Santa Cruz "Spygate" on Free Radio Santa Cruz Thursday & Sunday

The City's largely ineffectual and figleaf "police auditor" Bob Arenson, has served as a $20 G substitute for the voluntary Citizens Police Review Board [CPRB], which the Matthews-Rotkin City Council killed in January of 2003. Arenson was previously attorney for the CPRB, who then ghoul-like, took over a percentage of the money previously paid to keep the CPRB going.

After City Manager-for-Life Dick Wilson rubberstamped SCPD Deputy Police Chief Kevin Vogel's "investigation" of his own surveillance operation of the Last Night-DIY peaceful protest, Aronson wrote a one page letter describing Vogel's 600 pp. report as "incomplete and flawed".

At the Public Safety Committee meeting yesterday I suggested City Council freeze all undercover surveillance of peacerful political groups until City Council works out an appropriate policy, directs the City Manager to discipline the (ir)responsible parties, and hold appropriate public hearings on related police spying issues. Instead Rotkin, as chair of the Public Safety Committee, said they wouldn't discuss the issue until Aronson came back with his "final report", leaving SCPD police boss Howard Skerry's created-last- Thursday "guidelines" in place.

Councilmember Porter asked the audience for suggestions for Arenson and the Public Safety Committee in setting up surveillance guidelines, but then allowed Rotkin to end the meeting, showing the utter hypocrisy of his interest in taking "public input".

Police Chief Skerry's "guidelines" allow undercover surveillance if any "illegal" or violent activity is suspected of a group or any individual member of that group.

One pretext for surveilling the Last Night-DIY was that it was planning to "illegally" have a parade without a permit (which would have cost thousands of bucks). Such a permit is required by the letter of an anti-homeless law cooked up by City Council in 1989, however it has never been enforced.

When thousands reportedly came to the parade, why didn't the police cut short the "illegal" parade? If they were genuinely concerned with the "illegality" of the activity, rather than simply gathering info for future police action, files on political activists, using up grant money from godknowswhere, etc., they had plenty of direct "evidence". Obviously they regard surveillance is business-as-usual. This is done in collusion with the mayor and other city bureaucrats--as documented by Rico Thunder's ACLU- obtained documents and Vogel's own report.

Also unaddressed are the lies from Police Chief Skerry that this kind of surveillance of peaceful political groups is "unique" and a one-time thing, rather than a regular unconstitutional feature of our sunny little town. Porter thunderously defended Skerry on January 24th, then on February 13th tried to dismiss the surveillance as a minor issue. Here's a 600-page report, and yet no one died. Why are we spending all this time, he suggested.

Nor, of course, is anyone being held accountable.

Many give credit to Arenson for pointing to the obvious: that the SCPD's Vogel cannot credibly investigate an operation that he initiated and oversaw. The fact that City Council allowed this farce to go on, shows just how arrogant and complacent they've become--and/or subservient to the SCPD's sense of untouchability.

Now we have chapter two with Rotkin removing the issue both from the Public Safety Committee yesterday and from City Council today. And leaving the scary Skerry "guidelines" in place. Essentially a thumbs up to the cops--saying "do what you want while we investigate more."

Remember Reilly-Porter expansion of the Downtown Ordinances in 2002 expanding the "forbidden zones", creating the 1-hour movealong rule, the unattended property law, the "holding a sign up after dark is illegal" ordinance? This was rushed through City Council, after hearings documented that the MAIN concern coming out in the two public hearings the Reilly-Porter subcommittee had was police harassment not terrorist panhandlers or criminal marijuana vendors.

Coming up soon at a special Downtown Commission hearing prior to a slamdunk at City Council: a new law restricting being in parking lots and parking garages to 10 minutes. No more scraggly homeless people ducking in out of the rain. Old folks better shake a leg or get a ticket.

All this crap comes from an out-of-control police department which finds it much easier to expand its discresionary powers than to go to the community in search of real solutions.

But then, that's our job and our community. Whether we let this situation go on is up to us as well.

The only answers I see at the moment are the traditional ones: An independent tribunal from the community, an active copwatch, lawsuits, and--most important--an active citizenry willing to stand up and witness as well as denounce police harassment downtown and elsewhere.

If you see shit go down, write about it here in detail.

The issue will be discussed on Free Radio Santa Cruz Thursday and Sunday as mentioned above.