No Poor in the Parking Garages! (3/16)

“Any person who uses a City of Santa Cruz parking lot or garage for purposes other than motor vehicle or bicycle parking ... or who remains on City of Santa Cruz parking lot or garage premises for longer than ten minutes...shall be guilty of trespassing, which offense shall be punishable as an infraction.”

--proposed new City Council chapter 9.64



Modified version of a speech prepared for City Council 2-28-06
by Robert Norse

NEW LAW, NO DOCUMENTATION
This is a new law, expanding police power and contracting public space, mentioned briefly in January in the Sentinel. In the Downtown Commission [DC], Parking Czar Matt Ferrell, the law’s principal booster, revealed that he had no statistics justifying the need for such a huge reduction of public space. Indeed, the SCPD has refused to release any figures about the number of citations in parking lots and garages.

The law apparently was cooked up by the SCPD, the City Attorney, and Matt Ferrell without any previous public discussion of more community-friendly alternatives such as mediation, conduct codes, community forums, etc.

On January 26th, the DC--to my surprise and to its credit--delayed pssing the law on to City Council, instead, asking Ferrell to get more police info, DC member Sheila Coonerty to look into the law’s constitutionality, and DC member Jim Brown to check in on homeless impact.

LAW FAST-TRACKED
DC members contacted afterwards were surprised to hear that the law was originally fast-tracked onto the “no discusson” Consent Agenda of the full City Council two weeks. The law was deleted from the Council’s 1-10 agenda after e-mail protest that the DC had not even discussed it.

At the February Downtown Task Force meeting--closed to the public--Mayor Mathews and Councilmember Coonerty pressured DC chair Julie Shattuck to schedule an unprecedented special DC meeting on March 16th. The Downtown Commission secretary cannot recall a time in the last five years when DC meetings were held so close together. This would allow the law to be rushed to Council in time for its last meeting in March.

MISSING FACTS
The reason of the law, Ferrell said, was to protect employees concerned about issues of burglary, vandalism, sexual harassment, and camping in parking garages. However, apparently all discussion of this law was verbal.

Two Public Records Act requests, one to the police department, another to city staff, found no written or e-mail communications between employees, department heads, the police, the city attorney, the city attorney, and redevelopment agency gentrification experts.

OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS
Where are the minutes of staff meetings where this strange law was framed and finalized? How was the decision made to remove the equivalent of more than six city blocks from traditional public use?

Assistant City Manager Bernal--after an extensive search beyond the usual 10-day period--found only been ONE e-mail from the public. Peculiar. Particularly since I myself and others sent a series of e-mails to City Council in late December and early January opposing the law (when it was on the 1-10 Council agenda).

Why the plan to bypass public input and scrutiny? Why is making a harsh new law the first response? What specifically are the real problems employees face? What’s the rush? And why is the answer always expanding police arrest powers and contracting public space?

TIME TO EXPAND POLICE POWER?
Our SCPD recently authorized unconstitutional spy operations, lied about the extent of its surveillance last year, cooked up its own “guidelines”, & named the suspect (Deputy Chief Vogel) to be investigator. Do we really want to expand their enforcement responsibilities and arrest powers? City Council has shown no interest in any meaningful police oversight--whether the abuse is tasering, homeless marijuana busts, harassment of the Blue Lagoon, or selective enforcement downtown.

The proposed “10 Minute Loitering Law”--by its very nature --must be selectively enforced. Police won't target tourists waiting for their families, moms changing diapers, dads waiting to pick up their kids, disabled people taking too long--though that is exactly what the law requires. Instead they will force homeless people out into the rain, harass poor people in the vehicles, and “move along” Food Not Bombs at the Wednesday Market.

There have been better solutions proposed at every step of the way--from the 1996 Downtown Santa cruz Public Policy Mediation Project report commissioned by City Council at a cost of $10,000 to the 2000 Homeless Issues Task Force Mediation Proposals, arrived at after nine months of work. Instead City Council's answer has been repeatedly to create more criminal law, increase the power of the police department, and rely on their selective enforcement decisions.


SPEAK UP NOW!
Come to City Council Chambers at 7:45 AM on Thursday March 16 to encourage the Downtown Commission to say NO to a bad law.

Call the Downtown Commission at 420-5184 to register your opposition.

Contact City Council at 420-5020 and tell them to find better solutions.

Watch the city website http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/ the Ten Minute Trespass Law will likely appear on the next (March 28th) City Council agenda.


MORE INFORMATION
Downtown Commission Staff Report, Proposed Law & Other Documents: http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/pw/dc/CurrentAgenda/LotsGaragesRpt.pdf

Previous indymedia discussion on this issue:
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/19303/index.php