Travellers, Transitioning and Homeless Citizens:
City of Santa Cruz' City Attorney Can Now Dismiss Superfluous Criminal Sleep Tickets, Yet Will Do So Only for Listed Homeless Clients for Pet Service Provider Wait-lists
SANTA CRUZ -- The City Council on Tuesday unanimously voted to give homeless people a break if they are on a shelter wait list when they receive a citation for overnight camping.
Current rules allow the city to waive such tickets when the winter shelter at the former National Guard Armory site is full. It doesn't cover times when other year-round shelters are full, but the long-standing practice of the city attorney has been to dismiss citations written when such shelters are full.
Robert Norse, a longtime advocate for the homeless who has sued the city over First Amendment protections, called the change "a minor step forward."
But he and others argued that it does little to reverse a camping ban that criminalizes homelessness and sleeping outside. Critics said the rules also create a burden for homeless to visit the shelter every day to check on the wait list.
"It does no good to say you are on a waiting list because you still have to sleep outside," Norse said.
Norse suggested the council add a requirement that those on a wait list receive a receipt that could be shown to an officer, who would then be prohibited from writing a ticket.
Monica Martinez, director of the Homeless Services Center, said she supported the change because it makes the camping ban "more compassionate."
She said her center could issue some sort of verification that people are on a wait list but cautioned that a person, rather than taking advantage of a bed when it becomes available, could keep the receipt indefinitely. She said it would be too onerous for staff to give the same homeless person a wait-list receipt every day.
The council's decision left details about wait list verification for the city attorney to work out with shelter providers.
Earlier this week, City Manager Martin Bernal acknowledged a key aim of the ordinance change is to determine, "are people actually making an effort" to find shelter. He said the change is not in direct response to PeaceCamp 2010, a protest organized by Norse.
The demonstration against the camping ban began July 4 at the county courthouse lawn but was moved outside City Hall once it was clear that city police had no intention of citing participants on county property.
Since then, police have issued 107 citations, the majority of which are for the ban against camping from 11 p.m. to 8:30 a.m. Officers have also made 21 arrests for ignoring demands to leave the property and an array of other charges.
Linda's Hearth note: I like to write my own headlines so this blog indulges me. the article was originally published 09-14-2010 with this head: Citations waived for homeless on shelter list: Santa Cruz camping ban altered to cover more than winter refuge Honestly, I can't tell which is worse ~ mine ot he paper's? Also I was sad to see the lead give Robert Norse such singular leadership billing, when Ed Frey is the true hero in terms of helping create and contributing to sustain PeaceCamp2010.
Norse's contributions are quite important and indespensable, to be sure. At the same time, we all want to value most those among us who can DAILY carry on. Just think of the hours of devotion involved with the porta-potty's responsibility alone. The demonstrators are so fortunate in this. Back in my day, as it were, we had to carry our own "outflow" bottles.
We are all in this together and we all need to remember to TELL THE REPORTERS what they need to know, and not to expect them to figure out the best questions. Unless they have also lived in bedroll-burb or car-parking-land or share-the-floor-shire for longer than a weekend.
I really appreciate Ocean's wonderful dramatic lessons, hope he's OK wherever he now is? But I digress. Intended to share this: praise and validate whose-ever's doing the daily work ~~ at least daily praise and gratitude.
Tell those reporters we don't have any bedbugs down on the sidewalk!
The morning after this article announced the latest evisceration of the City's potentially deadly sleep-camping ban, the women at Peace Camp 2010 shared hot coffee with night's survivors and the 7am hidden sleepers checking in.
It was almost the first night nobody got awakened or cited for sleeping, camping, covering or laying on the sidewalk. We celebrated by launching a movable cafe co-op. Nine people joined us; campers, supporters, a guest from Westside Santa Cruz came downhill and compared notes and created a caring poster during our check-ins. Attorney Frey came by, passed on the caffeine, as did two others. Everyone washed their own mug, hoping to upgrade cafe coop each time.
Comment from Robert Norse: I've taken the liberty of snatching this story from Linda Lemaster's blog, which has numerous stories, poems, and news items concerning the homeless civil rights struggle in Santa Cruz. It can be accessed at http://www.hearthbylinda.blogspot.com/ .
Lemaster is a long-time homeless activist, supporter of PC2010, recent victim of the police crackdown on PC2010, former chair of the City's Homeless Issues Task Force, former chair of the City Commission for the Prevention of Violence Against Women, and former City Council candidate (whew!).
I've already commented on the inaccuracy of J.M. Brown's story. See "Three Updates on City Council's Latest Camping Ban Cover-Up" below.
The receipt, which Martinez agreed, could easily be given when a person signed up for the shelter waiting list, would become invalid after that person's name reached the head of the list. It was Madrigal who suggested a daily wait-list check in, which Martinez accurately noted would be too onerous for both the homeless person and the shelter. Since the City Attorney is going to check with the HSC anyway to see if the person with the receipt is on the waiting list, the possibility of a "bogus" receipt isn't relevant anyway.
As mentioned in my prior article, creating the illusion of caring by providing waiting lists that go nowhere in the short run, and then punishing people for not signing up, is contemptible.