2013-08-05 "Activists Lock Down at State Building, Call for Brown, CDCR to Negotiate with Prison Hunger Strikers"

Statewide Prisoner Hunger Strike to Stop Torture, Long-Term Isolation & Indefinite Solitary Confinement in Prisons [link]

info from "Californians United for a Responsible Budget":
RIGHT NOW: direct action in support of hunger strike
At 8:00am this morning, protestors locked themselves to the doors of the Oakland State Building at 1515 Clay St.
In solidarity with the California Prisoner Hunger Strike, they're calling for Governor Brown and the CDCR to enter honest negotiations to meet the hunger strikers 5 demands.
Please go to [https://www.facebook.com/pages/Prisoner-Hunger-Strike-Solidarity/117053298383319] and share photos and the press release far and wide - we may not all be able to take action like this today, but we can all help amplify it around the world.
This is the 29th day of the hunger strike. It's time for all of us to step it up.


2013-08-05 "Activists Lock Down at State Building, Call for Brown, CDCR to Negotiate with Prison Hunger Strikers"
by "prisonerhungerstrikesolidarity":

The Prisoner Hunger Strike Solidarity Coalition has learned that protestors locked themselves to the doors of the State Building on Clay St. in Oakland just minutes ago. Protesters are calling for Governor Brown and the CDCR to enter into honest negotiations with prisoners on hunger strike throughout California. Today marks the 29th day of the prisoners’ hunger strike.
In a statement released to local media, protesters said:
[begin excerpt]
As Governor Brown continues to silently endorse the torture of California prisoners, with the death of hunger striker Billy “Guerro” Sell, and in the face of ongoing retaliation against prisoners by the CDCR, we join the hunger strikers on this 29th day of their peaceful protest to meet their 5 demands.
Solitary confinement is widely and internationally recognized as torture. The hunger strikers and their family members are making a powerful and inspiring stand for dignity in the face of this inhumane treatment. We stand with them. Governor Brown and the CDCR, negotiate immediately to meet the 5 demands!!!
[end excerpt]
Since the beginning of the strike, there have been almost daily actions around California, US, and in many other countries in support. Over 80,000 people have signed petitions to the CDCR and the Governor. Medical professionals, human rights organizations, students, unions, lawyers, religious leaders, prisoners and their family members have all spoken to the urgency of meeting the hunger strikers’ demands.
A recent statement by the Short Corridor Collective at Pelican Bay State Prison states, “We are being tortured each day by state officials (Governor Brown, his appointee CDCR Secretary Beard, and all his underlings). Increased retaliation has been perpetuated upon defenseless and starving prisoners who only seek what any human being strives for—humane treatment, dignity, equality, and justice for our families, loved ones, and ourselves. These are the fundamental rights of all people, including those incarcerated by the state.”
As people on strike record losing over 30 pounds, communications from inside indicate that people are being punished through denial of necessary medication, further isolation, and cruel treatment like blowing cold air into freezing cells.

Protecting disabled houseless residents' ability to access the Homeless Service Center of Santa Cruz

John Colby's Freedom of Information Campaign against Human Rights abuse in Santa Cruz [link]
* Santa Cruz retaliates against Human Rights advocate John Colby [link]
* Human Rights abuse in itty-bitty Santa Cruz [link]

"CPRA request for "security enhancements", "Waiver Request" to CDBG program and communications about them"
2013-08-04 from John Colby to Dana McRae, County Counsel:
Dear County Counsel McRae,
I am writing to protect the civil rights of (disabled) homeless people who use the benefits of the Homeless Services Center (of Santa Cruz). I refer you to item #60 on the August 06, 2013 meeting agenda and minutes of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. Use the link below to view it [http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/BDSvData/non_legacy/agendas/2013/20130806/PDF/060.pdf], to quote: [begin excerpt]
Your Board approved a Supplemental Budget action to allow for a contribution from these CDBG Program Income funds for capital improvements at the Homeless Services Center, contingent upon the State's approval of this alternative use. This approval is obtained through the submission of a Waiver Request to HCD. The Waiver Request is to transfer $47,000 of the $141,065.00 Revolving Loan Account balance to fund a public facility project creating security enhancements at the Homeless Services Center (HSC). As your Board is aware, the HSC is a multi-agency campus that serves homeless individuals throughout the northern part of the County by providing day services, meals, employment support, County Clinic services as well as emergency shelter and transitional housing. The project would create a monitored single point of entry to the HSC campus by installing an electric vehicle and pedestrian gate that will be monitored by a security kiosk. By limiting entrance to the campus to clients who are receiving services, clients can more safely engage with the process to accelerate their pathway to permanent housing, treatment and stability. In addition, infrastructure 68CDBG Program Income Waiver Request improvements will be installed to transition the River Street pedestrian access point to an "exit only" turn-style gate. [end excerpt]

I question the legality of this proposal on the grounds that it will limit advocates for (disabled) homeless people, like me, access to my clients and the Homeless Services Center campus, violating their disability and Fair Housing rights. Moreover, I assert that it will likely limit access by disabled people to the Homeless Services Center campus.

