Santa Cruz More Reactionary Than L.A. Towards Homeless?

Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom
309 Cedar St. PMB 14B
Santa Cruz, Ca. 95060
http://www.huffsantacruz.org
(831)423-HUFF
or 479-9291

to: Vice-Mayor Ryan Coonerty
re: continued enforcement of MC 6.36 in a shelter emergency

November 5, 2006

Dear Vice-Mayor Ryan Coonerty,

The City of Santa Cruz this winter will have emergency drop-in shelter for less than 160 of its 1500 - 2000 homeless residents. MC 6.36 makes it illegal to get caught asleep on any public property or even in your own legally parked vehicle between 11PM and 8:30AM. To cover up with bedding during this time, or to set up a protective tent against the rain---EVEN IF THERE IS NO SHELTER AVAILABLE-- are also prohibited.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in April that the enforcement of a Los Angeles law banning sleep at night violated the Constitutional provision against cruel and unusual punishment. Los Angeles has responded by suspending night-time ticketing of the homeless population in skid row. The San Diego City Attorney faced with a similar lawsuit, has asked the police not to cite homeless people at night. Both City Attorneys were motivated by simple financial concerns that their cities are financially vulnerable given the federal court's decision.

HUFF is seeking a definitive statement from the City Attorney of Santa Cruz regarding enforcement of MC 6.36 at night given the Federal court ruling. Is Santa Cruz going to continue to cite homeless people for the act of sleeping, staying warm with a blanket, or sheltering themselves from the rain at night in violation of the court order?

Or is it the City's position, that since Santa Cruz law allows sleeping during the day, it is constitutional to ban sleeping at night? Does forbidding night-time sleeping or staying warm with a blanket at night constitute cruel and unusual punishment?

Even existing shelter cannot be used by many homeless people.

For example, Craig Canada, a homeless man in Santa Cruz, attempted to use the facilities at the National Guard Armory only to be turned away because he is a medical marijuana patient. He was then cited for sleeping out of doors. There are others as well, who HUFF is working with, who are considering their options of filing suit against the City of Santa Cruz. We hope this is not necessary.

Please contact City Attorney John Barisone and determine what the official policy is, given the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, regarding citations at night in a situation where inadequate shelter exists for sleeping, keeping warm, or keeping dry.

HUFF has a standing position that these ordinances are cruel, costly, counter-productive and should be suspended or abolished. The City of Santa Cruz' Homeless Issues Task Force came to a similar conclusion in 2000 (but was ignored by the City Council). What is different now, is the courts appear to be on our side.

I look forward to hearing from you.


Sincerely,

Becky Johnson of HUFF
Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom