Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
"Critical Mass" The City Council - Demand They Reinstate The Youth Bicycle Program
Import event into your personal calendar
Date:
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Time:
2:00 PM
-
5:00 PM
Event Type:
Critical Mass
Organizer/Author:
RazerRay (for Micah Posner))
Location Details:
Time. as always, Approximate. Santa Cruz City Council Meeting, City Hall
Since Santa Cruz seems unable to develop decent jobs & affordable housing for It's young people the LEAST they can do is give abandoned bicycles to them so they can make it to those three low-wage jobs they need to make the rent.
"At their next meeting the Santa Cruz City Council whether or not to reinstate the long-standing program of distributing unclaimed bicycles to youths in need.
For more than 15 years these bicycles were given to low-income youths who otherwise would have no access to a bike. In 2012, however, the program was weakened, and then in 2013 distribution stopped entirely.
Currently the bikes are being auctioned off for the first time since 1996.
Please let the council members know you support this valuable program and would like to see it reinstated.
You can tell them at the meeting or email them at citycouncil@cityofsantacruz.com "
For more information:
http://www.peoplepowersc.org
Added to the calendar on Thu, Jan 23, 2014 9:19AM
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
City Council staff has put forward a series of three proposals weighted against any distribution program other than to a preselected group--the Teen Center. None of the three proposes restoration of the Bike Distribution program to the Bike Church--abruptly ended by the SCPD in 2012 for unexplained reasons, transferred to a business (the Bike Dojo) that was involved with Mayor Briant's spouse and that sold some of the bikes for profit--violating the law.
Repeated attempts to restore the program--first through Mayor Lane, then through Mayor Bryant have failed. Nor will the staff provide the paper trail of why city council staff, and SCPD cut the bikes off in the first place and has stonewalled any restoration of the program.
The three proposals do not include directly restoring the bikes to the Bike Church, much less exposing who in the SCPD and City Staff was responsible for this backroom bikenapping. Instead the proposals are to (1) "select a qualified distributor through a fair and open process" with additional requirements such as licensing of all donated bikes--a proposal has the lengthiest objections by the staff and which it does not recommend; (2) "on-line auctioning through Property Room.com--apparently the police department's current policy--set up as a kind of straw man apparently to encourage the Council to accept the third proposal; (3) auctioning surplus biicycles through Property Room and giving usable ones to the Teen Center.
Collins, Shull,, and Bernal--apparently the real movers, shakers, and bike blockaders in the City are giving the thumbs up to the last proposal--which doesn't even consider restoring the bikes to the previous effective distributor (the Bike Church), nor even a "fair and open process" to request proposals--but simply dictates that they be sent to the Teen Center.
This is clearly a shaft in the ass of the Bike Church as well as those demanding the SCPD and City Council come clean about the machinations going on for the last two years on this issue.
From it's failure to demand open process and mount public demonstrations (say a bike distribution at the police station), it may be that the Bike Church is either too timid to stand up to these abuses, or simply thinks it's too much trouble and is finding other ways to help youth and low-income people. However they do no service in allowing this travesty to go on month after month with no strong exposure and counteraction.
Letting the SCPD and staff--not to mention the City Council to stonewall the bike distribution for two years and punish the Bike Church for providing them to youth and needy locals is another example of the perils of trusting Lane and Cosner and bowing to the power of the Robinson majority.
To catch the slimy details of the latest round of ripoffery, see the staff report at http://sire.cityofsantacruz.com/sirepub/cache/2/t3rrbd55s4ork1u23mmyvy45/384401701262014111704388.PDF .
Repeated attempts to restore the program--first through Mayor Lane, then through Mayor Bryant have failed. Nor will the staff provide the paper trail of why city council staff, and SCPD cut the bikes off in the first place and has stonewalled any restoration of the program.
The three proposals do not include directly restoring the bikes to the Bike Church, much less exposing who in the SCPD and City Staff was responsible for this backroom bikenapping. Instead the proposals are to (1) "select a qualified distributor through a fair and open process" with additional requirements such as licensing of all donated bikes--a proposal has the lengthiest objections by the staff and which it does not recommend; (2) "on-line auctioning through Property Room.com--apparently the police department's current policy--set up as a kind of straw man apparently to encourage the Council to accept the third proposal; (3) auctioning surplus biicycles through Property Room and giving usable ones to the Teen Center.