Under rights granted me by the California Public Records Act (CPRA), I request:
* all reports, summaries, memoranda, maps, drawings, images, photographs and (recordings of) presentations about, pertaining to, or referring to the "security enhancements" at the Homeless Services Center proposed in item #60 of the August 06, 2013 meeting of the County Board of Supervisors.
the "Waiver Request" referred to in item #60 of the August 06, 2013 meeting of the County Board of Supervisors.
* the most current civil rights requirements of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) award referred to in item #60 of the August 06, 2013 meeting of the County Board of Supervisors.
* all electronic and non-electronic written correspondence with the funding agencies for the subject CDBG award about, pertaining to, or referring to the "security enhancements" at the Homeless Services Center (of Santa Cruz) proposed in item #60 of the August 06, 2013 meeting of the County Board of Supervisors.

As these records are of great public interest, since they will be made available to the news media being carbon copied, I ask you to waive any exemptions to disclosing these records.
I also ask you to waive all applicable fees in the public interest. I ask you to waive any applicable search, retrieval and redaction fees, as well as applicable duplication costs.
I ask:
* if you determine that any or all or the information qualifies for an exemption from disclosure, to note whether, as is normally the case under the Act, whether the exemption is discretionary, and if so whether it is necessary in this case to exercise your discretion to withhold the information.
in case you decide that any of the information is exempt, please explain how the interest in not disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.
* if you determine that some but not all of the information is exempt from disclosure and that you intend to withhold it, that you redact it for the time being and make the rest available as requested.
* if there is any information in these records which is private and you decide it is exempt information, yet it is in an otherwise disclosable document, please segregate the private information by redacting it while providing me the rest of the unredacted record.
* if these documents are available in an electronic format such as standard audio, video and image formats, MS Power Point Presentation (PPT), Apple Keynote format, Portable Document Format (PDF), eXtensible Style Language (XLS), MS Word Document (DOC), Hypertext Markup (HTM), Rich Text Format (RTF), plain electronic text (TXT), native email formats — like AOL for Windows, Apple Mail, Claris Emailer, Compuserve, EML, Entourage, Eudora, Maildir, MBOX File, Mulberry, Neoplanet, Outlook, Outlook Express, Outspring, Powertalk, Quickmail Pro, Thunderbird, Windows Mail, Windows Live Mail, Yahoo Archive! — or as hyperlinks to the Internet that they be provided to me in one of those forms, preferably in their native form.
I am willing to pay a fee of up to $25 for this request. If you estimate the cost of completing this request will exceed that amount, please contact me first before completing it with a fee estimate. If this request would entail special searches which would incur search fees to me, please contact me first with a fee estimate.

Thank you for your assistance in fulfilling my CPRA request to protect the civil rights of (disabled) homeless beneficiaries of the Homeless Services Center (of Santa Cruz), particularly regarding limiting access by disabled homeless people and their citizen advocates like me to the Homeless Services Center campus.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this request please contact me.
Respectfully yours, [signed] John E. Colby, Ph.D.

