Downtown Merchants, Councilmember Coonerty Will Be At Ten Minute Law Meeting

DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION MEETING

Human Rights Organization activist Bob Patton and I spoke to the group of merchants, urging them to deep-six this bad law.

There was some spirited debate in the meeting, chaired by Downtown Commissioner and Atlantis Fantasyworld owner Joe Ferrara.

Ferrara gave a speech beginning "Fellow Anarchists" at the preview showing of the anti-fascist movie "V is for Vendetta" and told me he wouldn't vote for a law that would be selectively enforced. Yet at this meeting he not merely did so, but seemed to steer others into doing so.

COONERTY SPEAKS
Councilmember Ryan Coonerty--one of the main movers of this law--gave the same pitch to the Downtown Association that he gave to the Downtown Commission last week. He described himself as a civil liberties instructor and a lawyer. He reassured everyone there were no civil liberties problems with the ordinance.

In so doing, Coonerty joins the ACLUers-for-More- Police-Power led by former Mayor Rotkin, who is on the Board of Directors of the local ACLU), and Sheila Coonerty, Ryan's aunt, who did chair the Downtown Commission, and co-chairs the ACLU. I find this bizarre, disturbing, hypocritical, but not really surprising.

MERCHANT DOUBTS DISMISSED
A number of merchants asked again if existing laws didn't cover problems in the Parking Lots and Garages. They asked why the issue was being rushed. They asked where the documentation was that clarified the "criminal problem" and how this would solve it. Ferrara explained that all would be explained if folks came to the Downtown Commission's second special meeting on Thursday.

Two special meetings of the Downtown Commission within one week devoted to one subject alone shows you how determined Coonerty, Mayor Cynthia Mathews, Parking Authority Chief Farrell, the SCPD, and City Attorney Barisone are to push through this law fast.

In fact, Farrell acknowledged there will be no substantive change in the law come Thursday. There isn't likely to be any additional documentation either.

KEY DOCUMENTATION STILL LIKELY TO BE MISSING
So the key documentation of the written record of actual problems in the Parking structures, copies of citations issued, and the broader picture of crime elsewhere in the city for comparison will still be missing.

In what felt to me like a steered vote, a straw poll of the Board
was taken finding support for the ordinance 7-3 or thereabouts. They made a decision to delay a final vote for two days until the next meeting (at 10:30 AM Thursday morning or whenever the Downtown Commission meeting ended--whichever was soonest).

This seemed to run over the concerns by a number of merchants that the whole process was rushed and the law unnecessary as well as consuming too much time.

There also seemed to be a focus on defending or attacking the law instead of considering alternatives.

CRITICAL SPEAKERS WANTED
Since merchants will be at the Thursday meeting probably wanting to speak, I encourage CRITICS OF THIS LAW to reappear and bring friends to speak further, particularly if you have new issues to raise.

Councilmember Coonerty suggested the law would probably NOT be on the Council's 3-28 agenda, but later told me that it depended on what Mayor Mathews decided to do.

The agenda should be out on Thursday night--probably in the main library. I will try to announce it on my Thursday evening Free Radio show at 101.1 FM 6-8 PM.


SUBSEQUENT COONERTY MEETING

I later met with Coonerty to get some more information. He said he might agree to extend the 10 minutes to 20 minutes, and add a "warning" provision. But he seemed rather tightly committed to a new law that fundamentally removes 8 blocks of city space ANY use other than parking.

He didn't see this as a fundamental change in how parking lots and garages are actually used in Santa Cruz. I found it really hard to understand how he couldn't see this would be a basic change in how people have used these public spaces, as well as another dark shadow of police enforcement for not just the homeless but the whole community.

One of his concerns was bicycle disassembly, which he thought might involve stolen bicycles. When he called the police, they wouldn't respond because it "wasn't illegal" to disassemble a bike. I suggested that he might limit the ordinance to car repair and bike disassembly, but he rejected that.

