Jose plans cleanup of homeless encampment that’s grown to 100 residents – San Jose Mercury News

Posted on by

NOTE FROM NORSE:  By “cleanup”, of course, the San Jose Mercury News and the San Jose Police Department mask the darker reality: the destruction of homeless survival camps.  City authorities provide no alternatives, but simply destroy protective structures, confiscate survival gear, and drive people out of a protective community.

Homeless survival is apparently an “eyesore” to some, but that doesn’t amount to a public health or safety problem–which is the real issue.

It’s amazing how baldly brutal the statements by public officials are, candidly talking about “fences” and “keeping them out” and citing the needs of tourists and airport customers to a sunny view on their drive to and from San Jose.

Another bit of hypocritical window-dressing is the 1000 Homes Campaign program (somewhat similar to Santa Cruz’s 180/180 figleaf, which seeks to provide shelter (actually to lessen the financial cost) of a small percentage of the most visible and intractable homeless folks.

Prior “destroy the encampment” programs in other cities at least would make token efforts to provide temporary shelter for the folks they were displacing (usually for a few days).   Authorities apparently feel more shameless these days in the absence of strong protests.

Perhaps CHAM (The San Jose Community Homeless Alliance Ministry) or the Occupy San Jose movement will do  some documenting of this massive attack on poor people.

San Jose plans cleanup of homeless encampment that’s grown to 100 residents

By Carol Rosen, Correspondent
Posted:   02/28/2013 08:01:47 PM PST
Updated:   02/28/2013 08:01:47 PM PST
A homeless encampment on Spring Street near the Mineta San Jose airport has been targeted for a full cleanup during the week of March 4. Cleanup of the site will include removing trash and debris, eliminating all structures and storing all property and belongings for 90 days.

The site has become an eyesore, according to city officials, who report that the camp started with a few tents and tarps but grew to more than 100 residents in about a month. In early January, Caltrans cleaned up a camp on the Guadalupe River north of Coleman Avenue. The people living there joined what at the time was a small homeless camp on Spring Street’s undeveloped parkland, adding tents and tarps, fire pits and other semi-permanent structures.

One of those structures was built on a plastic-covered mattress to keep cold and wet out of the tent, according to a local news program. As more homeless moved in, groups that reach out to the homeless brought them food, clothing and other items to make those living there as comfortable as possible.

The city is concerned not only for the welfare of those living in the encampment, but also because it is visible from passing cars, and by business people and tourists flying into Mineta San Jose airport.

The city in mid-February began notifying the camp’s residents that a cleanup would take place within 30 days.

The city’s housing department, in conjunction with Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services,

the police department and environmental services are involved in the cleanup. At the beginning of the week the city will issue a warning, followed 72 hours later by the cleanup, which is estimated will take one or two days. The four departments also will coordinate with outside contractors including the Conservation Corps for trash and debris removal, Santa Clara County household hazardous waste and Tucker Construction to remove the structures.Typically, once a camp has been cleaned up, the homeless drift back, sometimes within hours. This time the housing department plans to keep them out.

“There are a number of possible deterrent options that we’re evaluating at this time,” Ray Branson, homeless encampment project manager, said in an interview.

The police are committed to respond to the site on an as-needed basis, but other options include hiring a security company or using the city’s park rangers to patrol.

While numbers from the 2013 homeless census, taken in January, are not yet available, the census two years ago estimated about 18,000 live on the streets or in encampments, according to Branson. This continual challenge to the San Jose community has resulted in a long-term plan to slowly but eventually get people off the streets.

San Jose’s 1,000 Homes Campaign is working to get the 1,000 most vulnerable homeless into permanent homes. Homeless people will be interviewed as to the length of time they’ve been on the streets, their age, physical illnesses or disabilities and mental health. Those determined to be most vulnerable will be moved into homes and given a case manager to follow their progress.

The city is finding help for the program with Destination Home and local nonprofit groups. “We won’t have an answer that will end homelessness in a month or a year, but in the long run we believe our work will yield positive results,” Branson said.

An encampment in San Jose Council District 9 on the Guadalupe River is on the priority list for the program, according to Branson. While the first step will be Spring Street, other areas will follow. As the camps are cleaned up, deterrents, such as access barriers, fences and an on-site security presence, will be used to keep the homeless out.

“We’re not just picking up trash and letting [the people who were living here] come back; we’re hoping to utilize barriers to keep them out. The goal of our program is to have a long-term impact for the community,” Branson said.
At the same time, the project is working to create housing units so the homeless won’t have to camp out. Options include looking at different methods of developing units, ordinance modifications for existing units, master leasing and developing housing and policy methods to add housing units to the community, Branson added.