UC retreats from broad graduate school tuition hikes

2013-07-04 "UC retreats from broad graduate school tuition hikes; After proposing increases for about 14,000 graduate and professional school students, university officials now plan to hike fees for about 800 students, mainly in nursing" 
by Larry Gordon from "Los Angeles Times" [articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/04/local/la-me-uc-graduate-fees-20130705]:
After previously proposing widespread and hefty tuition increases for graduate and professional degree programs, UC's top administrators have retreated and will seek fee hikes affecting only a small group of graduate students, mainly in nursing, and at much reduced levels.
Only about 800 students in eight programs will be affected by a proposal expected to be approved by the UC regents later this month, officials said. Under a previous and now abandoned plan, about 14,000 graduate and professional school students in more than 50 programs such as law, medicine, social work and business faced tuition increases that met strong opposition from the governor and other officials in Sacramento.
In one of the most important changes, nursing students will probably face annual tuition hikes of $619, less than a quarter of the $2,700 they faced under the previous proposal. Nursing programs have lost some federal funding and must backfill with tuition, officials said.
"It's a balancing act," UC system spokeswoman Dianne Klein said of the much-reduced tuition proposal. The university needs enough money to maintain "top-notch programs to attract the best graduate students, but we also don't want to alienate the people who make the decisions for state funding for the university."
However, she warned that the tuition freeze for most graduate and professional school students may not last beyond the 2013-14 academic year. "This is not a long-term blueprint. This is the very minimum we believe we need to go another year. It's not a sustainable model," she added.
UC student regent Cinthia Flores described the change as "a step in the right direction" and said most graduate students will be pleased that the tuition freeze now will benefit not just undergraduates. "The UC system is finally starting to understand its commitment to higher education extends from the undergraduate level to the professional level," said Flores, who is a UC Irvine law student.
For months now, it has been settled that undergraduate tuition at UC won't increase next year. That will stay the same for the second year in a row, thanks in part to the tax hikes state voters approved last November.
Yet until now, much uncertainty surrounded tuition in some master's and professional studies. The fate of those fees were among the final major decisions facing UC President Mark G. Yudof, who is leaving his post in late August.
In November, Yudof sought to raise 2013-14 fees for 56 professional and graduate degree programs, most by less than 10%. Those ranged from $144 more annually for a preventive veterinary medicine degree at UC Davis to a $3,256 increase for a business degree at UC Berkeley.
That proposal was put on hold after Gov. Jerry Brown said it was unseemly just days after voters approved Proposition 30, which boosts sales and some income taxes. Assembly Speaker John Pérez has been telling UC not to revive the idea, saying it would add too much student loan debt.
Graduate and professional degree students generally pay basic tuition of about $12,200. (Non-residents pay more.) In addition, about 14,000 of them are charged so-called professional degree supplemental tuition that ranges from $4,000 for a master's in social welfare at UC Berkeley to $38,548 for a master's degree in business at UC Berkeley, with a wide variety of costs for such fields as urban planning, dentistry, architecture, engineering, law and environmental science.
Despite student protests, the university over the last five years has imposed those supplemental fees on more programs, widening the scope from the traditional categories of law, medicine and dentistry to fields that often lead to less lucrative careers, such as public health, art, education and social work. (Students in more purely academic studies such as doctorates in English or chemistry did not face those supplemental charges.)
The UC regents are expected to approve Yudof's new proposal, which includes financial aid for needy graduate students, at a meeting July 16-18 in San Francisco. Under the plan, supplemental tuition would be increased only at nursing programs at the UCLA, Davis, Irvine and San Francisco campuses.
In addition, according to Klein, the supplemental fees would affect four new master's programs: $28,900 for UC Santa Cruz studies in games and playable media; $23,000 for UC Santa Cruz's technology and information management; $10,400 for UC Davis' health services and physician assistant studies; and $30,330 in a joint UC Berkeley-UC San Francisco program in translational medicine, which will train students to bring new inventions to patient care.
Yudof recently approved a plan for the full-time business master's degree program at UCLA's Anderson School of Management that will rely wholly on tuition and donations rather than state funding. He is expected to approve a tuition hike for those students without needing a vote of the regents.

2013-08-02 "First Responders in El Centro Strike Against Poverty Wages"

by Leslie Miller, International Brotherhood of Teamsters [calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/first_responders_in_el_centro_strike_against_poverty_wages]:

Teamster first responders for Gold Cross Ambulance are on strike for a third day in their fight for a wage that allows them to feed their families and pay for medical coverage.
Sixty of our Teamster brothers and sisters in El Centro, Calif., are standing strong against Gold Cross Ambulance, which pays them starting hourly wages ranging from $8.78 to $9.77 for saving lives as ambulance drivers, EMTs and paramedics. They are members of Teamsters Local 542 in San Diego.
Phil Farias, president of Teamsters Local 542, said the Teamsters deserve a fair wage, better benefits and decent working conditions: "These are dedicated employees who want to do this work, who want to serve their community."
The Teamster first responders are joining a wave of strikes engulfing low-wage employers around the country. Labor unrest is escalating this week with a series of shorts strikes against fast-food companies. Hundreds walked off the job at Wendy's, McDonald's and KFC yesterday in New York. Today low-wage workers went on strike in Kansas City and St. Louis, while more workers are expected to strike in Chicago, Detroit and Milwaukee over the next few days.
In California, KYMA News reports [kyma.com/slp.php?idN=8646&cat=Local+News]: [begin excerpt] Alex Ochoa has been working for Gold Cross Ambulance as a paramedic for 13 years. "We're running out on calls--we break down going to a call. Or we have a patient on board--A/C's not working in the back. We're handing them ice packs and apologizing to them," Ochoa said. [end excerpt]
Despite the 106 degree heat, the employees on strike are out 24 hours a day holding signs near the corner of Imperial Avenue and Vine Street in El Centro.
Said Farias: Our members are strong and they will stay out for as long as it takes to get a fair contract.

