Monday, April 29, 2013

"Visible Sleepers" action for Human Rights in Santa Cruz

Defend those without homes [link] ! Santa Cruz attacking houseless people [link]! Also see how Santa Cruz attacks "Food Not Bombs" and other Human Rights advocates [link], and Human Rights abuse in itty-bitty Santa Cruz [link]!!

Robert Norse Notes: In Santa Cruz, a small protest sleep-out by the Visible Sleepers in front of the Post Office which went on for four nights and seemed to establish that getting documentation that you were on shelter waiting lists (at the Homeless Lack of Services Center) deterred police ticketing under the Sleeping Ban. Others are working for a long-term solution with a Sanctuary Camp Ground.
2013-04-29 " (Visible Sleepers) Sleep and Resistance in Downtown Santa Cruz"
by Alex Darocy []:
On April 17 a group of homeless community members in Santa Cruz initiated a high visibility sleep-protest, which was held downtown at the main branch of the post office. Sleepers subsequently occupied several locations outside of the front of the building for four days, with many individuals continuing to sleep there in protest after being cited for violating the sleeping ban or for obstructing the sidewalk. Some of those cited under Santa Cruz's municipal code 6.36.010, the ban on sleep in public places, say they were on the Homeless Services Center wait list for shelter spaces at the time they were cited. The protest was organized in support of decriminalizing sleep, and individuals primarily participated in the protest because they needed a safe place for the night. "We are just looking for a safe place to sleep, and we are really trying to get the sleeping ban lifted," a homeless participant named Zack said. Yoyo, another homeless participant added, "you can't sleep shouldn't be illegal to sleep."
One individual at the protest felt that section 8 of the Homeless Bill of Rights (AB 5), which is currently making its way through the California State Legislature, described what motivated his participation. Section 8 asserts that homeless people have the right, "not to be subject to criminal sanctions for resting or sleeping in a public place, including vehicles legally parked on public property in a non-obstructive manner."
 The same individual referred to their presence at the post office as a protest "of sorts," saying that, "there's no marching, there's no chants....we just want to be seen."
 On the first night of the sleep-out on Wednesday, April 17 the group said there were about 12-15 participants who, before sleeping, crafted protest signs and displayed them to passers-bye. By Saturday, April 20, their fourth continuous night at the post office, the protest signs were gone, but the individuals continued to gather and sleep there.
 "We're gearing down our main plan...I think our presence is enough here," one individual said.
 Conditions were difficult for the protesters and he added, "really we just want to sleep. We are really tired...We really haven't slept much in the last week."
 "This is affecting the health of the homeless community and we are seeking a change to that," Zack said. He noted the group had been taking naps in the day, but that was nowhere near sufficient.
 "We need to be able to sleep, and a lot of the homeless don't because they are afraid of taking some jail time, and it leads to a lot of drug problems. It leads to a lot of people smoking crank and staying up all night just to not get ticketed," he said.
 That was reflected in the number of sleepers at the post office on Saturday night. At 12am there were five individuals sleeping, but by 2am there was a total of 11 people present.
 The group says they were pushed from sleeping in the woods, were they preferred to be, to the more exposed location of downtown Santa Cruz.
 "I'm not trying to take anybody on tonight....I'm going to go to sleep tonight and I'm going to be woken up by a police officer no matter where I do it," said one participant.
 "So we might as well do it where they can see us," Zack added.
 "We really like the woods, and we are very respectful to the woods," he said.
 "We don't leave trash and we're not drug users."
 "They've driven us into the city" he said, adding that sleeping at the highly visible location of the post office is, "kind of the only way to get our message across."
 "All we are trying to do is be peaceful and sleep in our natural environment...and this is definitely not it," he said.
 The group explained they weren't asking for any expanded services for homeless people as part of their protest. They said they personally had "everything" they needed.
 "We want for nothing," Zack said.
 For those who need homeless services, he said it seemed "pretty good" for them in Santa Cruz.
 "In this town it's comfortable, but you have to run and hide."
 The sleep protest was first initiated at the Santa Cruz Main Post Office following two negative incidents Zach, Yoyo, and their friends experienced locally as self-described homeless "travelers." They also referred to themselves as "home-free" and "roofless" as alternative terms for "homeless."
 In one incident, the group says they were trying to find a place to sleep in Pogonip, a large wooded city park located along the green belt of Santa Cruz. Members of their group were arrested for being in an area that was closed, which they say they was unclear due to the signage. When the authorities found them in the closed area, according to the group they were asked, "what if a family came by here to hang out?"
 "We're a sore sight to see, I guess," Zack said, interpreting the implications of the comment. To him it didn't make sense, and he wondered how, if the area in Pogonip was clearly off limits, would a family see them in the first place.
 He and the group said they are used to being discriminated against because of their appearance, even though they are clean and dress like average hikers. "We weren't doing anything wrong."
 "They've singled us out," Zach said. "I think they are trying to make it known that they don't want the travelers here."
 "Because we choose to live outside should not strip us of our basic rights of sleep and of being able to sit in a place," he said.
 The second negative incident the group experienced was when a group of individuals they say had "Eastsiders" tattoos picked a fight with them as they were returning from Seabright Beach along the train trestle over San Lorenzo River. That encounter was brief, but four days later on the levee they say the "Eastsiders" came out of nowhere and immediately resumed the conflict.
 The Santa Cruz Police Department became involved and the group of travelers said they told officers that the "Eastsiders" were the ones to attack them first, but officers told them that they "shouldn't hang out in the areas that the people could find us."
 Zack claims that officers knew that he and his group of friends were homeless, and as a result he felt they were, "basically saying you guys are not welcome here," and he said that even though the Eastsiders were giving them a hard time, the SCPD were, "not going to do anything about it."
 "We were downtown in spots we hang out at all the time," Zack said. "They know I am roofless and homefree."
 Zack wanted to make it clear that, "we're not looking to fight with anybody ever, we are looking to exist peacefully."
 When asked if the police have ever told them where they are supposed to go when they have been forced to move on from where they wanted to sleep, Zack said they, "suggest things that don't really make sense."
 "Like go to Capitola [or] Monterey," but Zack noted that, "it's illegal to sleep in Capitola too. It's illegal to sleep anywhere in Santa Cruz County."
 "There is no help from them at all, and we didn't expect any help from them," he said.
 Zack and the group are seeking broader political change related to the sleeping ban, as opposed to the expansion of specific services, and they have been active politically, attending Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom, Take Back Santa Cruz, and Santa Cruz City Council meetings.
 Zack said he has been concerned that community members in Santa Cruz were using the terms drug addict, transient, and homeless person, "almost interchangeably," after he attended a recent forum on public safety put on by the city.
 This was especially pertinent to the group because, as Zach's friend explained, "intravenous drug users don't travel much."
 They feel that travelers have been miss-characterized on a variety of levels and that has lead to poor policy decisions regarding public safety and the homeless in Santa Cruz.
 "The whole take back Santa Cruz thing is kind of ridiculous because they are trying to take back Santa Cruz from people who don't have anything," Zack said. "We don't have anything to begin with."
 "They are pushing us into a smaller and smaller smaller corner," he said, "and eventually it is going to be a FEMA camp or something like that."
 When Zack attended the "Families First" rally that was organized by Take Back Santa Cruz and held at Harvey West Park on March 26, he observed that, "a lot of those speeches were very very very reminiscent of what Third Reich speeches and what Hitler had to say, and they are scapegoating the homeless."
 "I followed the march to make sure that nobody was going to screw with the homeless people," he said. "Me and a couple of other people were kind of policing make sure that nobody got violent with any of the people out here."
 While Zack has not heard of any incidents where Take Back Santa Cruz members have directly attacked homeless people, he feels the "sentiment" is there in the group.
 One of the signs that Zack made and held at the post office during the protests read, "Why is it illegal for me to exist?"
 One other issue raised during the protests has to do with one the chapters of the local sleeping ban that provides relief from prosecution under the ordinance if those cited are on one of the homeless shelter's waiting lists.
 Santa Cruz municipal code 6.36.055 states that, "A person shall not be in violation of this chapter if, at the time of his or her citation for a violation of this chapter, either: the winter shelter at the Santa Cruz National Guard Armory is filled to capacity; or the person is currently on the waiting list for shelter service through one of the shelter programs offered by the Homeless Services Center or the River Street Shelter in Santa Cruz."
 Participants who were on the Homeless Services Center wait list say they were cited by SCPD at the protest regardless of their wait list status, and critics have questioned the efficacy of this enforcement strategy. Civil rights issues aside, sleeping bans nationwide similar to MC 6.36.010 have been shown to be very costly for cities to enforce.
 When interviewed on the fourth and final evening of the protest, the young group of travelers who initiated the action didn't recognize some of the other people sleeping there with them at the post office. A small group of individuals that was sleeping to the south end of the post office steps was made up of older individuals who carried their possessions in a shopping cart.
 Those present at the post office during the course of the protests appeared to represent a cross section of homeless people in Santa Cruz, and their stated intentions were similar to that of those participating in previous local sleep-protests such as PeaceCamp 2010 and Occupy Santa Cruz. During those actions, a segment of those participating included homeless people who were hoping to make a political statement through the action, as well as homeless people who were motivated not necessarily out of political justifications, but because they were looking for a safe place to sleep as part of their nightly routine of survival.
 "Traveler" Yoyo said he has lived in the area on and off since 2007, and he recalled much of the political change that led up to several anti-homeless policies being enacted during that time period.
 Other community members present had long term political ties to homeless issues in the area as well. One woman who slept for all four nights of the protest has made her home in Santa Cruz on and off since her involvement with Occupy Santa Cruz in 2011.
 One man who said he slept in front of the post office on April 19, passed by on the evening of the 20th, saying he wished he could participate for one more evening but that he had received a citation that morning from the SCPD for laying on the sidewalk. The man has been homeless for several years locally, and he described the difficulties he has had as a result of losing his career in the economic downturn.
 He said that recently it has been very difficult for him to find a place to sleep in Santa Cruz.
At 3am on Sunday morning (April 21), approximately two dozen people could be seen sleeping in a variety of other public locations that were within a two block radius of the post office.
[Photos were taken the evening of April 20 through the morning of April 21]

Imagine Positive Change (If you need help, call 2-1-1)

2013-04-19 " (Visible Sleepers) Morning Report" 
by Robert Norse []:
 Zack, one of six people who, he says, slept at the post office steps area last night called in with a report a few minutes ago. They all received "camping" tickets for survival sleeping in a visible area. I call them the Visible Sleepers.
He says some of the folks from the previous night left for the North, but they intend to continue their protest tonight and in the nights that follow.