“The key issue is for the city to make positive progress. This is a complex problem and there’s no question this is a tragedy that hits everyone.”

Talk Back at Looney Bigotry Showcased as Angry “Activism”

Posted on by
A drumbeat of right-wing vitriol is now being lionized in the media.  Ken “Skin-Dog” Collins has his guts in the right place but his head in a tv show starring citizen cops and homeless villains.

My reaction to the Santa Cruz Weekly article below:

”

Cleaning up trash is one thing, talking trash and treating people like trash is another.




Recognizing politicians ducking issues and holding them to account is one thing, pressing a


violent senseless Drug War is another.



Calling for the resignation of powerful top-salary institutional bureaucrats like Martin Bernal is



one thing, calling for a search-and-destroy policy against homeless people destroying



homeless services and bulldozing homeless camps–is another.



Step back and consider who the real culprits are as the war, surveillance, and bankster


economy crushes us all.

Santa Cruz’s Angriest Man

Big-wave surfer Ken Collins has become a public-safety activist and controversial figure

Ken Collins, a Santa Cruz big-wave surfer turned controversial activist, talks to an officer while cleaning up at Harvey West.

Ken Collins has been talking nonstop for fifteen minutes. His voice is getting hoarse, and the cold he fought off a day earlier sounds like it’s coming back. “This is a small surf city with big city problems. It should never have gotten this bad,” he says, sitting at a picnic table about thirty yards from the Harvey West Park woods where he played hide-and-seek as a kid. These days, Collins wouldn’t let his children on the playground.
Collins has with him an empty plastic milk carton of cigarette butts and used syringes he found on the ground. When he goes to a city council meeting, he brings the same carton with him, and shakes it like a rattle in between public commenters.
Collins, better known as “Skindog” to the extreme sports world, is one of the world’s premiere big-wave surfers. He competed in the Mavericks Surf Competition last month—and from the looks of it, probably hasn’t smiled since. Collins took up this local cause after a long Tuesday walk in November when he and about 20 others found a bunch of trash on the railroad tracks and stormed into the city council chambers to give the politicians an earful.
Collins isn’t the only person angry about used needles and homeless addicts around Pogonip City Park, the San Lorenzo River and Cowell Beach, which ranked as the worst beach in California last year. But he might be the most

“Santa Cruz is a supermodel with AIDS,” he says. “It’s this beautiful place that’s completely diseased.”
Collins calls the Homeless Services Center a “crack house.” (HSC director Monica Martinez says the shelters have a no-drug policy.) He says the city manager should be fired for failing to address Santa Cruz’s public safety, and accuses city councilmembers of not doing their jobs, even though two of them began their first terms less than two months ago. Collins is a little short on patience.
Volunteers Craig Lambert and Gary Young are working nearby in the Harvey West’s baseball field to build a batting cage. Last season, the two men, both of them fathers, showed up early before little league games to clean trash off the field. They say someone has to do what Collins is doing.
“When I was a kid,” Young says, “we’d play outside until we got hungry and come home for dinner. You can’t let your kids play out until dark anymore. You have to practically drive them everywhere.”
It’s tough to deny that Collins, regardless of what anyone thinks of what he spouts, embodies the frustration that erupted after fellow surfer Dylan Greiner made a YouTube video in November about three tons of trash in the caves near Cowell Beach.
Collins says he’s not just harping on problems, but also has solutions. He suggests the city build public restrooms with surveillance cameras out front, while also hiring a ten-member group to pick up trash and a four-member team of police officers with all-terrain vehicles and horses to “harass” homeless people and chase drug dealers out of town. The city is looking at healthy reserves for the first time in years, and Santa Cruz might hire new cops, but plans like Collins’ would be no small expense for a city.
“There are good homeless people,” Collins says. “I have compassion for the homeless people that are down on their luck and need help, and they’re seeking help. But there are junkies who use the homeless population to hide themselves and camouflage themselves to do their dirty seedy work.”
There’s no evidence that Santa Cruz’s recent high-profile crimes—two shootings, a grocery-store robbery, and a rape at UCSC—were committed by homeless people. But Santa Cruz Police Captain Steve Clark says a “playful attitude” about drug use has plagued Santa Cruz for years, and leads to more crime.
At a recent city council meeting, councilmember Don Lane cautioned against dividing homeless people into different camps.
“Those are all people who are homeless, and they may have different needs, and the community may want to deal with them differently, but we do need to deal with them,” Lane said at the Feb. 12 meeting. “The fact that someone’s homeless and a drug addict does not make them a non-human being in our community. And we need to deal with those folks in a constructive way, too.”
“Skindog” is not backing down. “My approach has been very aggressive. I’m very aggressive,” he says. “I don’t pussyfoot around this. I don’t tread lightly trying to be polite, because that’s not going to work.”