Collins, Shull,, and Bernal--apparently the real movers, shakers, and bike blockaders in the City are giving the thumbs up to the last proposal--which doesn't even consider restoring the bikes to the previous effective distributor (the Bike Church), nor even a "fair and open process" to request proposals--but simply dictates that they be sent to the Teen Center.
This is clearly a shaft in the ass of the Bike Church as well as those demanding the SCPD and City Council come clean about the machinations going on for the last two years on this issue.
From it's failure to demand open process and mount public demonstrations (say a bike distribution at the police station), it may be that the Bike Church is either too timid to stand up to these abuses, or simply thinks it's too much trouble and is finding other ways to help youth and low-income people. However they do no service in allowing this travesty to go on month after month with no strong exposure and counteraction.
Letting the SCPD and staff--not to mention the City Council to stonewall the bike distribution for two years and punish the Bike Church for providing them to youth and needy locals is another example of the perils of trusting Lane and Cosner and bowing to the power of the Robinson majority.
To catch the slimy details of the latest round of ripoffery, see the staff report at http://sire.cityofsantacruz.com/sirepub/cache/2/t3rrbd55s4ork1u23mmyvy45/384401701262014111704388.PDF .
In his latest e-mail to constituents, Councilmember Posner wrote:
Abandoned Bicycles
On Tuesday, sometime between 3PM and 4PM, the Council will consider what to do with abandoned bicycles. It seems as though the staff preference is to donate a few bikes to the Teen Center and auction off the rest for profit. Given the extremely low dollar amount the city would receive for many hundreds of bicycles, why would the city rather auction them off to private companies than support a non-profit helping people use them for transportation? I would be very disappointed if the staff decides to do this.
This brings me to an obvious question: why were the bicycles pulled, without notice, from the Bicycle Church - a non-profit run mostly by volunteers that gives away bicycles to youth and the poor? After two years of inquiry I still have not been given a satisfactory answer.
Donations to the Teen Center is something I thoroughly support, however it does not address the question of why we would auction off anything that could be turned into a significant resource for the community.
At the Bike Church, all used bikes are free for our youth. Somewhere in the city of Santa Cruz there is a person in need of a bike to get to work or school. Can’t we find a way to get all of these abandoned bicycles into the hands of those who need them?
The staff report is on cityofsantacruz.com As always, to email Councilmembers use citycouncil [at] cityofsantacruz.com.
Abandoned Bicycles
On Tuesday, sometime between 3PM and 4PM, the Council will consider what to do with abandoned bicycles. It seems as though the staff preference is to donate a few bikes to the Teen Center and auction off the rest for profit. Given the extremely low dollar amount the city would receive for many hundreds of bicycles, why would the city rather auction them off to private companies than support a non-profit helping people use them for transportation? I would be very disappointed if the staff decides to do this.
This brings me to an obvious question: why were the bicycles pulled, without notice, from the Bicycle Church - a non-profit run mostly by volunteers that gives away bicycles to youth and the poor? After two years of inquiry I still have not been given a satisfactory answer.
Donations to the Teen Center is something I thoroughly support, however it does not address the question of why we would auction off anything that could be turned into a significant resource for the community.
At the Bike Church, all used bikes are free for our youth. Somewhere in the city of Santa Cruz there is a person in need of a bike to get to work or school. Can’t we find a way to get all of these abandoned bicycles into the hands of those who need them?
The staff report is on cityofsantacruz.com As always, to email Councilmembers use citycouncil [at] cityofsantacruz.com.
Thanks for the long-form history and serial postings... But your point... You DO have one?
The redirection of abandoned bikes from city-auction revenue generation and perhaps private businesses that bod on them/rebuild/resell for profit to non-profit youth programs... Whether OR not "Bike Church-bound" is WHY the call to "Critical Mass" The City Council - Demand They Reinstate The Youth Bicycle Program".
And for everyone's information ALL the bikes have NEVER gone solely to the Bike Church as Robert attempts to make it appear. Honestly, I think Santa Cruz citizens who care about the kids who will get the bikes GIVES A FLYING which non-profit, or group of them does it.
As long as it gets done.
The redirection of abandoned bikes from city-auction revenue generation and perhaps private businesses that bod on them/rebuild/resell for profit to non-profit youth programs... Whether OR not "Bike Church-bound" is WHY the call to "Critical Mass" The City Council - Demand They Reinstate The Youth Bicycle Program".
And for everyone's information ALL the bikes have NEVER gone solely to the Bike Church as Robert attempts to make it appear. Honestly, I think Santa Cruz citizens who care about the kids who will get the bikes GIVES A FLYING which non-profit, or group of them does it.