 He said several police arrived around 6 AM and did ask them if they had Homeless (Lack of) Service Center receipts, but ticketed them anyway with the Camping Ordinance MC 6.36. (subsection 6.36.010).
A key paragraph of 6.36.055(a), a key subsection of MC 6.36, reads
 (a) A person shall not be in violation of this chapter [the Camping Ordinance] if, at the time of his or her citation for a violation of this chapter, either: the winter shelter at the Santa Cruz National Guard Armory is filled to capacity; or the person is currently on the waiting list for shelter service through one of the shelter programs offered by the Homeless Services Center or the River Street Shelter in Santa Cruz."
The officers gave citations anyway in apparent violation of the law. They suggested the citations "might be dismissed in court." Zack said the group explained they had nowhere to go, were told the shelters were full, were given a receipt by Christine Younger of the HLOSC so asserting (that is, they were put on the Waiting List), and had no legal place to sleep. Police then left, and they went back to sleep, Zack continued.

Some of the signs they were displaying read, according to Zack, "If every life has value, then why is our life illegal?"
 "If safety is a priority in this community, why do we have to fight for a safe place to sleep?" "When you privatize public space, you silence the voice of the very community it was designed for." "Any law against sleep is unjust." And other signs as well. They can be viewed again tonight, presumably, when the protest is slated to resume.
Some locals suggested that to avoid tickets they could leave early in the morning, but Zack noted he told them that the point is we shouldn't have to move since there is no legal place and we're not doing anything illegal. First Alarm "security" thugs arrived after 8 AM and told them they'd have to lie outside their sleeping bags or be ticketed. Freedom initially declined, saying it was cold, but when another woman came up with a problem for First Alarm, she complied in order to facilitate First Alarm's helping with that other problem.

 A police officer advised the group that First Alarm was "just doing their job; they are the middle men between business and the people."
 Zack concluded, “We're not trying to incite any anger against us by the police. They spent a lot of time trying to justify what they were doing. They could have been out arresting violent criminals instead of explaining...cause we're peaceful, and we need a place to sleep.”
 Camping citations carry a potential fine of $100-200. As mentioned in a prior posting, interviews from last night's Free Radio Santa Cruz show with Freedom, Andrew, and Cody are archived at [].

Workshop Tomorrow -
There will be a workshop tomorrow led by Food Not Bombs co-founder Keith McHenry around broader issues of homeless civil rights (the California Homeless Bill of Rights) and deeper issues of housing (foreclosures and occupying vacant buildings as Homes Not Jails does). At the Sub Rosa Cafe at 703 Pacific Ave. as mentioned above and described at [].
Protecting ourselves from Santa Cruz thugs. Reclaiming our housing in the face of foreclosures. Help Organize Protection Against a New Rash of Attacks on Homeless People. Discuss the Formation of a Homes Not Jails Housing Occupation Movement. Learn More About the California Homeless Bill of Rights... and more.  See []

[2013-04-19 update] Revised Estimate -
Andrew, one of the group at the post office last night, says he kept watch through the night (as designated non-sleeper) and noted five not six sleeping tickets were given by police--in spite of documentation shown the cops indicating Waiting List status and hence immunity under MC 6.36.055. He hopes to post some photos of the protest.

[2013-04-20 update] Night #3 Report -
Zack reported by phone this morning that two cordial cops ticketed them again--this time with "lying down on the sidewalk" citations. 6 people got those citations ($100-200 or more), and 1 (on the steps of the post office) got a camping ticket.
 The officers who cited them advised them that they wouldn't be "on shift" tomorrow morning to "expect a response that might not be so cordial." Zack noted favorably that they didn't insist they leave. He also noted they've been treated better downtown than in the Pogonip-- a response he made to Brent Adams, who suggested they move back into the woods where they'd be less noticeable.
 Brent, who stopped by and spoke with the group last night, said he was concerned the public protest would discredit his Sanctuary Camp proposal (see []). He also continued to insist the camp was a "Robert Norse"-inspired production, which the sleepers disputed--to no avail. I made several jokes about the campers being "my minions", but Brent was not amused.
 I gave the group with some HUFF flyers, advising people how to sign up for the Paul Lee Loft Waiting List (which should immunize campers from camping citation prosecution if the city follows its own MC 6.36.055). (See [] & [] for more info and a copy of the receipt that should be presented to the Homeless Lack of Services Center when homeless folks sign up for the Waiting Lists as documentation that they are on the list).
 A particularly chilling analysis of the anti-homeless agenda of Councilmember Pamela Comstock and her Take Back Santa Cruz group can be found at [].
Zack thought they might take a respite from the sleep-out tonight, awaiting the return of some companions. "We need more people," he noted. Several phone calls to the Sentinel advising them of this protest have gone unanswered.

[2013-04-21 update]  Visible Sleepers May Call It A Night and a Victory; Options Debated  -
The group of counter-culture travelers who responded to police repression in the Pogonip by doing a public sleep-out downtown in front of the Post Office spoke to the Saturday afternoon Occupy Santa Cruz group. They noted they had made their point and were worried about suggestions from the SCPD of an increased crackdown that might target their dogs.
 Police have also shifted from giving camping citations to "blocking the sidewalk" and "laying on the sidewalk" ciations in a move reminiscent of attacks on protesters for "parading without a permit" in 1960's segregated Montgormery, Alabama.
 The sleepers may continue their nightly vigil, but acknowledged that diminished numbers and the growing exhaustion of the group makes it more problematic. Cody, an activist who spoke of prior experience with such protests in Seattle and elsewhere, described their growing difficulties and encouraged people to come down and support the night-time protest, even if only for a short time.
 Last Wednesday this group visited the Homeless (Lack of) Services Center [HLOSC] en masse and prompted them to give out for the first time documentation that homeless people are on the long waiting list (4-6 weeks) for 46 spaces at the Paul Lee Loft Shelter. See [].
 City law states that citations for camping will be dismissed if one is on a Waiting List. As activists suspected, it is also questionable for police to even issue those citations if a homeless person can show she or he is on the list--and police have responded (at least against this group) by turning to other harassment tools.
 It's too early to tell whether the victory achieved by this group will last. It depends in part whether homeless people choose to continue to demand receipts for being on the small shelter HLOSC Waiting List.
 There was universal praise for the persistent protesters at the Saturday Occupy Santa Cruz meeting in front of the main post office along with discussion of the upcoming California Homeless Bill of Rights (scheduled for hearing early this week) as well as the newly-formed Homes Not Jails chapter to investigate occupation of long-vacant corporate housing in Santa Cruz. Occupy Santa Cruz meets weekly 5:30 PM there after the 4 PM Food Not Bombs meal.
 There may be further updates on today's radio show 9:30 AM to 1 PM at 101.3 FM (streams at [], archives at []).

 [2013-04-21 update]  Update for Saturday Night and Sunday Morning
 Cops reportedly came around 4 AM Sunday morning and gave out a slew of "blocking the sidewalk" tickets at a point where the sidewalk is 70' wide at least (the circular area surrounded by posts where the Pacific, Front, and Water streets intersect on the Post Office side. They then moved across the street to harass sleepers in Scope/Scriber Park next to Serpent's Kiss.
 Some of the sleepers went back to sleep where they were, others trekked off. I came by around 7 AM with some coffee and got some audio for the morning radio show, which was replayed several hours later and is archived at [].
 Cody, Freedom, and Yoyo spoke on the air in person later in the same segment. Likely tonight they will not be doing the sleepout, but may resume it when their group grows again.
 I hope to be playing the audio from Keith McHenry's talk on the Homes Not Jails strategy of occupying vacant buildings on Thursday evening. A start-up HNJ group is slated to get together at the Wednesday HUFF meeting 10 AM at the Sub Rosa.
 Dreamcatcher, a local artist, and one of those wakened by police across the street from the protesters, said he thought the protest was an educational process for those doing it and perhaps for the community. As to its effectiveness, "we don't know. It isn't over."
 Whether it's over or not, I thank the group of protesters for finally getting Homeless (Lack of) Services Center director's staff to provide the documentation that folks are on a Waiting List, enabling them to get sleeping tickets dismissed and deter police ticketing under the camping ordinance. This was confirmed by police switching to other (actually less credible) charges like the absurd "blocking the sidewalk" charges in their campaign to shut down the protest.
 Keep posting those reports of police conduct (and misconduct). The clearer the picture is, the less are able those who wish to obscure the "Public Safety" issue. The real issue in these contacts is the intentional insecurity imposed on those outside.
 As for those who criticize the protesters as "travelers", I'd say that the Sleeping Ban impacts everyone who sleeps outside--and that travelers as well as those who have had to face this crap for years are entitled to the right to sleep.

2013-04-18 "(Visible Sleepers) Sleep-Out Continues For Second Night"
by Robert Norse  []:
Interviews with Cody, Freedom, and Andrew, three of the visible sleepers who were in last night's protest will be speaking about the issues at the Sub Rosa Cafe Tonight from 8 to 9 PM, and then in front of the post office continuing the Sleep-Out for a second night.
The interviews both lived and taped from last night are archived at [].
 Freedom encourages anyone who wants to contribute food, blankets, or other supplies to come on down or leave a message at 831-423-4833.
I also include a survey that folks may want to fill out and bring to the "Arm the Homeless" forum on Saturday at 2 PM at the Sub Rosa Cafe at 703 Pacific.

2013-04-17 " (Visible Sleepers) Sleepless in Santa Cruz: Survival Sidewalk Sleep-Out next to Main Post Office" 
9:00 PM - 9:00 AM
Location Details: Santa Cruz Main Post Office, corner of Water Street and Front Street, Santa Cruz
6-9 homeless people carried forward their plan to document the lack of shelter in Santa Cruz and then educate the public through direct action tonight. I am told they plan to rally on the sidewalk outside the main post office in downtown Santa Cruz at the intersection of Water and Pacific Avenuen at 9 PM. Anyone interested is invited. Bring a cell phone if you have one to help document. I was asked to pass on this and the following information.