Vallejo Dignity Village

2013-07-23 "Pastor looks at alternative idea to homelessness"  
by Jessica A. York from "Vallejo Times-Herald" [http://www.timesheraldonline.com/news/ci_23712867/pastor-looks-at-alternative-idea-homelessness]:
Returning to the "real world" after 40 days living as though he were (nearly) homeless, Scott Nalley said readjusting to having a home, family and church to run was not seamless.
"I noticed there was still that connection. It just don't feel right," said Nalley, pastor of Bridgeway Church Outreach Center, about a week after his journey ended. "I guess it's like soldiers on a combat field."
About a week into his plan to serve Vallejo's homeless on their own turf, Nalley, 52, stumbled upon Vallejo's experiment with creating a "Dignity Village."
Vallejo's Dignity Village, which is being disbanded, was a regulated effort kept mostly under wraps by organizers. It was based on a 13-year-old alternative homeless shelter of the same name in Portland, Ore. The camp was divided into districts overseen by its denizens, with tents, tarps, food and other services regularly provided.
"I went from the hill (near Lowe's) to Dignity Village," said Nalley, an ex-Marine. "It's just a huge difference. Because there, they really are camping. It really highlights how valuable community is... It's just a place to call home. They say 'we're not homeless, we're houseless.' "
Nalley came to Vallejo four years ago from Napa to find a place where he found it easy to be of help to some of the area's neediest. He said he was surprised to find out what the hardest parts of being homeless are.
Waking up with a damp sleeping bags, avoiding bugs, finding a place to shave and get water, keeping your phone charged -- the needs were immediate for Nalley and many to whom he spoke.
Nalley said he learned that Vallejoans are some of the most generous people he's met when it comes to helping the needy, and that it is a misconception that homeless people do not work -- they just go about it in different ways.
"It's actually pretty hard to stay homeless. If you think about it, you've got to (find a) shower, you've got to get food," Nalley said. "They get up early every day. Some of them get up at 3, 4 in the morning and head out for recycling."
Vallejoan Deme Stall-Nash began publicly campaigning for the city to launch its own version of the encampment, aimed at returning dignity to those without a permanent home, after a woman was found dead in a Vallejo encampment.
Stall-Nash went on to secure the permission of a property owner in the city's White Slough area to allow the encampment for a year. The area behind Redwood Street was already a regular gathering point for homeless people, and has been cleared out by the city or at the city's urging on several occasions in recent years.
In June, Stall-Nash and Nalley appealed to the Vallejo City Council for attention to the matter. Stall-Nash said she and camp organizers Vallejo Together had not received the backing they were hoping for to make the encampment permanent, and now were being told to clear it out by Aug. 1.
"It's sad that we're not taking ownership," Stall-Nash said Monday. "We need our city leaders to realize (homelessness is) our problem now. They're just going to somebody else's land owner."
Between 30 and 40 people were staying at Dignity Village at its peak, organizers said.
Code Enforcement Manager Nimat Shakoor-Grantham has raised concerns that the debris and waste byproducts of the encampment are endangering the White Slough's federally protected wetland environment and could open the city to fines from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Vallejo Housing and Community Development Director Anne Putney said last month that her office is working to provide resources for the homeless encampment as it is being disbanded, including distributing to denizens a resource guide that sprung out of last year's homeless workshops.
Putney also pointed to the upcoming roundtable homelessness discussion as a place to "get all the players at the table." She added that $75,000 in city Housing Authority budget reserves have been set aside to fund homeless services, and hopes ideas raised at Wednesday's discussion will assist in zeroing in on priority needs.

If You Go
What: Vallejo Homeless Workshop 3
When: 4-6 p.m., Wednesday
Where: John F. Kennedy Library's Joseph Room, 505 Santa Clara St.
At issue: Vallejo's homeless people and service providers brainstorming session, with Placerville Mayor Wendy Thomas speaking on the "Hangtown Haven" encampment
RSVP: Vallejo Together, 655-5381 (seating limited)