As long as it gets done.
For more information:
http://razedbywolves.blogspot.com/2010/01/...
The bike distribution has been stalled for two years by the SCPD and its staff allies.
There was testimony that the Teen Center would be less effective than the Bike Church.
In addition bikes will be auctioned off rather than used for parts to help youth via the Bike Church.
But the underlying reality is that this seems to be an SCPD-motivated political decision which has been sedulously supported and its workings concealed for two years. Secret government with a secret political agenda--one that disadvantages groups whom the SCPD dislikes. Government by uniformed gunmen behind closed doors is not a good thing, however well-intended (and there's no indication this was well-intended).
And activists hoping to kiss-and-make up instead of strong exposure and protest simply enable this whole corrupt process and encourage further such capers.
All of these considerations are "the point".
There was testimony that the Teen Center would be less effective than the Bike Church.
In addition bikes will be auctioned off rather than used for parts to help youth via the Bike Church.
But the underlying reality is that this seems to be an SCPD-motivated political decision which has been sedulously supported and its workings concealed for two years. Secret government with a secret political agenda--one that disadvantages groups whom the SCPD dislikes. Government by uniformed gunmen behind closed doors is not a good thing, however well-intended (and there's no indication this was well-intended).
And activists hoping to kiss-and-make up instead of strong exposure and protest simply enable this whole corrupt process and encourage further such capers.
All of these considerations are "the point".
"its workings concealed for two years. Secret government with a secret political agenda"
If it was secret you wouldn't have known about it.
As far as testimony as to which non-profit got the bikes, I've already stated that a long as the YOUTH of the town got them I DID NOT CARE WHO did the distribution.
Why do YOU care about that issue more than the kids?
If it was secret you wouldn't have known about it.
As far as testimony as to which non-profit got the bikes, I've already stated that a long as the YOUTH of the town got them I DID NOT CARE WHO did the distribution.
Why do YOU care about that issue more than the kids?
The SCPD and City Staff have stonewalled Public Records Act requests, though we got an inkling of the police story from Scott Collins (with no specifics, questions, or discussion) at Council as the Robinson majority passed their pre-ordained Teen Center/auctioning option, ignoring the promised call for proposals, and open process.
With all the stonewalling in the last two years, we have the refusal of the staff or Council to respond, even to Councilmember's questions of why--why the distribution was stopped, why it was passed on to the Bike Dojo (a for profit provider) with no public process, who stopped the city manager's agreement in the summer of 2013 to have an open process... So, yes, the reasons, the documentation, the facts about this process remain....secret.
How many kids will get bikes? Problem is that that Teen Center, according to a Bike Church worker--who has a friendly relationship with them---says they've never been able to distribute bikes in the numbers at the Bike Church has--so kids will be impacted significantly. Additionally, many will be auctioned off instead of being provided as parts to the Bike Church. While the Church didn't distribute the SCPD leftover bikes to older homeless people (only to youth as required by law), they did and do have numerous work-credit services that are used by homeless people--according, again, to the Bike Church.
It's also widely speculated (though not proven) that this was a political decision. Having such decisions in the hands of the police, and--worse--having no check from either staff or city counci...or--still worse--activists in the community...is bad.
I think activists critically examining the situation need to raise these questions--not attack activists who do.
I mention this because I think a lot of Ray's analysis of the broader issues is right on. But not here.
With all the stonewalling in the last two years, we have the refusal of the staff or Council to respond, even to Councilmember's questions of why--why the distribution was stopped, why it was passed on to the Bike Dojo (a for profit provider) with no public process, who stopped the city manager's agreement in the summer of 2013 to have an open process... So, yes, the reasons, the documentation, the facts about this process remain....secret.
How many kids will get bikes? Problem is that that Teen Center, according to a Bike Church worker--who has a friendly relationship with them---says they've never been able to distribute bikes in the numbers at the Bike Church has--so kids will be impacted significantly. Additionally, many will be auctioned off instead of being provided as parts to the Bike Church. While the Church didn't distribute the SCPD leftover bikes to older homeless people (only to youth as required by law), they did and do have numerous work-credit services that are used by homeless people--according, again, to the Bike Church.
It's also widely speculated (though not proven) that this was a political decision. Having such decisions in the hands of the police, and--worse--having no check from either staff or city counci...or--still worse--activists in the community...is bad.
I think activists critically examining the situation need to raise these questions--not attack activists who do.
I mention this because I think a lot of Ray's analysis of the broader issues is right on. But not here.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network