 As planned a week before, the group of people went to the Homeless (Lack of) Services Center at 115 Coral St. earlier this afternoon and requested to be put on the Waiting List for the Paul Lee Loft. They were advised by Charles, a worker there, that the shelters were full but that they'd be put on the Waiting List after filling out an application. When asked if they could get a receipt or some documentation for their Waiting List status, Charles said no, nor would he give them any written statement about the shelter being full.
 Other asked Charles the same question and told him that Executive Director Monica Martinez had publicly stated that on request, the HLOSC would provide receipts that one was on the Waiting List. Christine, another worker, and he then agreed to do so. He acknowledged he'd not done so before in the last year.
Since they had no receipts available, HUFF workers provided their own version of a receipt which they'd created, anticipating that the HLOSC wouldn't have any handy. Christine and the HLOSC staff helpfully copied, filled out, and signed them for the 8 or so clients applying, documenting that each person was on the Waiting List for the Paul Lee Loft.

 Waiting List status means that camping tickets will automatically be dismissed by the City Attorney's office prior to court, as stipulated by MC 6.36.055. It might also persuade the police of the futility and even impropriety of giving out camping tickets at all, since all such tickets are supposed to be automatically dismissed.
 We also interviewed a few workers out there who confirmed that there were no spaces available on the Paul Lee Loft--suggesting that anyone cited for the more serious offense of "illegal lodging" (PC 647e) would have a "necessity" defense in court.
I hope this procedure will be followed by every homeless person so that they can more safely sleep in groups, well-lighted areas, and closer to police protection--given the increased risks homeless people face outside from violence. The procedure again is to go to the HLOSC M-F around noon, sign up for the Paul Lee Loft Waiting List, and get a receipt indicating you are on the list. You then have to check in once a week or your name will be removed from the list.

 This group of homeless people claims to have repeatedly been harassed by police and/or rangers for simply being on public property, to say nothing of sleeping. In response, it is my understanding they intend to exercise their right to be on the sidewalk (perhaps another group might call it "Positive Loitering"), even to sleep there, since they have no legal place to sleep.
 Two of those involved--Freedom and Andrew--were arrested yesterday and apparently face misdemeanor charges involving something like "disobeying an officer". (See "ALERT: Two Arrested For "Being" in the Pogonip" at with trial slated for May 14th.)
 Activists hope to alert the community to the human rights that are being ignored or trampled. To me these would be (as starters): (a) there is no legal shelter for 95% of the homeless community; (b) police, rangers, and vigilantes are targeting homeless people anyway with false "public safety" concerns; (c) there are no public bathrooms open downtown at night, yet homeless people are blamed for human waste; and (d) homeless people receive a level of over-policing for their very existence under both existing laws and the recent needle hysteria.
 The recently formed hand-picked right-wing "Public Safety" Task Force (which includes no homeless people or advocates) is an example of the "wrong road" City Council has taken.
I encourage people to support this demonstration
Update by Robert Norse, Thursday Apr 18th, 2013 12:37 AM:
Looks like about a dozen folks on the steps of the post office festooned with many signs against the Sleeping Ban. No overt police activity.
"Word from the Sidewalk" by Robert Norse, Thursday Apr 18th, 2013 8:26 AM:
According to Sonny in a phone conversation, the group spent the night peacefully, moved from the steps so they could be swept by a postal official, and had a polite encounter with three cops who neither ticketed them nor asked them to move from their new spot on the sidewalk. Reportedly, they plan to continue their protest through the day with signs educating the community about the Sleeping Ban.
Brent Adams has created a great video (see pressing for a Sanctuary Camp. My own conversations with local homeless people on Pacific Avenue last night indicated that they were generally supportive of the Visible Sleepers, though not willing to risk harassment, citation, or arrest themselves.
 I was also glad to see Food Not Bombs activists there supporting the Sleepers. The issues involved are basic and important ones in a city with no shelter for 95% of its homeless.
I'll be playing interviews tonight on Free Radio Santa Cruz from 6-8 PM at 101.3 FM (streams at Feel free to call in with your thoughts at 831-427-3772.
 I encourage all homeless people to sign up for the Waiting List at the Paul Lee Loft at 115 Coral St. so that their camping tickets will be dismissed under MC 6.36.055.
MC 6.36.055 reads
(a) A person shall not be in violation of this chapter [the Camping Ordinance] if, at the time of his or her citation for a violation of this chapter, either: the winter shelter at the Santa Cruz National Guard Armory is filled to capacity; or the person is currently on the waiting list for shelter service through one of the shelter programs offered by the Homeless Services Center or the River Street Shelter in Santa Cruz.
 (b) Any citation issued for a violation of this chapter shall be dismissed by the city attorney in the interest of justice if, at the time of citation issuance, the winter shelter at the Santa Cruz National Guard Armory is filled to capacity or the recipient of the citation demonstrates that on the date of the citation he or she was currently on the waiting list for shelter service through one of the shelter programs offered by the Homeless Services Center or the River Street Shelter in Santa Cruz.
 A discussion of the California Homeless Bill of Rights will be held at 2 PM Saturday at the Sub Rosa Cafe with Keith McHenry a featured speaker. See [].
I encourage folks to support the protesters with blankets, food, dialogue, and calls to City Hall demanding lifting the police harassment and Sleeping Ban citations and/or providing a safe place to sleep as an emergency measure whether in a parking garage, a campground, or somewhere else. Call 831-420-5020. E-mail them at citycouncil [at] . But don't hold your breath.
"No Norse to be seen" by brent adams, Thursday Apr 18th, 2013 6:44 AM :
I visited these out of town travelers 3 times this morning. They've taken over the post office steps.
I video taped them snoring, shivering and rising.
 A cop arrived at about 6am and told them to wake up.
At no point did I see Robert "where's my hug?" Norse, Becky Johnson or Colin "monkey" Clyde who rallied
 and encouraged this band of Los Angeledans to protest city laws by sleeping out.
Also there weren't any local homeless folks who'd been booted from the Armory as it was closed for the rest of the year last night. This band of travelers (spurred on as they were by Norse,Johnson,Clyde) had hoped
 to drag local homeless survival campers into contact with law officials to bulster their protest but very few locals joined this hearty band of so-cal travelers.
They were rising and shining at the crack of dawn ....
Again, I repeat, R. Norse goaded these kids into staging a sleeping protest homeless encampment on the Post Office steps and then he himself went home to sleep in his lair of cowardice.
"So, Brent..." by (A), Thursday Apr 18th, 2013 7:49 AM:
It's clear that Robert was there at the protest until nearly 1am. I hope I have that energy when I am his age. Good job, Robert, thanks for all of your work in the community.
 So Brent, now that you have made your money off of Occupy Santa Cruz, you are a critic of that type of protest?
 Are you anti-occupy now?
 Can the people who donated money to you get a refund now?
 It's sad to see you trolling other activists, especially when you have profited financially off of very similar activities to what they are doing now for free.
 It's also sad to see you discourage people from speaking out in the way they feel is right.
 I guess they all should just do what you tell them to do?
 The community is tired of your mud slinging and hypocrisy, Brent.
When you say you are "invested" in those kids, we take it literally. You now have stock footage of them snoring, as you put it, and that you will no doubt put the footage in some video of yours to fit whatever agenda of the day you are obsessed with.
Brent, I heard that the total amount you made from that video was at the minimum in the hundreds of dollars.
 How about some transparency here? How much money in total did you collect for your projects relating to Occupy Santa Cruz?
 Now go spend some more of that cash you got from Occupy Santa Cruz...or is it all gone now?
And Brent, I think we are all wondering now if your precious sanctuary camp will be for locals only?
 I guess homeless people from Los Angeles don't have any rights in Santa Cruz?
 They shouldn't protest in this town, right?
 Are you now on the side that is against providing homeless services to out of towners?
 Wasn't the camp at Occupy Santa Cruz also largely comprised of non-locals?

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Poverty Crime in Santa Cruz: Walter Lilly

Defend those without homes! campaign page [link]
Santa Cruz is attacking houseless people [link]

2013-04-27 "Poverty Crime in Santa Cruz"
NOTE BY NORSE: Walter Lilly called me from jail several times in the last day, and whose account I'll be broadcasting tomorrow at 10 AM on Free Radio Santa Cruz (101.3 FM []) His "crime" was failing to pay Sleeping Ban infractions and then being jailed under a Municipal Code passed a few years ago to by-pass the reality that Infractions crimes are normally not jail offenses.
Santa Cruz's MC 4.04.010(4) makes failure to appear in court or post bail for 3 infractions within 6 months (such as sleeping, sitting on the sidewalk, being on a bench for more than an hour, jaywalking) then all subsequent infraction offenses become misdemeanors at the city attorney's option punishable by up to 1 year in jail and $1000 fine. MC 4.04.015 makes such a failure to show or bail three infractions in six months a crime in and of itself punishable with the same penalties.
He was arrested and told he'd be held on bail he couldn't pay until trial, so in January he agreed to a stay-away order from Pacific Avenue to settle the cases in January. However when crossing Pacific Avenue (and perhaps hanging out there) he was accosted by cops who told him they'd not only arrest him for violating the order, but "throw away" all his possessions, by his account.
Some days ago he was arrested and goes to court next week with $10,000 bail for "violating probation", which is to say the deal his PD talked him into in January.
Poverty crime is no novelty in Santa Cruz, but a regular process these days.