RESPOND TO THIS MISPLACED AGGRESSION WITH YOUR OWN COMMENT AT

Responding to Councilmember Posner on Today’s Council Meeting

Posted on by
To: Rnorse3@hotmail.com
Subject: UCSC Expansion, Cars on the Beach, Needle Exchange, & Public Safety
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:08:57 -0800
From: micahposner@cruzio.com

On the agenda: UCSC Expansion, Cars on the Beach, Needle Exchange, & Public Safety
Dear Constituents,
City Council continues to be a fascinating learning experience for me and each agenda item is merely a window into a complex intersection of institutional efficiencies and community priorities.

Cars on the Beach
This week, item number 18 of the 3PM session is a proposal from staff to amend the city’s ordinance governing automobile use on the city’s parks and beaches. The proposal would legalize the expansion of the use of automobiles beyond emergency and maintenance vehicles to “any vehicle under contract with the city”. Those of us who walk and ride the levee path and beaches have noticed a significant increase of automobile traffic in these “car free” places, much of which is comprised of private First Alarm Security Guards patrolling from within their trucks. Now folks have the opportunity to comment on whether or not this is appropriate. If you do or do not want First Alarm and other folks trucking around the parks and beaches, please send the city council an email before Tuesday at 9:00 AM to citycouncil@cityofsantacruz .com or show up at the meeting at 809 Center Street. Number 18 will be heard as early as 3:30PM.
UCSC Expansion
Perhaps the most fascinating thing to be discussed on Tuesday will occur in closed session but the public is still welcome to weigh in on it. At 1:30 PM, on Tuesday, the council will talk about it’s ongoing case with the Habitat and Watershed Caretakers. According to the Santa Cruz Sentinel, this is in regard to the fact that a citizen’s group (Habitat and Watershed Caretakers) recently successfully won a lawsuit against the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that the City filed on behalf of the University to expand city water and sewage ‘sphere of influence’ into the upper campus of UCSC. Should the city continue to spend money and staff time to attempt to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court? Should we redo the EIR to include the alternative that UCSC could expand into upper campus without increasing its overall water use? Or drop the whole thing and risk undermining the part of the settlement agreement with the city requiring the University to house at least 2/3 of their students?
Needle Exchange
What isn’t directly on the agenda is the atmosphere of fear around public safety in our city, fueled by Take Back Santa Cruz. At the last City Council meeting on Feb 12th, the council took action on a series of public safety recommendations, including a conversation on our local needle exchange program, which is run by volunteers. Everyone agrees that this program could use more oversight and support from the county health department, but some people seemed to blame the program itself for the scary proliferation of used needles around town, and were trying to insure that the needle exchange lose its ability to operate in the city.  After a week of intense study, I learned that needle exchanges are, in fact, our best chance of properly disposing of used needles and that the proliferation of needles is more likely caused by drug stores selling needles for 60 cents each without a prescription and having no obvious place to dispose of the dirty ones. At the end of the day (literally), Cynthia Mathews made a motion for the county health services staff to come up with a needle exchange proposal to include operation within the city which passed unanimously. While the Council still has to approve a location for the exchange and is sure to get opposition in doing so, the motion represented a victory of reason and sound policy over fear based perceptions.
Other Thoughts on Public Safety
While we can all appreciate the energy that folks are putting into public safety right now, it is important that we use our best thinking and best research when trying to improve the situation, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts and proposals on how to do so.
PS: There are many excellent events being organized to promote Public Safety at present. One of them is being organized (in part) by my ex-campaign manger Jacqueline Seydel. Below is the information:

March and rally to counteract the acceptance of rape culture.
Noon on March 8th- International Woman’s Day
Meet at the Quarry Plaza at UCSC for speakers, followed by a march to town.

Please contact me anytime. I work for you.

You are receiving this email because you are a member of Micah for SC City Council. Click here to modify your email subscription options. For other information, please visit our website.


Council member Posner:

Here are a few concerns regarding your e-mail to constituents.

1.  I notice you did not send it to me from the City Council address, yet you are suggesting people respond to that address.  Which do you prefer?  Are e-mails on city business being saved so they can be made accessible to Public Records Act requests?  Will you please request specific information (currently being withheld) on which City Council members are using private accounts to store (and/or delete) correspondence on City Business?

