Fliers Passed out at second LuLu Carpenters Boycott / Protest

Thanks, Tim, for printing this info about merchant/police harassment of the homeless, specifically at Lulu Carpenters.

I encourage folks to download the "I Don't Like Panhandlers" flyer (the backside is headed "Free Coffee for Abusers"). Folks can than do a DIY (do it yourself) protest at a time of their own choosing by giving out flyers on Pacific Avenue, when and where they choose.

It's particularly relevant, of course, in front of Lulu Carpenters.

Those following this issue should remember that a lesson to one merchant is a lesson to all merchants: "abusing poor people is bad business practice; people of conscience will hold you to account for this." A public discussion at the very least, and perhaps less business.

Boycott Bigotry buttons (perhaps with the logo "Proud to be Banned for Life from Lulu Carpenters") should be ready soon.

Manthri Srinath is just one example of a merchant who believes he owns the sidewalk near his business. It was Cynthia Matthews (Of Planned Parenthood League-also located on Pacific Ave) who first suggested the Move-Along Law. Here is how she pitched it. "What if a musician decides to play the same song over and over again all day in front of someone's business?" She then promoted this theoretical possibility (the worst possible scenario for an act allowed under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution)--lacking even any anectdotal evidence that this had ever occurred---and City Council passed it!! Now we have a law that says an event which is site-specific, such as the Boycott of Lulu Carpenters, must move 100 feet away from that business every hour!!

(BTW--- this does NOT prevent a musician from playing the same song over and over again---since it only affects display devices, primarily political tabling)

Note that Manthri Srinath invoked the move-along law---called the police on HUFF activists who were engaged in LEGAL flyering and demonstrating against his business. The protest was because the owner had violated the rights of a terminally-ill homeless man (with a bunny!) sitting 2 full businesses away from his, including making a false citizens arrest of the man, with the compliant help of the SCPD!

Demonstrating in front of Bentens Japanese restaurant makes no sense at all.
But then the law--per Mathews--was not meant to be rational. It was meant to empower merchants
to remove "the wrong kind of people" from the sidewalk near their stores.
And Barisone and the council will spend all the taxpayer dollars they want to, to defend these unconstitutional laws
and merchant powers.

The Move-Along law is unconstitutional and only needs to be challenged in the proper court before it will fall. This Barisone-concocted law designed for merchants, such as Srinath, so they can control who is using their 1st amendment rights to free speech on the sidewalk near their stores. Just as John Maurer recently won in federal court against THe City of Santa Cruz for the unconstitutional aspects of the panhandling ordinance costing the city beaucoups bucks, this law needs to go as well.

Let's get rid of the law BEFORE an expensive lawsuit nullifies it.