Vallejo's services to the Homeless are cut-back

2013-08-02 "Vallejo homeless shelter limits free daily meals"
by Jessica A. York from "Vallejo Times-Herald" [www.timesheraldonline.com/news/ci_23782532/vallejo-homeless-shelter-limits-free-daily-meals]:
Vallejo's only homeless shelter has begun limiting the number of free meals given out to the city's neediest, and other groups are being tapped to fill the void.
The move came several weeks ago, after three years of the Christian Help Center opening its daily meals to anyone in need, organization Executive Director Norma Ramos said Monday.
"I opened up the breakfast, lunch and dinners to the entire community because people were having such a dismal time," Ramos said. "For a while it was fine, we were able to keep up. (But) in the past few months, it's been just a little bit more difficult, and I anticipate it could get worse."
The shelter recently transitioned back to a limited number of meals for those not already staying at the site. That shift is due to a reduction in food donations from local businesses, Ramos said, also citing two years of funding reductions from the city-administered federal Community Development Block Grants.
"Even with donations from (the community), now there are so many groups that are giving out food donations," Ramos said. "Say there's five organizations doing it, so now we get a fifth (of the donations). That's made it harder, too."
Prior to Ramos taking the helm and opening the process to all, meals were limited to five a year per person not residing at the shelter. Ramos said she has set a higher ceiling of 12 meals - averaging about one a month.
The Christian Help Center will continue to hold Saturday lunches and offering bread and water to those in need, regardless of whether or not they are staying at the shelter, Ramos added.
Also, a recent plumbing problem that had closed the shelter's men's shower over the last several months is expected to be remedied by next week, Ramos said.
Vallejo Rev. Al Marks, of the First Baptist Church, said the Christian Help Center notified him some five or six weeks ago of the center's pending feeding policy. Marks organizes the nearly 14-year-old Sparrow Project, providing hot lunches Monday through Thursday, a Sunday dinner and a late-night Saturday barbecue.
"We've seen an increase of people coming for lunches, that's for sure," Marks said Tuesday. "Last Saturday morning, 112 people came out. We're doing turkey and as much soup as we can make and sack lunches."
Marks acknowledged that while meal attendance always rises at the end of the month, when paychecks start to dwindle, that last week's group was about a 12-to 22-person increase. He added that his effort is benefited by both weekly deliveries from Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano, donations from eight Vallejo and Benicia grocery stores, coffee shops and more than seven years of monthly food from Gracie's Barbecue.
"The Christian Help Center has a long history of doing great work for the community and the homeless, but for those who aren't in residence, there aren't a lot of places for them to turn to, and we try to be one of them," Marks said.
Marks' perspective on competition for local charity differed somewhat from the Ramos'.
"It's not competition for the donations at all. There's no sense of competition in getting the donations," Marks said. "It's just that there are not many places that will make donations."
Vallejo Together's organizer Maria Guevara said she was concerned when she heard of the meal cutbacks for homeless "friends in need." Vallejo Together works through its mobile Care to Share to distribute food donations to the city's homeless every Friday, among other regular efforts.
Guevara said feeding efforts by various groups are not reducing the needy population. She added that she and others would be willing to help the Christian Help Center find alternatives to reducing the daily meals.
"Before they canceled it, they should have had a call-out (for help)," Guevara said. "We could have helped them. There are so many churches in town that are not involved in (homeless feeding efforts). Now that we found out ... we are more than willing to assist them in scheduling groups to cook for (the homeless), because no one should go hungry."
Benjamin and Mary Ann Buggs, who organize the 2-year-old Faith Food Fridays - a weekly giveaway of bags of fruit, vegetables, dry goods, bread and dairy - said they have not experienced a reduction in food donations received.
However, Benjamin Buggs acknowledged, Faith Food Fridays does not serve hot meals multiple times daily.
"Faith Food Fridays partners with the Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano, and I'm not sure they're taking advantage of that option," Buggs said. "In the last couple of years, don't think we've ever seen them there."
"Our numbers are actually going, significantly going, up," Buggs added. "We averaged 65 to 80 people a week in our first year. Now, we're up to 130 a week - about 170 came through (this past) Friday. We're the only food program without restrictions - everyone from the county can come out every week."

Faith Food Fridays giveaways arefrom 3 to 6 p.m. at 826 Solano Ave.

Contact the Christian Help Center at 2166 Sacramento St. or call 553-8192. Contact Faith Food Fridays, call (510) 9782396 or visit faithfoodfridays.com.

Contact Vallejo Together at 655-5381.The Sparrow Project serves 11 a.m. lunches Monday through Thursday at 2025 Sonoma Blvd.