GROUPS "TAKING OVER" PUBLIC SPACE
Another Coonerty concern was the apprehension he found constituents had going downtown faced with groups of people "taking over" parts of public space. He didn't feel there was any "traditional" Santa Cruz use of parking lots and garages except for parking. So he felt that making that explicit and legally enforceable was no problem.

This has already been the justification for installing change-making machines, removing benches, planting flowers along fences, putting spikes on cement boxes, making planters unsittable, and setting up private leased areas like that in front of New Leaf Market. I guess it's only the merchants that will be allowed to "take over" spaces.

I pointed out that Santa Cruz was not Santa Barbara (the only other city that has such a law that we've heard of) and that traditionally free association in public spaces is a high priority and community value. He didn't find this persuasive, saying there were parks and sidewalks that could be used "as public forums".

I replied that after dark such use was highly limited, and that spaces were continuously being contracted what with "gentrification creep". He didn't seem to regard it as a concern.

ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS
I suggested Coonerty consider proposals by Commission and CPVAW members for increased lighting, perhaps monitors in two of the four parking garages that don't have them, increased funding for Parking Attendants, signage urging the community to be more watchful and use cell phones (sorry, Marilyn).

He seemed rather focused on the Ten Minute law, claiming it had first appeared in November and was still waiting for consideration now in March. He didn't seem terribly concerned that four months later, there was still no clear documentation of the "criminal problem" the law is supposed to address.

I feel this conscious casual neglect to provide statistics shows the arrogance of the SCPD and/or Parking Authority that's pushing this law. They are so confidant of their inside track, they don't need to present any hard evidence--similar to how they pushed through the Downtown Ordinances.

It's in the same category as the SCPD appointing Deputy-Chief Vogel to investigate himself, an outrageous decision and one that wouldn't pass the "straight-face" test. They must feel no one's watching, no one cares, or no one will be able to do anything. Since the SCPD is asking and the Mathews-Rotkin Council is in power, why bother with documentation if you've got the votes?

MORE PROBLEMS AT BOOKSTORE THAN IN PARKING LOTS
Interestingly enough, Coonerty admitted there were seven times as many "problems" in the Bookshop Santa Cruz per month where he works in terms of complaints of sexual harassment, theft, vandalism, etc. as he got from the parking lot area by employees, customers, and members of the public. I didn't suggest we institute a Ten Minute rule on the sidewalk near the store or near bars, but perhaps I should have.

SATIRICAL FLYER
At the DA meeting, Bob distributed a satirical flyer--the text of which I recreate below. In the final form, it actually looks like an official city flyer.

I think it would be good to distribute the flyer to tourists coming in and out of parking garages and/or businesses. Check it out.

Here's the rough text of the flyer, but hopefully Bob will be able to post it in downloadable form:



PARK SAFELY IN SANTA CRUZ !

Santa Cruz has an strict parking fine policy.
It is one of the few cities that requires feeding a parking meter as late as 8 in the evening, even Sundays.

A new law soon to pass City Council will make it illegal to walk across a parking lot or enter a parking lot garage unless you are parking a vehicle (car or bicycle).

You may enter a parking lot or garage if you have parked or are parking, provided you exit the parking lot within 10 minutes.

The proposed law current reads:

“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

Cost for violating this law: $100-$1000 per citation.

Violation of MC 9.64 is more serious than a parking ticket.
It is a criminal infraction, but is not as serious as a misdemeanor.
The law will probably go into effect in early May.

There are free parking areas across the river to the East.
A small walk may be required.

If you park, please assist disabled, elderly, and younger family members to enter and exit the lots and garages swiftly.

Please make sure your vehicle is empty of all passengers.
No one is permitted to remain with the vehicle.

Please report anyone without a bike or vehicle to the police.
Help exclude homeless vagrants using garages to avoid the rain.

Save Yourself a Fine and a Trip to Court.
Park Wisely. Shop Safely. Help Your Local Police.

Flier by HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) 831-423-4833 309 Cedar #14B Santa Cruz, http://www.huffsantacruz.org 3-20-06