2.  Re: #18 specifically.   Please make a staff request to get information regarding citations, stops, and costs of city-authorized vehicles on the levee in the last two months. How frequently do they patrol?  What specific “public safety hazards” have they found?  Ask for particulars, not general comments about drugs, loitering, camping.   Ask how much property has been confiscated on the levee.  How much thrown away?

3. UCSC expansion:  What are the enforcement provisions for UCSC’s promise to provide 2/3 of the student housing ?  Wasn’t the same promise made several decades ago and then violated without consequence?  What’s your position on the questions you raise?

4. Council’s cave-in in response to Needle Hysteria:  Are you actually suggesting there is any credibility to the Drug War Prohibitionist claim that needle exchange needs “more oversight”? If so, what particular acts or omissions of the last four years require that?   

5.  I renew my request that you ask for police stats around the Barson St. site during needle exchange times for the last three months to indicate (a) whether any reports of needles were found there, (b) whether there was any increase in actual crimes there, and (c) how many needle-stick reports have been made to the SCPD and other agencies in the last 5 years.

6/ Please also ask whether city authorities have a specific needle clean-up program, how often it operates, how much funding it gets, and whether that funding has increased or diminished in the last decade. 

It continues to enrage me that you and other Council members responded to a panic attack by creating a public safety hazard with the shut down of the Barson St. needle exchange.  This was done behind-closed-doors with no public input in a decision you have neither publicly renounced or even criticized.  (If you have done so since in any public statements, please advise me.)

    I believe obtaining the information requested above may be helpful to assess the accuracy of the picture Take Back Santa Cruz, the Clean Team, and their right-wing allies on the Council painted in the last few months.  It may in some small measure ameliorate the damage City Council has done through the City Attorney.

    Thanks for this your constituent letter and for  trying to broaden your public outreach.

Where can the “restore needle exchange in the City” petition can be accessed in hard copy?  I’d suggest you also put out that information to constituents (as well as on-line info) if you are serious about restoring needle exchange in accessible areas and reversing the public health threat the Council has unleashed. 

Robert Norse
(831-423-4833)

Local Civil Liberties Issues

Posted on by
Councilmember Posner:

At the HUFF meeting, members asked you numerous questions.  This is a follow-up to those questions and to my previous e-mails and phone calls as well as your responses.  If you find the number of specific questions daunting–please indicate which of these you will  prioritize.  I believe they are all important and actually only don’t require extensive work on your part.


1  Have any new insulting “Imagine Real Change” meters been set up in the last year?  How much money has actually been generated by these meters since they were put in?   How often were they vandalized and repaired?


2.  What is the response of the City Attorney to your question about whether the SCPD is being advised to respect the White v. City of Sparks decision protecting artists and writers selling their work downtown?  
3.  Please request a staff report on police policies around homeless sweeps–i.e. whether homeless people who they accost  in the middle of the night are given a legal place to go sleep.  Ask for the specific instructions given to beat officers, any written documents or reports around this practice, and how much money and police time is being spent on this.
     Additionally please request a report on property confiscation:  what the policy is, whether survival material found at camps left vacant during the day are stored or destroyed (the latter is what is being reported to me),  how much property is currently in police impound or storage, and how many trucks full of homeless property have been taken to the dump for destruction–by what agency, how frequently, and at what cost?

4.  I’d also like to see a report on the “addresses” of those cited in the downtown core around such ordinances as the Sitting Ban, the Panhandling Ban, and the Performing/Tabling Ban  (where ‘Ban” means severe restriction).  This would go a distance towards indicating whether the chief targets of these laws are homeless or disabled people.   The City, of course, faces legal vulnerability here, which would be a good motivator to halt such practices.

5.  What is the status of your public support for Ammiano’s Homeless Bill of Rights?

6.  Please ask to see the direction given SCPD officers in the downtown core regarding enforcement on MC 5.43.020 (“Move-Along Every Hour if you’re a political tabler, panhandler, artist, or performer”) &  MC 9.50.012 (Sitting Ban).

7..  Are any bikes being delivered to non-profits from the SCPD, either via the Bike Dojo, the Bike Church, or any other mechanism?  The response that this issue is “under discussion”–which has been the City’s line for the last year while poor people via non-profits are being denied bikes is not a helpful one.  Please provide specifics regarding how many bikes have been delivered in the last six months and then passed on as was previously the case at the Bike Church.

Please clarify  when and to whom you have made these information requests and send me a copy in writing of such communications.
Thanks,
Robert Norse

831-423-4833