Human Rights abuse in itty-bitty Santa Cruz

* Santa Cruz city council censors, punishes critics who speak during public comments portion of council session [link]
* Santa Cruz ACLU ignores Human Rights Abuse against the poor, homeless [link]
* Santa Cruz attacking houseless people: [link]
* 'Code Blue' campaign of terror against homeless residents [link]
* Santa Cruz targets "Gangs", scapegoats lower-income communities [link]
* Santa Cruz attacks "Food Not Bombs" and other Human Rights advocates [link]
* Santa Cruz persecutes the "Santa Cruz 11", with Linda LeMaster, Ed Fry, Gary Johnson [link]
* Santa Cruz tortures political dissidents: An account by Steven Argue [link]
* Santa Cruz attacks independent arts, culture and artisan vendors [link]
* Copwatch: Santa Cruz [link]
* Freedom of Information Campaign organized by John Colby against Human Rights abuse in Santa Cruz [link] 
* Retaliatory actions against Human Rights advocate John Colby [link]
* Cop Watcher in Santa Cruz shut down by private security guards (2014-07-31) [link]
* Robert Norse, People's Journalist of Santa Cruz, targeted for silence by repressive city council (2014-04-02) [link]
* Videos of Officer Azua harassing four young African Americans with intent to falsely arrest (2014-08-16) [link]
* Superhero attempts to address Human Rights abuse in Santa Cruz using a legal action which can be used anywhere else [link]
* Santa Cruz PD and racial profiling against African visitors [link]
* Santa Cruz selectively enforces "clutter laws" against people who are protesting or of lumpenproletariat status (2014-06) [link]
* Solidarity with Santa Cruz political prisoners, Defend against inhumane foreclosure business practices (2012-03-11) [link]
* Permanent Surveillance in Santa Cruz [link]
* Santa Cruz restricts peaceable public assemblies [link]
* Law that allows for Dissenters to get arrested for speaking to Santa Cruz City Council [link]
* Non-profit bike charity targeted for disruption by Santa Cruz City for alleged political motivations (2014-01-31) [link]
* UC Santa Cruz Police Attack non-violent students (2006) [link] 
* Santa Cruz Sentinel newspaper photographer Dan Coyro is a police spy, and shows extreme hostility for advocates of education and democracy [link]

Note by Norse, 2014-08-08:
Some days ago I made a Public Records Act request for the guidelines and frequency of use of the SCPD re: chokeholds, tasering, drawing a gun, using it, and pepper spraying. I also asked the police to specify the officers engaging in these acts of force, who they used them against and the dates. The article referenced is in regard to the toxic use of force by another police department.
Our SCPD stonewalled on the specifics but gave me the following responses.
I asked " Do I understand that officers do not specifically note and their superiors review when they have drawn or fired their weapons, other than an incidental part of the report?" Jacqui Dreschler the Records Supervisor noted "Correct, the information would be contained in the narrative of the report."
In response to specifics Dreschler declined to provide any, other the following summary:
"Types of Force Number of Uses: Taser 39; Baton 4; Hands 6; Elbow 3; Knee 2; OC 1" during the period 2012 through 2013.
The actual Use of Force Police itself I include and is chilling in and of itself-


Santa Cruz has been a police state 'testbed' for a loooong time -
Santa Cruz was one of the first Police departments to get a rather elaborate associative database to 'play with', and is prominently mentioned in "The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove: An analysis of U.S. Police",  1977. The Feminist bookstore in Santa Cruz sold it, used to be on Walnut was, before that 'mysterious fire' burned them out. You can download a copy of the book here [link].


2006-03 "Ten Minutes, Then Jail"
article from "Street Spirit" newspaper archives at "HUFF"
[huffsantacruz.org/StreetSpiritSantaCruz/241.10%20Min.,Then%20Jail=3-2006.jpg]:
page 1

Page 2:



2001-12 "Some History of Blatant Political Repression in Santa Cruz, California"
by Steven Argue from "Liberation News" (subscribe free: [lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news])
---
[Painting by Steven Argue: Brutal Pig as Carnivorous Beetle]