Friday, April 26, 2013

Retaliatory practices by hospitals against Patient's Rights advocates, documented by victims

Ms. Bobbie Jane Jenke [P.O. Box 3454 Santa Rosa, CA 95402] [707-546-2879] [] [] []
Also see:
* Health Administration Responsibility Project []: Fighting Back against Unfair Insurance Claims Settlement Practices in California
* Jupirena Stein [coelipink (@)]: Did you know that Kaiser Permanente is a HUMAN SUBJECT RESEARCH HMO and all their hospitals are TEACHING HOSPITALS?... that they use theirs members for medical experimentation? My video although short, 3:8 seconds is highly educational. Please, Google this title: Kaiser Permanente Crimes - Teaching Doctors How To Become Criminals.
* Mothers Against Medical Error [155 S Bull St., Columbia, SC 29205]

"Senator Feinstein and CA Gov. Brown sacrifice life of CA teacher/Disabled surgically harmed "patient rights" advocate to Malpractice Industry in CA"
2014-04-13 from Bobbie Jenke:
I am the surgically mutilated CA Special Educator from Santa Rosa, CA who is being DENIED access to ANY evaluations of my surgical damage since 2004.  My mangled body videos are on You Tube under Bobbie Jenke and on websites and
I begged Senator Feinstein for help finding medical care and assessment for my complex injuries.  I should be able to get this under Medicare--(right?)
All Senator Feinstein did was refer me to CA Governor Brown's office stating that they would help me.
So, I requested HELP from Governor Brown's office in CA via a fax that was ignored. Sent again! Ignored and then again and again.
Later, my advocate, John Colby, called his constituency staff on my behalf--and Adrian No Last Name told him that I needed to call them myself to clarify my fax requests.  I did this--and Adrian, No Last Name--Head of Constituency Services for the Governor of CA acted like he never heard from me at all--nor got my fax.  When I told him about Dr. Colby calling on my behalf prior--he stated--"He's NOT a doctor."  I told Adrian that he was Ph.D. and then I knew that he had my fax and knew EXACTLY who I was.  I asked if the Governor cared about surgically harmed patients in CA who cannot find medical care.  He stated he did not like my "broad statements" and then he HUNG UP the phone on me.
So, I publicly reported that Governor Brown's office ignored my faxed requests for medical help and even HUNG UP on me as a Surgically HARMED/Disabled CA Special Educator.
After that occurred---my CalSTRS disability teacher pension got messed with badly. (a meager amount of money that I receive monthly to survive)
I was sent suddenly sent a 1099-R for 2013 in which they claimed I earned a Gross Distribution of a highly INFLATED amount of money (as I really make approx only $9,000 per year from them and live very disabled and impoverished in an expensive area in Northern CA. They stated in a letter that they (CalSTRS) had PAID themselves over $31,000 from my disability pension and listed it as a Gross Distribution to me on a 2013 1099 tax form.  So, as impoverished and disabled as I now am--I had to deal with CalSTRS staff over this for months--while very sick with a virus and with my mother dying in a hospital.  They did seem to try to reconfigure their mistake, but they still left me with this 1099 stating I made over $40,000.
So, I had to find a TAX EXPERT to deal with this FRAUDULENT 1099 from CalSTRS for 2013 that they had REFUSED to change.
I'm recently sent them a letter that the tax expert helped to compose--and I am hoping that they will fix this situation and stop harassing me.  Meanwhile--I had to PAY to extend a filing date on my taxes--because of their FALSE claims of money I never made.
The Tax Experts told me it is CalSTRS responsibility to accurately reflect the ACTUAL income I received that was approx $9,000 for the year of 2013 which shows I am IMPOVERISHED and do should not even need to file taxes at all.
I'm telling you this now--because--I believe what has happened to me is RETALIATION from the CA Governor's office for my public whistle-blowing regarding his lack of help for patients HARMED by the Medical Industry in CA.  I feel this retalitation could also be for my whistle-blowing on a past illegal HUD landlord in which HUD REFUSED to investigate my claims--another civil and human rights violation.
Senator Feinstein's staff refused to investigate the HUD landlord lies and ABUSE, and about the illegal HUD/FHEO behavior in refusing also to investigate the situation.  Senator Feinstein's office claimed that they always believed HUD--because HUD does not lie.
To all who care, Thank You for all you are doing to help the most vulnerable populations in America and to expose corruption and fraud and abuse in government agencies.  The length and extend of which I have been harassed and abused as a severely surgically damaged CA Special Educator--for daring to tell about my medical/surgical and then HUD housing abuse--has been relentless.
I hope the government and its ferocious lobbyists will begin to leave me alone with what little time I have left in this world.  If not, I'll have to go to my grave still fighting for justice.
Thank you for any help you are offering.
Here I was in 2001 at a patient rights rally that I spearheaded with help of friends/and X-Kaiser HMO patients...  This peaceful rally occured prior to my 3rd and last devastating surgery ever called Thoracic Outlet Surgery) in 2004.

"Medical Industry in Santa Rosa, CA shuts off patient "Oxygen" for Surgically Harmed Teacher/Patient with Respiratory Damage",
message to the public, written 2014-03-30 by Ms. Bobbie Jane Jenke:
Santa Rosa Oxygen Company puts the “DEATH SQUEEZE” on very disabled, Surgically Harmed/Disabled MEDICARE Patient/CA Special Educator, Bobbie Jane Jenke, with “surgically caused” severe COPD and Asthma and Paralyzed Diaphragm.
See the attached letter from Valley Oxygen and Medical Equipment, dated 3/28/2014 (click on image for larger view).

See the attached patient's document of medical proof of 2004 surgical paralysis of R diaphragm following Dr. Avery's Thoracic Outlet Surgery at CA Pacific Medical Center, a Sutter Hospital (click on image for larger view).

Sonoma County Sutter-Affiliated, Federally Funded Clinic denies needed specialty referrals to this same surgically injured patient, Bobbie Jane Jenke, and then dismisses her from their care.
See the attached letter from Dr. Jason Cunningham, director of West County Community Health Centers.
(click on images for larger view)

Very disabled, surgically harmed, Bobbie Jane Jenke, is being “blacklisted by all pulmonologists, primary care doctors and specialists in Sonoma County and elsewhere who subscribe to the same Physician-owned wealthy Malpractice company as the surgeon who harmed her, called “The Doctors Company”.
And CA Special Educator of Santa Rosa, CA and vocal patient safety advocate, Bobbie Jenke,  struggling to survive her life, disabled and on Medicare, is also being further harmed since her 2004 T.O.S. Surgery by denials of care, negligence and patient “blacklisting” by Sutter Health, its affiliates and employees, Northern CA Medical Associates, former Kaiser Permanente HMO doctors and their affiliates, “The Doctors Company”, a large physician owned malpractice company, and their affiliates, UCSF, Stanford and more.
Bobbie Jane Jenke fears she will die or suffer a severe traumatic event due to her unevaluated post-surgical complications from Thoracic Outlet surgery performed at a Sutter Health Hospital in 2004, who refuses to help her after they allowed one of their surgeons to perform unnecessary surgery on Bobbie, thus mutilating her, and lying about all risks of the surgery beforehand and after. See the attached pre-operative risk form signed by Dr. Gaylord James Avery II aka Dr. G. James Avery II (click on image for larger view).

Despite clear evidence of harm, lies and recklessness and more, the CA Medical Board allowed Dr. Avery to continue to perform T.O.S. Surgeries as did Sutter Health at CA Pacific Medical Center with no disciplinary actions, which they claim is a high risk surgery, contrary to Dr. Avery's risk form. See the attached letter to Bobbie Jane Jenke from the Medical Board for California, denying any malpractice occurred (click on image for larger view).

Kaiser HMO Patient Rights Rally, 2001,
Please view this new video to you tube of a Patient Rights rally done in 2001 in front of Santa Rosa Kaiser HMO for Patients' Rights!  The rally was organized by Bobbie Jenke in Dec 2001 and friends, and speaks about all the patients HARMED by Kaiser Care.
Shortly after the rally, Bobbie Jenke, Santa Rosa teacher and Kaiser patient was expelled from the Kaiser facility for "complaining" too much. The CA Department of Managed Health Care simply allowed Kaiser to do this.
I believe this video shows that American patients live in dangerous times.  I was forced to leave Kaiser HMO because I tried to improve the rights and safety for all patients in 2001.  Today--I cannot even get an appt at UCSF or Stanford to have my surgical damage evaluated. (see how bad I am now on you tube under Bobbie Jenke.
I have asked Senator Feinstein and Gov Brown for help--but I get none, and things are only getting worse for me.
Please pass this video on to all your friends and learn more about the dark secret world of Kaiser Permanente HMO by viewing the Kaiser Crimes Videos on You Tube by Ms. Jupirena Stein. We were both patients who were harmed in the hands of Kaiser Permanente--and have survived to tell you our stories--so that you can become informed patients.
The level of retaliation in today's Medical Industry has escalated, especially for the most vulnerable patient populations.
Hospitals, doctors and malpractice companies are allowed to act so brutally because they are almost completely unregulated, especially in CA.  More doctors, clinics hospitals and HMOs have fierce malpractice companies/departments that invest in Wall Street and globally, and are very wealthy. Everyone is tied to someone powerful--in a world where humanity and ethics plays NO part, especially once they damage you.
And, if a patient is injured by the medical industry in CA--the Tort Reform laws financially cap any non-economic damages awards--so it is almost impossible to find an attorney to sue, (even if you are healthy enough to do so). Nor can you stop a BAD doctor/hospital.  In my experience, the CA Medical Board is completely useless (on purpose) at protecting patients and yet allows dangerous doctors to continue to practice.
Please view my other videos on You Tube as I am nearing the end of my functional life due to severe injuries caused by TOS surgery in San Francisco.  I have been blacklisted in my town with severe respiratory and other damage from my surgery with my R diaphragm paralyzed and my too much of my neck region cut away, and more.