I’m reposting the following article, one that I wrote over ten years ago, because we are still dealing with most of the same issues it addresses today. These issues include police repression of left-wing activism in Santa Cruz, atrocious abuses of the poor, especially the homeless, in Santa Cruz, as well as the support of the Santa Cruz Green Party in backing those policies. The article was written in December, 2001.
The types repression suffered by Santa Cruz activists reported in this article, carried out by the local “progressive” government, have continued unabated to this day. This includes the latest outrageous government attacks on Santa Cruz activists Ed Frey, Gary Johnson, Linda Lemaster, Occupy Santa Cruz, and the Santa Cruz 11. For more on those cases, see “USA: Human Rights Activist Ordered to Six Months of Jail, More Repression Scheduled” the link is posted at the end of this article.
In addition, there has actually been a worsening of anti-homeless laws, including laws that make sleep by the homeless now punishable by serious jail time. This includes a new bill passed by the Democrat controlled California State Assembly that doubles the punishment under anti-sleeping law 647e, making sleep punishable by up to a year in jail. In addition, new Santa Cruz City laws passed by the “progressive” Democrats of the Santa Cruz City Council make repeat sleep offenses by the homeless punishable by up to six months in jail as well.
The role of Green Party of Santa Cruz in carrying out oppression against activists, reported in this article, fits with the Green Party’s recent successful actions to remove socialists from the ballot in Illinois. Santa Cruz history is useful in seeing some of the inherent problems with the capitalist Green Party and seeing the need for building a revolutionary socialist alternative.
Santa Cruz also has an informative history with a civilian police review boards. In response to police actions in Anaheim, the Freedom Socialist Party presidential campaign is presently pushing reformist illusions in creating a citizen’s police review board to reign in the abuses of the cops. Yet, as reported in this article, Santa Cruz experience shows that these boards don’t work. Over and over again we see that it is the most abusive cops that usually get promoted and who are only rarely prosecuted for their crimes, let alone fired. The police abuse us, not because they are rogue, but because they are following orders. Santa Cruz experience shows nothing changed under a citizen’s police review board. The Santa Cruz Citizen’s Police Review Board was set up merely to give the illusion that there was a proper channel within the system that could give people justice after we were abused by the cops. And that’s all it was, an illusion of a chance for police victims to receive justice where we never got it. Reformist illusions in such bodies need to be fought in favor of recognizing that abusive police are an inherent part of the capitalist system, and only the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist state will end police abuses.
In addition, after my article, I offer some self-criticism on why my program at the time wasn’t enough. Because I did receive a large amount of support from the community at the time, I think this public criticism of my errors could be useful and informative for the struggles of today and struggles to come.
************************
HOMELESSNESS AND POLITICAL REPRESSION, THE GREEN PARTY FAILS THE TEST IN SANTA CRUZ. (December 04, 2001)
By STEVE ARGUE
Green Party City Council Person Tim Fitzmaurice and "progressive" Democrats Christopher Krohn and Keith Sugar were swept into office out of a ground swell of opposition to plans for expansion of the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk in 1998.
At that time many had the illusion that these three were going to over turn the city’s sleeping ban (a city law making it illegal for the homeless to sleep at night), and confront the repressive nature of the Santa Cruz Police Department. Those illusions were soon shattered.
During Tim Fitzmaurice's past three years in office he has opposed lifting the sleeping ban. In 1998 the City Council was under public pressure to end the sleeping ban. At that time Fitzmaurice did support a successful measure that lowered the fine for sleeping outside or in a vehicle from $162 to $54. But Fitzmaurice voted with the majority on the council against lifting the sleeping ban. The vote was Sugar and Krohn for lifting the sleeping ban, Fitzmaurice, Biers, Rotkin, and Hernandez against.
This year (2001) when newly elected Council Member (D) Ed Porter tried to bring the issue of the sleeping ban up for discussion, (G) Mayor Fitzmaurice broke the rules of city hall by vetoing the discussion. Porter, in an Al Gore like fashion, did not fight the violation of democracy.
Fitzmaurice's stand against the rights of the homeless is in clear violation of the platform of the Green Party, which opposes anti-homeless laws. Because of this fact, Green Party member Robert Norse has pushed for the Green Party of Santa Cruz to hold Tim Fitzmaurice accountable. Yet, instead of the Green Party officially distancing themselves from Tim Fitzmaurice for his policies against the homeless they have demonized Robert Norse for criticizing their beloved Green Party mayor. Many of these attacks on Robert Norse are of a personal nature despite their clear political motivations.
It is the obligation of any political party to hold those they elect to power to the positions of the membership of the party. If a political party does not do so its political platform is only worth so much toilet paper. This has been the case of the Democrat Party for years. It is the case with the past three years of Green Party power in Santa Cruz as well. If the Green Party truly represented change it would kick Tim Fitzmaurice out of the party for his violations of party policy and violations of human rights, rather than defending him.
While nothing has been remedied, the anti-activist and anti-homeless nature of the Santa Cruz Police has been there since before the Green Party took office. In the 1980s the Santa Cruz Police, according to court testimony of fellow officers, carried out beatings of homeless people which they called “operation code blue” over their radios. What “code blue” meant was that officers were to arrive on the scene where they beat homeless people to death.