"Senator Feinstein and CA Gov. Brown sell life of CA teacher/Disabled surgically harmed "patient rights" advocate to Malpractice Industry in CA",
2014-04-10 letter from Bobbie Jenke to Disability Resource and Legal Center of Santa Rosa:
I am a surgically harmed disabled Santa Rosa Special Educator, who is being medically blacklisted by federally funded clinics, hospitals, physicians and more in Santa Rosa, CA.
I fear that my prior patient safety and Patient Rights advocacy-(as seen on You Tube under Kaiser Patient Rally--and my other videos-- and my complex surgical injuries are becoming life-threatening at times now--as I live tortured each day--with NO healthcare team to evaluate my 2004 surgical damaged that is literally choking me, disabling me, and sometimes completely debilitating me.
Can you please help me? Suggestions??
I have been a member of your group in the past-when I could attend meetings--but my body has deteriorated now, and cooler days--like today--make me completely home bound. I MUST leave Santa Rosa for a warm dry climate due to so much internal scar tissue/nerve and muscle damage and contracture, and my paralyzed diaphragm and partially compromised Vagus Nerve. i.e. I nearly DIED during a common cold last month from an inability to cough up my congestion--and breath at night--(it turned into SEVERE asthma) that Sebastopol Community Health Center REFUSED to treat.
I have IN Home Support, and I'm on SSI--and a small teacher pension.
I know Nancy Hall, and some other staff members there from the past who have been EXTREMELY kind and supportive to me many years ago.
I have a Section 8 Portable Housing voucher that I MUST use by August 1 in order to move out of this area to find medical help and to a warm, dry climate--but I need a village of HELP to plan and execute this task. i.e. Much computer research to find medical help in southern areas, a livable Section housing environment, etc.
Now, both talking and typing is hard for me as is writing, walking, or being jostled at all.  I am getting very weak--but I have a strong will to remain living independently.  I expect to have some money soon available (that is allowed on SSI) to pay for this task--but I need the help to begin very soon.
I live deteriorating, isolated and in pain--and I lost my great HUD apt in 2011-- after five responsible years of tenancy, because I "blew the whistle" on HUD landlord, Matthew Locati, of Terracorpinc--who hired an attorney firm to get rid of me during a "redevelopment sale to Bentall Residential and a 'redevelopment million dollar deal" with the City of Santa Rosa in 2011.
We had serious problems at Windham Village Apts during the five years I lived responsibly there-- that needed reporting--like old apartment furnaces, one that leaked LETHAL levels of CO gas that sent an older female tenant to the hospital in my building of 32 units--An Apartment Fire just down the hall from me that FAILED to trip the building Fire alarm system or the tenants smoke alarm--yet it almost gutted his kitchen and melted the blinds in his Living room, etc.
Locati and his staff-- used Draconian "abuse of power" as managers of their 50 unit complex at Windham Village, and they are still managing it today--tho it was sold and now owned by Bentall Residential of Irvine--and the huge Bentall Kennedy of Canada. I was forced to drop my HUD complaints against Locati due to his bullying, slander about me, harassment,and more.  And, (despite a botched regional HUD investigation later)-- Senator Feinstein's staff told me that HUD never lies.
As a Special Education Teacher in Santa Rosa for many years I have learned that--I am the one who got a "special" education about the severe injustice and inhumanity that exists in our country if one dare to report wrongdoing, or gets disabled and impoverished.
My pro-bono attorney in that 2011 HUD case was the multi-millionaire stepson of Charles Schultz, named Attorney, Brooke Clyde.  He is on the board as a "Community Leader" for the Center for Family Justice, and he also openly advertises for NUDE models to photograph a website--and instead of "representing me" he bullied me, and threatened to falsely report me to SSI if I did not drop my HUD complaints against HUD landlord Locati.  (Clyde was NOT working for me, the impoverished disabled tenant at his part-time job at Sonoma County Legal Aide on Dutton Ave. nor was Attorney Barbara Shirrell(sp?).
Then after they forced me out of my great apartment at Windham Village--"someone" made false reports about me to SSI that forced me into several extended and exhausting SSI reviews--that turned up NOTHING!  I finally got Senator Feinstein to make that harassment STOP!
Many dangerous problems were just covered up--and they PAID me MONEY to leave--that I had to legally shelter in a Special Needs Pooled acct. but it was barely enough for me to move on, as disabled as I was.
I have been punished for daring to speak out as a disabled person about many very serious, dangerous problems in our medical system and in our housing system under HUD.  Now, I believe perhaps they are winning--and will finally shut me up.
Please see if there is any help you might kindly offer--or ideas.  I may have money soon to pay for help that is not within the realm of the IHSS help i need to live my daily life.

"CA teacher/Disabled "patient rights" advocate running out of time!",
2014-04-05 letter to Patient Safety Advocates, and Human Rights/Healthcare Journalists and Legislators:
You Tube Links below-- for Surgically Harmed Disabled CA Patient Advocate/CA Special Educator, Ms. Bobbie Jenke, who will die because Senator Dianne Feinstein and Governor Jerry Brown have sold out to California's ferocious Malpractice Industry. 
Despite Bobbie Jane Jenke's pleas for over ten years, her websites asking for help at and and many articles, she has been denied ALL medical evaluations of the medical damage caused by a Sutter Health's 2004 unnecessary Thoracic Outlet Syndrome Surgery paid for by Medicare.
Instead, she has been left by the CA Hospital systems, local physicians, The Doctors Company, Northern CA Medical Associates, federally funded clinics, Sutter Health Hospital Systems, Kaiser Permanente HMO, UCSF, and Stanford's PEARL program, and more to suffer, unevaluated, until Bobbie Jenke, and the medical/surgical damage and criminal harm to her body dies with her. 
As of March of 2014 Bobbie has survived ten years of torture, begging doctors for help, while they took her Medicare payments and then denied her access to the very tests and treatments that could help to save or at least improve her life for the time she has left.
You Tube video status of Bobbie in September 2013 after her new primary care doctor from Sebastopol Community Health Center, an affiliate of Sutter Health, Dr. Rhonda Berney, in September of 2013 told her she would get NO referrals to specialists for her condition and that she should “just learn to live in her deteriorating body."
The fifty-six year old, prior active, health conscious Jenke, lives with undiagnosed surgical damage from Thoracic Outlet Surgery done at CA Pacific Medical Center, a Sutter Health Hospital, with a 1st rib resection by surgeon, Dr. Gaylord James Avery II aka Dr. G. James Avery who abused Bobbie after his surgery failed and damaged her.  He paralyzed Bobbie's phrenic nerve for breathing, and Long Thoracic Nerve to the R scapula, cut out her neck muscles, prior neck surgical vascularized fat pad in her R neck, and cut out her first rib.
He did all this without consulting her prior surgeon(s) to see if the risk of his surgery might further damage her. He performed NO diagnostic tests except an exam to see if she even needed his highly invasive surgery. And he lied to Bobbie on paper about all the risks of his surgery.  Documents are available that show this.  The CA Medical Board reviewed the documents of per-op lies and more, and did nothing to discipline Dr. Avery, clearing him of any wrongdoing. He continued to cut out ribs in this T.O.S. surgeries at CA Pacific Medical Center, a Sutter Health Hospital in San Francisco.
Surgically damaged Jenke has been discharged from federally funded Sebastopol Community Health Center, by Director Dr. Jason Cunninghma, after she asked for an MRI to evaluate her vascular system in her neck and surgical damage, and after Dr. Rhonda Berney, a prior longtime Kaiser HMO physician, and prior chief of Palm Drive Hospital, at the clinic abused her at her September 2013 appointment.
Bobbie is left, BLACKLISTED by ALL pulmonologists in her area, and her Oxygen company just sent her a letter denying her any further breathing assistance, despite her surgically paralyzed diaphragm and need for  Bipap machine supplies and help, and sometime O2 to sleep at night, and during the day.  Bobbie, a NON-Smoker, also now has severe surgically induced respiratory dysfunction and almost died from severe untreated asthma during her last viral cold in March 2014 in which Sebastopol Community Health Center DENIED her a rescue inhaler- and during which the ON CALL doctor of Sebastopol Community Health Center, Dr. Ly hung up on Bobbie.  Bobbie Jenke cannot handle any stress, and is physically severely compromised and feels she is being left on purpose to die in Santa Rosa, CA.   She feels the large malpractice industry and risk management departments of Sutter and Kaiser prefer her dead, than living proof of their crimes.
Contact info for Bobbie is (707) 546-2879 and P.O. Box 3454 Santa Rosa, CA,  and details about Bobbie Jenke are at and  This has become extremely urgent.
Before teacher, Bobbie Jane Jenke, was injured by Dr. Avery's TOS surgery in 2004—she was a Kaiser Patient Advocate and in 2001 she helped to Spearhead this Patient Rights Rally in front of Kaiser Permanente her, then, HMO in Santa Rosa, CA. [].
Shortly after this 2001 peaceful rally for Patient Rights, Bobbie Jenke received a letter from Kaiser Permanente's Dr. Bob Schultz, kicking her out of the Kaiser facility for “complaining too much.”  The Department of Managed Health Care simply allowed this to occur.
Despite having Medicare and MediCal Bobbie Jenke cannot find a primary care doctor in Santa Rosa or nearby who will assess her surgical damage of 2004 that is killing her, and causing her to live a tortured life.  Neither Governor Brown nor Senator Feinstein, both of whom she contacted several times, will help her survive this surgical/medical crime and threat to her life.

Letter to Senator Feinstein, 2014-03-30 from Ms. Bobbie Jane Jenke:
I am a CA Special Educator who has worked for many years as a Special Education Teacher with a variety of student populations from pre-school through Santa Rosa Junior College.  I have worked with students with brain injuries, autism, learning disabilities, communication deficits, developmental disabilities, home and hospital students, as well as developing my own curriculum during summer months to help “learning disabled” grade school students “catch-up” during summer sessions in Santa Rosa and Sonoma County Schools.  Prior to that, I worked as an instructional assistant in Sonoma County, while earning my three teaching credentials at Sonoma State University.  I paid back all of my student loans prior to getting injured and then disabled.
Before I decided to become a teacher, I was an Interim Health Specialists for Sonoma County Head Start, assisting multicultural, “at-risk” pre-schoolers to get dental, vision and hearing screening by various charitable community physicians and dentists, and I developed various health education programs for parents of “at-risk” youngsters both in Santa Rosa and in Chico, CA, where I earned my B.A. Degree in Community Health Education.
Senator Feinstein, after I was injured by a by a one-time sample treatment by a Sonoma County Rolfer in 1998, which was extremely brutal and harmful to my body, I fell into a trap of substandard treatment at Kaiser Permanente HMO of Santa Rosa.  In fact, much the care I received was reckless, and cruelly dismissive—causing me to spend much of my financial savings seeking evaluations and treatments outside of Kaiser HMO.
By the year 2000, I had become so damaged by iatrogenic injury, that I became devoted to the cause of Patient Safety and the enforcement of “Patient Rights” in America today.  I knew too many friends and patients who had been harmed by Kaiser HMO Care, and I knew if we did not try to improve “Patient Rights” and “Patient Safety” in this country, we would all be doomed.
Alas, I didn't realize that by using my voice and writings, to exercise my 1st Amendment Rights in the United States of America, to publicly advocate for “patient safety” in America, as a disabled, injured patient myself, I would soon be destroyed, and abandoned by the various Health Care Systems I needed and now urgently need to survive my complex iatrogenic injuries.  I also didn't realize that my legislators would forsake me.
I learned how deeply entrenched physicians are with their “for-profit” Hospital Systems and HMOs and with their “profit-driven” wealthy Medical Malpractice Companies at the moral and real expense of sacrificing human lives, like fodder.
All the while, most of these profit-driven companies, and many of their physicians and clinics, receive and abuse taxpayer monies to actually do harm to unsuspecting patients like Jupirena Stein of Stein vs. Kaiser as seen on You Tube, (a once unsuspecting woman of Latina heritage/who learned the hard way about the plight of innocent patients in the United States), and so many other damaged bodies and souls that you can see strewn all over the internet on Patient Safety and Consumer Watchdog websites.
Senator Feinstein, these are real people who went to a doctor or hospital for help, but instead got severely harmed, or killed  in the United States of America.  Just like me!  And after we got injured we learned about the Tort Reform Laws that the AMA tells us we need to make healthcare “affordable,” but which actually only serve to force the taxpayers via our government programs to pay for the carnage our legislators have allowed our Mega-Medical Industry to leave in its path.
Most recently, the medical-corporate maiming and killing of patients is not even covert or secret anymore, as you can see in the letters I've presented here that I received this month, stating they will “cut off” my air supply and medical help, following the DAMAGE that a surgeon of Sutter Health did to me after he grossly misinformed me about all the risks of his surgery.
I could breathe just fine before I was cut open by Dr. G. James Avery of CA Pacific Medical Center, a Sutter Health hospital, and harmed so recklessly.  Now I have such severe surgically induced sleep and airway obstruction which over time developed into COPD and asthma so severe that a common cold virus almost killed me last month.  During this virus I was refused a rescue inhaler by Dr. Jason Cunningham of Sebastopol Community Health Center, an affiliate of Sutter Health.  Did Dr. Cunningham want me to die?  Or did Sutter Health's risk management attorneys tell him to do this. After all, a dead damaged patient is better than living proof of the harm they did.
And, after the harm is done to so many of us, these wealthy medical  companies once again “cost-shift” the harm they do onto the taxpayers of the United States, who must then support us disabled patients of iatrogenic harm in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Affordable Care monies, SSI, SSDI, subsidized housing and more.  Is this OK with you?  If not, what will you do?
I'm sincerely hoping you will take some action to save my life and stop this “sanctioned patient murder” in your state.  Who else will stand up for patients struggling to survive iatrogenic injury, disability and death?  Our Mega profit-driven Medical Malpractice Industry has no accountability for the maiming and killing of patients, and  the Affordable Care Act is NOT going to change this, nor save my life or others.  Please! Time to say “ENOUGH!”
Thank you!
Sincerely, [signed] Ms. Bobbie Jane Jenke, age 56, CA Special Educator, Community Health Educator, former teacher's union representative, Disabled by Medical industry crimes and abuse.  Proud granddaughter of former MI State Representative, and former MI State Deputy Auditor General, also a teacher, Mr. James Knox Jamison (maternal-side) and proud granddaughter of hard-working Jewish immigrants (paternal-side).

MEGA MEDICAL INDUSTRY GROUPS spending MILLIONS to stop drug and alcohol testing on doctors and surgeons. How would you like your surgeon to have a few drinks before he/she puts a scalpel to your body. YIKES! YES, it happens--and patients pay for it--with their lives. see [] to read a list of doctors and Medical Industry giants paying millions to STOP doctors from having to PEE IN A CUP! If bus drivers are required to do it, why shouldn't a surgeon 'PEE IN A CUP' before he/she cuts on a patient, etc...
"Doctors, medical staff on drugs put patients at risk"
2014-04-15 by Peter Eisler from "USA TODAY" []:
Anita Bertrand doesn't remember much about the first time she stole narcotics she was supposed to administer to surgical patients. She doesn't remember exactly when she installed the intravenous port in her ankle so she could inject the drugs more efficiently. And she doesn't remember how many patients she may have put at risk before getting into treatment.
But she remembers how easy it was to get away with it.
"I was absolutely impaired, using narcotics while working. … And no one ever noticed," says Bertrand, 49, a nurse anesthetist in Houston. "Did I make mistakes? I don't know, and that's the scary part. I'm not aware of any, but I certainly would not say I was immune to that."
America's prescription drug epidemic reaches deep into the medical community. Across the country, more than 100,000 doctors, nurses, technicians and other health professionals struggle with abuse or addiction, mostly involving narcotics such as oxycodone and fentanyl. Their knowledge and access make their problems especially hard to detect. Yet the risks they pose — to the public and to themselves — are enormous.
A single addicted health care worker who resorts to "drug diversion," the official term for stealing drugs, can endanger thousands. Nearly 8,000 people in eight states needed hepatitis tests after David Kwiatkowski, an itinerant hospital technician, was caught injecting himself with patients' pain medicine and refilling the syringes with saline. He infected at least 46, mostly in New Hampshire.
It was the third hepatitis outbreak since 2009 linked to a health care worker using patients' syringes (the others were in Denver and Jacksonville, Fla). And for each of those worst-case scenarios, there are countless more practitioners whose drug-related errors are more isolated — a botched surgery, an incorrect dose of medication, a worrisome vital sign missed.
Much of the damage goes unnoticed or undocumented; oversight mechanisms to detect, report and address drug problems in health care settings are haphazard and limited. Still, a USA TODAY review of state and federal records identified hundreds of cases in recent years in which physicians and other health care practitioners were disciplined or prosecuted for drug diversion or other medical misconduct related to substance abuse.
The toll also can be brutal for the medical professionals who suffer with addiction — often in high-stress jobs with little help. Many struggle with guilt and despair, physical and mental health ills, and indifferent professional environments. Last year, New York's Supreme Court ruled that a hospital was not liable for the overdose death of a physician who, after returning from drug rehabilitation, was given operating room duty, where she had ready access to the propofol that killed her.
"Drug diversion affects so many people, and the systems for dealing with it are completely broken," says Lauren Lollini, 45, who was infected with hepatitis C in the Denver outbreak and now works with HONOReform, a patient safety group.
Bertrand, who returned to practice after treatment, now counsels other health care professionals with drug problems.
"The medical community thinks it's immune from this disease, but that's not true," says Bertrand, who had no history of drug use until she got hooked on pain medication after an abdominal surgery. "There are so many practitioners working impaired and we have no idea. ... We're doing a terrible job addressing this problem."

"See difficulty patients have in believing the BRUTALITY of our carefully engineered defensive Mega Medical Industry that will KILL patients to protect!"
2014-04-25 report from Bobbie Jenke:
I saw Dr. Rhonda Berney at that Sebastopol Clinic twice -- Aug and Sept 2013. I made it clear to her on a written intro of me and summary I gave her about who i was, what I'd been thru and what I hoped for in a physician.
She thought it was GREAT! and we got along fine--at the 1st appt. And she collected her Medicare money for that appt and the second one.
However, at my second appt.--she was totally different.  She acted like she HATED me!!! (I did not know she was a former Kaiser doc. til AFTER i looked her up MUCH later)....She told me at my second appt. in front of my caregiver---that I would NEVER get referrals to any more specialists, and that I should just learn to LIVE in my deteriorating body.
I was actually in SHOCK!  I had been friendly and professional, and she came in the exam room this way--standing in the doorway--as if i was too contaminated for her to enter the room.
So, I Called Dept of Health Services in Sonoma County--and told them I was being "DENIED care" out at Sebastopol Community Health Center.
They basically did NOTHING--and later told me they had NO POWER to make any doctor order tests or refer any patient to specialists.
However, I thought maybe, Dr. Jason Cunningham--who was now director of all 3 West County clinics--MIGHT help me, as he had seen me just as a D.O., at one of the clinics in 2006(repeatedly)-and he seemed like a really nice guy.--that is the letter you see on that Northbayrising website from him dated 2006.  He was kind to me, back then--and did a few things that attempted to try to help me. (Minimal tho)
So, i finally thought I'd set up an appt to go back to Sebastopol Community Health Center where he worked also now, and also acted as director of all 3 West Co clinics.
Beforehand, I had asked for an apology re this Dr. Rhonda Berney's prior behavior--or at least and explanation of her abuse toward me. It NEVER came, prior to my appt with Cunningham, as I had asked for and hoped for.  I realized then --that Dr. Cunningham would NOT go against Dr. Berney--cuz I read up on Dr. Berney and she used to be DIRECTOR at Palm Drive Hospital in Sebastopol--and she had 13 years PRIOR exp. at Kaiser, probably learning to DENY care to patients.
I knew any appt at that clinic would probably be a "set up" for MORE Abuse--so I cancelled the appt. in PLENTY of time ahead.--also my caregiver was unavailable as I thought she was going with.
 I don't think it is legal for a federally funded clinic to DISCHARGE a patient for ONE timely cancellation (more than 24 hrs in advance) of an appt.  This is politics of x- Kaiser docs--who are all over Sebastopol clincs, etc. spreading bad rumors about me--and, ESPECIALLY, the fact that this Sebastopol clinic is affiliated with Sutter Health!! It's always about the MONEY and BLAME--i.e. DEFENSIVE medicine of HUGE malpractice companies affiliated with these HUGE hospital systems. I had done an IN PRO PER lawsuit against Dr. AVERY and Sutter Health for his mutilation of me in San Francisco. I was too disabled--and had no attorney due to TORT REFORM laws in CA-that cap. non-economic damages--and so unless one is REALLY rich it is nearly IMPOSSiBLE to find a malpractice attorney in CA. The case got dismissed--but at least I filed it in the SF Superior Crt to document the DAMAGE I incurred by whom and where. I believe that is important!!Sutter Health is the HOSPITAL SYSTEM that INJURED ME with TOS surgery in S.F. in 2004--aka CA Pacific Medical Center-- a Sutter Hospital. Sutter Health is one of the LARGEST hospital chains in No. CA and Central Valley area--I think.
   Do you think they WANT to diagnose their OWN surgical injuries from one of their old surgeons from their own hospital network--who a patient made a legal CLAIM against for harming me so badly?

Santa Cruz residents engage in death-squad behavior against homeless

Defend those without homes! campaign page [link]
Santa Cruz is attacking houseless people [link]

2013-04-26 "Gabriel Jumped by Homeless Haters near Cabrillo College Wednesday"
by Robert Norse []:
I received a phone call yesterday from a formerly homeless man, now a Cabrillo student named Gabriel. He gave the following report of being beaten Wednesday 4-24 near Cabrillo College as he headed for class. Subsequently he checked in with the Cabrillo Health Clinic, but was reluctant to contact the police, having heard from other formerly homeless people that police declined to investigate such incidents. He mentioned the case of a guy named Zack, whose picture was prominently posted on Facebook & rather than investigate, cops told Zack: he'd "better avoid areas where he's likely to be found."

 Gabriel reported he can barely see out of one of his eye and was kicked in a previously injured leg so badly, it's now oozing puss. He continues to feel whoozey a day later. The incident happened around 12:30 PM Wednesday. There was little pedestrian traffic and tree cover, so no witnesses nearby that he noticed.
 The four assailants got out of their car and were apparently cruising around looking for people to beat up. They demanded to know where he was from. When he told them he was a student, they became skeptical and demanded to look inside his backpack. He refused and they then accused him of having something to hide. They then beat him up, but he was able to get away and get to class and ultimately to a Cabrillo medical clinic.
 He didn't call the cops, he said, because of past experiences when homeless about police indifference or hostility.
 A day later blood continues to run out of his injured eyes; his hand is fractured (from punching back), and the nine months in healing leg injury has been torn apart again.
He says he took photos of his injuries which he'll later post. He hasn't been homeless for three years and is now both a student and employed.

 He says the attackers got out of a gray 4-door pick-up truck. Some of them wore checkered shirts, jeans, baseball hats. One had blonde hair, another had black hair; most of them had short hair "buzz cuts". One had a 5-day stubble; the rest were generally clean-shaven. Between the ages of 18 and 30, he estimates. He noted their socks were pulled way up. He suggested they were "East side local" affiliated...
He says he's still in touch with old homeless friends and followed reports of the recent assaults of Sam-I-Am and Zack on Facebook and through other friends. The situation has escalated significantly since the massive officially orchestrated ceremonies and endless Sentinel police-boosting the Butler-Baker deaths.

 Gabriel also said he spoke with 4 hitchhikers leaving town in a group at the Ocean St. entrance to Highway 1 South. He said it was unusual to see such a large group hitching together (since that makes getting a ride harder). They told him they'd been stopped on Pacific Avenue by thugs who knocked off their hats. The thugs then opened their backpacks, spilled the contents on the ground and announced "It's all garbage and belongs in the garbage."
 The encounter continues, Gabriel reports, with “Hey, do you know what? You're all garbage and that's where you belong. You have twelve hours to get out of town before you're put in the trash.”.
 Gabriel concludes, “They seemed pretty freaked out. Their main objective seemed to be clearing out of Santa Cruz.”
 “A 'criminal' who is on the side of the police doing the dirty jobs the cops want to do but can't. They have to be recast somehow by showing the real literal damage they're inflicting on innocent people."
 Homeless people, or those who look homeless, Gabriel concludes, or even those with backpacks should travel in groups, to provide witnesses if not greater safety.
 His final words are even more sobering:
 “How long before they surround a female homeless and decide to 'teach her a lesson'? I'm sure what this "lesson" would be doesn't need to be stated outright, but it's more than likely to occur the more they feel that their actions are backed by the police and by the community. Homeless folks are starting to arm themselves and you know how that's going to go down. The first time some lug gets stabbed or seriously hurt in the process of vigilante work it's gonna be a hey-day excuse to get rid of the homeless altogether.”
Gabriel may be posting some photos soon.
2013-04-26 "Santa Cruz Contra?" comment by Steve:
Reading articles such as this is leading me to recall the days of the Contras in Nicaragua and El Salvador, and also films such as "In the Time of the Butterflies." It is sad to recall it was wealthy "landowners" (I don't like the word "landlord", a Medieval/Dark Ages term that still seems to apply today!) who pay thugs to beat up poor folks. Is this is a result of "Take Back Santa Cruz?" Santa Cruz Contras and other paid mercenaries? How sad. But ya know, I saw something this morning that speaks to how inhuman even the City treats homeless folks. On Golf Club Drive, on the other side of the Train Bridge, there is a path that in the last few days the City put a barely visible stretch of barb wire to block the path, with no sign or warning. It can hardly be seen in broad daylight. I can imagine how once dark out, someone will head down that path that has been open for years and cut themselves when suddenly encountering sharp old rusty barb wire (even thoughit is new in the sense of being just put up, the wire is old with old metal spikes protruding. If someone is bleeding, especially a wrist cut as they bump into it, and they pass out from blood loss, they could very well die. Really, if I get a chance I'll take a pic, so you all can see how crude and inhuman this is. No sign, no warning, just low lying (about waist level) barb wire, like a booby trap, a booby trap for the homeless.

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Copwatch: Santa Cruz

Human Rights abuse in itty-bitty Santa Cruz [link]

2013-04-23 "SCPD cop Vasquez slams drunk homeless man's face into concrete"
posted by subcommondante [] []:
At about 1am on april 22, 2013 Downtown Santa Cruz, Pacific Avenue. I rode my bike past two guys sitting passively on a bench at night downtown. Then a cop stopped and one-thing-led-to-another and the officer hand cuffed one of them and "spun him" ... slamming the mans face with great force into the sidewalk.
Great news! We've just had a report from the hospital that Richard is doing "better"... we don't know specifically what that means but it may mean no brain damage.
If a police officer slams a homeless man to the ground fracturing his skull and someone isn't there to video tape it, did it even happen?
2013-04-24 observation: 48 hours later the blood is still caked on the street in front of Del Williams, what's up with that? I have lots of thoughts about the right of a person to sit peacefully and calmly without complaint and to be left to do so.... even if that person is drunk as a skunk. All businesses were closed and those two men were taking care of eachother. The charade of "which one do I take to jail and which one goes to the hospital" angers me. That is your suped up authority for no reason thing. A parade of police cars, fire trucks, ambulances... and maybe even a hearse. For what??
2013-04-25 UPDATE!!!! Richard Hardy has been released from the hospital. He had many sutures in his for head and his face and eye look deformed still. He must have a head made of steel. He watched the video and is very appreciative of the care people have been showing. He was very fatigued in his body. He says he has been on morphine since he was admitted. He was very upset about what happened to him.
2013-04-26 "The Artificial Creation of Crime and For What?" by Doug L. of Santa Cruz
Yesterday I watched the Youtube video of a drunk homeless man being accosted by law enforcement I couldn’t help wonder what other options could have been employed by the persons responsible for public safety (homeless persons are included under the definition of the “public”). Let’s explore the options: the police could have walked by, smiled and kept moving. This would be my favorite. They could have questioned the duo, and then moved on, realizing they were drunk and minding their own business and harmless – number two on my list. They could have arrested them and when they got belligerent, “tasered” them, saving the one guy from a potential brain damaging blow to the head from a cement collision and resolving the situation – not the best option but better than a hospital stay. Apparently this dangerous situation called for backup and a physical confrontation.
 According the Santa Cruz police department there were 3 homicides, 33 rapes, 83 robberies, 313 aggravated assaults, 527 burglaries, 2792 acts of larceny, 264 auto thefts and 21 acts of arson. That makes 11 of these types of crime per day. So I am just wondering if police time could be better spent on these types of crimes. Sitting on a bench drunk didn’t make the list for 2012 but there will be at least one offence for 2013. The good news is the Santa Cruz police department has launched Twitter and Facebook Pages and has a Mobile App for iPhone and Droid!
 Back to the dynamic duo. So let me get this straight, there are two guys on a bench, drunk, but doing a whole lot of nothing, and not really in any condition to walk, let alone able to creating mayhem. So pretty much the sum total of their transgression is akin to speeding or jay walking – it appears to me these two guys were totally, here's the result, the police initiate a confrontation, then the situation escalates, the two become belligerent (they weren’t belligerent before the cops arrived, begging the question what’s the catalyst?). This results in a booking, hospital visit, jail time for one, costing the tax payers tens of thousands of dollars, issuing nuisance citations that will never be paid, generating arrest warrants (again costing more money), the officers will get paid 1.5 their pay for overtime and retire at 45 with a healthcare benefits and a generous pension...and the City of Santa Cruz gets sued into oblivion (again) by a smart young attorney ...not to mention the guy got his face bashed in and potential brain damage and pain...and for what? Who wins here? The man was belligerent. Who gives a shit? My kids are belligerent and so are my employees. So what? Adults handle these situations with common sense. The new buzz issue these days is bullying, but this is worse than bullying, it’s brutality. The standard justification for acts like this is how hard the job of the police is – as if this justifies assault? Being a doctor is a hard job. Working in the fields is a hard job. Having a hard job doesn’t justify being an ass hole. This is crime creation, not law enforcement. And they could have just walked by.
Response by Robert Norse of "Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom []:
Nicely put, Doug.
I wouldn't suggest tasering, which can also be lethal and tends to be misused as curbside punishment for less-than-swift-compliance. But rather calling for a few more cops to help move the guy into the squad car.
The new strategy seems to be to use fear and punishment if people don't fully cooperate, seems like.
I'm normally not a fan of megacopping on Pacific Avenue--I've seen half a dozen instances of it in two weeks around things like "leaning against the railing of the fence near the New Leaf Market" (an incident involving Brent Adams and Officer Ahlers), 4 squad cars blocking traffic on the street while a fifth parks across the street (near community TV) to handle one drunk on the sidewalk who's already handcuffed (and may have also been slammed down--I got their late and his face was bleeding). Actually both these and a third happened on the same day--I witnessed the first, got a first hand account of the second, and a more distant account of the third--I think it was Friday April 5th.
Maybe there's a "message" police are trying to send out to drunks similar to the message their vigilante cousins are sending out to homeless people: "get out of town or get hurt". Just wonderin'.
Finally, the cops also often use this "drunk in public" charge to haul people in, seize their property, and sequester it for days--notably homeless people and their backpacks and blankets, when folks simply have an open container or are mildly buzzed and "have the wrong attitude". They are then held in a cell for a few hours and released in the cold wee hours without charges.
It looked like Richard Hardy--the name of the man assaulted by Officer Vasquez--was perhaps too drunk to take care of himself--the actual definition of drunk in public, rather than the police misusage above. So perhaps he had justification, but what really tells is the subsequent behavior of the cops ("Are you all right, Richard?") where they attempt to whitewash their brutality for the watching videocamera and the cover-up of the matter by the SCPD (not aware that Vasquez has been relieved of duty pending investigation). Also with the Copley decision of a decade ago, there's no public revelation of any disciplinary consequences unless someone leaks it.
Hardy, by the way, was reportedly released from Dominican yesterday, but I'm not sure if that's because they're cheap, or because he's truly recovered.
The aggravated anti-homeless climate in Santa Cruz (I got another report yesterday of 4 guys jumping a man named Gabriel as he headed for Cabrillo College--which you may have heard on the radio--report to be posted soon) is ramping up and solidifying this long-time police corruption.
I'm hoping to begin creating a video on-line library of such local incidents and turn them into a well-edited video that demonstrates both police brutality locally and the abusive anti-homeless laws to pass on the public in another of my (often seemingly ineffectual) Calls to Conscience.
Thanks for your analysis.

2013-02-01 "Officer Ahlers is a Bad Cop"
by brent is found guilty []:
Today I was found “guilty” of sitting on the sidewalk and ordered to pay $300.
 The only problem is that I didn’t sit down....
Photo showing SCPD Officer Travis Ahlers:

Today I was found “guilty” of sitting on the sidewalk and ordered to pay $300.
 The only problem is that I didn’t sit down until SCPD officer Travis Ahlers ordered me to sit down on the sidewalk.
 I had been walking south on Pacific Ave. near the intersection of Laurel St. when I saw officer Ahlers talking to a man who was sitting on the ground. He said, “may I search your backpack?” At which point, from a distance of 10’ away I told the man that he didn’t have to allow the officer to search his belongings. “Tell him NO,” I said. Officer Ahlers turned towards me and told me to sit down and produce my ID. I asked him what the charge was and he said, “For sitting on the ground.”
 “I wasn’t sitting down until you told me to sit,” I retorted. He said, “that’ll be for a judge to decide.” Later I found out that the man who was sitting down was under formal probation and was able to be legally searched even without being told before-hand. I didn’t know this when I was reminding him of his 4th Amendment right to the privacy of his person and all of his stuff. Had I known this, I would have said nothing to him.
 Well today was my day in court. Since this is an infraction and wouldn’t be heard in a regular court I had commissioner Kim Baskett disqualified so that the case would be heard in a regular court and the officer would have to be sworn in. Finally, on my 5th visit to the courthouse since September on this matter the case was seen by judge Timothy Volkman. I was charged with: "9.50.012 SITTING DOWN ON SIDEWALKS IN DESIGNATED CITY ZONES.No person shall sit upon the following enumerated portions of a public sidewalk: (b) Within fourteen feet of any building."
 The officer said that the ordinance included “squatting” and then offered to tell the judge what the dictionary definition of “squatting” was. The judge declined hearing the definition. I read the ordinance aloud to high-light that it clearly reads “No person shall sit..” The officer said that my buttocks were within 8” of my heels.
 With this, the judge found me guilty of sitting on the sidewalk and ordered that I pay $300. The judge said, “this will teach you to leave the police alone while they’re conducting their business.” I said that I’m not being charged with Obstructing an officer, but instead, Sitting on the ground which I obviously didn’t do. The judge said, “I’m siding with the ‘people’ that your are guilty.”
 I said that I don’t have the money... I don’t have $10 and I can’t pay. Then I said “I won’t pay. This is not justice. This is a bad cop and you’re a bad judge.” I refused a payment plan or a work program.
 I then left the court when the bailiff who was escorting me out said, “If you don’t pay it’ll be twice as much.”
 It is true that at the end of this frustrating hearing that I lashed out in classic Brent Adams style. I really couldn’t believe my ears when I was found guilty. Yes, it is just an infraction and yes, its just $300 but isn’t it the principle of the thing? I had not been sitting and yet I was found guilty of sitting down. It is true that I don’t have the money to pay. I will check with the clerks office and try and get on a payment plan or a work program.
 I am truly frustrated.

2013-02-02 "Thoughts" by Robert Norse []:
The indomitable and irascible Robert Norse hosts in studio guests, on-the-street interviews with the houseless, and listener call in's at (831) 427-FRSC or 427-3772. Phone HUFF (831) 423-4833 if you want to be a guest or have comments. If you get the voicemail, leave a message with phone or e-mail.
 Broadcast Schedule Thursdays from 6-8 p.m. and Sundays from 9:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
 Free Radio Santa Cruz is also reportedly picked up by pirate broadcasters and is relayed at 101.3 FM around the Santa Cruz area.
 Brent got screwed because he challenged the authority of the cop by watching and commenting. He was obviously not really obstructing or interfering (or he would have been charged with that misdemeanor crime). Nor was he sitting. Leaning and squatting--according to the 2002 debates on the Sitting Ban (which specifically considered that question) rejected "leaning", much as fashion-conscious merchants wanted to include it.
 The Sitting Ban has nothing to do with obstructing the sidewalk, obstructing officers, or public safety. It has to do with obstructing poor and counterculture folks (or anyone the merchants find unsightly) and giving maximum discretion to the police so they can move people along. That's why Measure S was recently defeated in Berkeley. The Berkeley service providers, three members of the Berkeley City Council and the local ACLU mobilized against it.
 Of course, we haven't heard a peep from Ken Cole (head of the Housing Authority), nor Monica Martinez (Executive Director of the Homeless Lack of Services Center), nor the local ACLU, nor--of course--any City Council members. Our City Council unanimously voted to increase the penalties and scope of the Ban in 2009.
 Copwatching is legal and important. I spoke with two observers who witnessed the entire "trial". Judge Volkman reported reprimanded Adams for his copwatching activity, suggesting it was a "lesson" for him. If "shut up, close your eyes, and keep moving" is the lesson, I suggest we fire the teacher.

 The current Sitting Ban (so-called since it bans sitting in 90% of the sidewalk in business, downtown, and beach districts) is a nasty ordinance which has never had a real constitutional challenge (as Berkeley's did).
 9.50.012 Sitting Down on Sidewalks in Designated City Zones: In the C-C community commercial, C-N neighborhood commercial, C-B commercial beach, CBD central business district, and R-T tourist residential zoning districts, no person shall sit upon the following enumerated portions of a public sidewalk: (a) At any bus stop; (b) Within fourteen feet of any building. Where any portion of a building is recessed from the public sidewalk, the fourteen feet shall be measured from the point at which the building abuts the sidewalk; (c) Within fifty feet of any ATM machine or cash disbursal machine, or any other outdoor machine or device which disburses or accepts coins or paper currency except parking meters and newspaper vending machines; (d) Within fourteen feet of any fence that abuts a public sidewalk; (e) Within fourteen feet of any drinking fountain, public telephone, public bench, public trash compactor, information or directory/map sign, sculpture or artwork displayed on public property, or vending cart; (f) Within fourteen feet of any street corner or intersection; (g) Within fourteen feet of any open air dining area or cafe extension; or (h) Within fourteen feet of any kiosk.
 Since most sidewalks are 10' wide in all other places than Pacific Ave, this simply bans sitting where there are buildings--period. It's designed to "clear away the riffraff" and give us the Shopping Mall look. The latest 2009 twist was to include "sculptures" and "directory signs" as creators of 14' forbidden zones. As well as increasing penalties on "unattended" tickets to create both (a) a new misdemeanor crime (MC 4.04.015) and (b) the right to charge every subsequent infraction crime, no matter how petty or irrelevant as a misdemeanor ((MC 4.04.010(4)).

 Other ordinances that involve the creation of "forbidden" zones have warning provisions. Benches, for instance, have a ridiculous 1-hour restriction.
 On those benches that still remain that is--three have recently been removed on Cooper St., perhaps at the behest of the noxious Nextspace, a Coonerty-founded business.
 For instance 9.50.12, Sitting down on Public Benches in Designated Zones, which forbids you to "sit down upon or otherwise occupy a public bench or use a public bench to store property for more than a total of one hour during any given twelve-hour period" has a second provision that "No person shall be cited under this section unless he or she has first been notified by a police officer, public officer or downtown host that he or she is in violation of the prohibition in this section, and thereafter continues the violation."
 Not so with the Sitting Ban.

 For more fun fuck-you-over ordinances, check out "Deadly Downtown Ordinances--Update" at [].
 For another account of the fun-loving Officer Ahlers, see "Selective Enforcement and Harassment by Santa Cruz Police on Pacific Avenue" at []

 Since we have a hopeless City Council, responding to the agenda of Take Back Santa Cruz, the SCPD, the SC Neighbors, and the DTA, I've fond the best response is to do what Brent tried to do: point out the abusive behavior of the police, hosts, and private security thugs.
 When you do this, I suggest you address passersby, keep at least 10' away from the incident. Take a step back if asked. Document what you're doing with a phonevid or some other device, and try to have a second witness with you. Often cops will stop and park their running squad cars in the middle of the street to deal with the "emergency" of a "criminal sitter".
 Alerting the public walking by to this has often, I've found, shortened the police action and encouraged them to move on to more sensible priorities.
 It's also quite appropriate to fine a formal Internal Affairs Complaint with the Professional Standards Unit of the SCPD or contact the City's so-called "Independent" Police Auditor with your concerns. You don't have to be the target of the abuse. You just have to witness what you felt was wasteful, abusive, or uncalled-for police behavior.

 An on-line form to fill out when you witness or experience abusive behavior of any kind from the SCPD can be found at []. Just make sure you check #5 at the end, indicating it's a "complaint" and not a "Comment" or any of the other classifications that are essentially irrelevant.
 Robert H. Aaronson is the auditor. He wanders in occasionally from his roost in Palo Alto to collect 20Gs a year or more, never bothering to issue a written report that I've heard about. Still it makes a record--and that can count later for others who want to make Pitchess Motions in court challenging an officer's credibility or violent behavior in a future case. Aaronson's e-mail is not given, but is on the City website as a form at []. His phone is given as 650-565-8800.
 Again--the purpose of these is not to expect any kind of justice or accountability. Rather to simply make a record. If you do complain to either Aaronson or the SCPD, please post a copy on line as well.