Sandy Loranger did jail time for feeding the homeless soup. When the judge offered her counseling instead of jail, Sandy Loranger replied, "If feeding my fellow man is a crime, I am beyond rehabilitation." Film footage shows activist B.D. was tackled and pepper sprayed by Santa Cruz Police when he was merely giving a speech for the rights of the homeless on a downtown sidewalk. In a similar manner, film footage shows James Cosner was tackled down and arrested merely for taping up a poster of political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal to a downtown fence.
The repression and abuses have continued since the election of Tim Fitzmaurice, but the Green Party in office has done nothing to stop them.
One year before the election of Tim Fitzmaurice, homeless and anti-police brutality activist John Dine was shot and killed by Santa Cruz Police Officer Connor Carey. On television, the claim by Police Chief Belcher was that John Dine was pointing a toy gun at the officer before he was shot. Yet none of the many independent eyewitnesses backed up that claim.
Even the Citizen's Police Review Board (appointed by the City Council) recognized that John Dine was not pointing a gun. Yet the Citizen's Police Review Board (CPRB) claimed not to be contradicting Chief Belcher in their findings despite telling an entirely different story.
The CPRB's report stated that the shooting of John Dine was justified because he was reaching for what appeared to be a gun. Because of activism, too much of the truth had gotten out to the public for the CPRB to stick with Chief Belcher's version of a pointed gun, but the CPRB continued the cover-up with this new falsified version of events where John Dine is supposedly reaching for what appears to be a gun. The independent eyewitnesses refuted this CPRB version of events as well.
Some of the eyewitnesses had become so upset about the cover-up by the city government, DA, and the corporate media that they became activists in trying to get out the truth and punish those responsible.
The Santa Cruz Sentinel, one of the main corporate newspapers in Santa Cruz, however, continues to refer to John Dine as "a deranged man who was pointing a toy gun at police".
On November 12, 1998, the one-year anniversary of the police murder of John Dine, a protest of 100 people was organized demanding an end to the cover-up. Speakers at that event included newly elected City Council Persons Christopher Krohn and Keith Sugar along with myself. The following day, a photo of all three of us standing in front of the demonstrators was prominently displayed on page 2 of the Santa Cruz Sentinel.
That same day, November 13th, I was brutalized and arrested by Santa Cruz Police Officer Garner. The pretext for arrest was that I was selling newspapers without a license. Yet the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is very clear about protecting freedom of press. It states, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." In fact, the city law, on paper anyway, also allows the selling of newspapers. Officer Garner's request for a license brings my arrest and beating to the level of absurdity because the city does not even have a license that it issues for selling newspapers in the first place.
Up until November of 1998 the police regularly harassed and at times ticketed those who distributed more truthful news than can be found in the corporate media. Those papers include the newspaper Street Spirit which advocates human rights for the homeless, various socialist papers, and the revolutionary unionist paper: The Industrial Worker.
I was released without charges after four days in jail and after being brutalized by arresting officers on the street, and also being beaten by sheriffs in the county jail. In addition, Christopher Krohn and Keith Sugar were criticized in an editorial in the Santa Cruz Sentinel for their participation in the November 12th demonstration. After facing that criticism, Krohn and Sugar shut their mouths about police brutality, including in the cases of John Dine and myself.
I, on the other hand, knowing that freedoms have to be fought for, was back out on the street selling newspapers immediately after my release from jail. I also spoke out on the radio, TV, and in the newspapers for freedom of press. As a result of my actions and other activists publicizing the case, the police have, for the most part, stopped violating the right of people to buy and sell newspapers in the City of Santa Cruz. The one exception I know of was in 2000 when I was once again threatened with arrest for selling newspapers. I refused to back down and eventually the police backed down instead.
My attorney, Kate Wells, and I have also filed a lawsuit in federal court for the City’s violations of the constitutional rights of the people of Santa Cruz to free speech. The attorney for the City, who works for the Green / Democrat City Council, is arguing that it is not legal to sell newspapers in Santa Cruz. A Federal Judge, however, has ruled that not only was my arrest a clear violation of constitutional rights, but that the way the City is trying to defend its actions now shows that it is City policy to violate constitutional rights. The City attorney's office, again under the control of the Green / Democrat City Council, is appealing the ruling and continuing to argue against the First Amendment Constitutional rights of the people of Santa Cruz.
Green Party City Council Person Tim Fitzmaurice along with Krohn and Sugar did nothing to defend freedom of press when I was arrested. In fact, Fitzmaurice's appointee to the so-called Citizen's Police Review Board, Green Party member Arne Leff, voted with the rest, saying that the police acted properly when they arrested and beat me for selling newspapers.
The Green Party of Santa Cruz moved further to the right in the 2000 elections in their opposition to freedom of press. They endorsed Arne Leff in his run for city council.
These are not small questions. They involve the protection, or not, of the most fundamental free speech rights. Freedom of press is difficult enough in America as it is without arrest because of the lack of advertising and accompanied low budgets that those who try to get out the truth have to deal with. John Dine can no longer pass out flyers or participate in protests to end the sleeping ban because he is dead. The fact that Connor Carey is still on the police force, serves as a powerful warning to other would be homeless activists that they may die for their convictions.
The silence of the City Council only helped to promote this repressive atmosphere. The City Council is the boss of the police through City Manager Dick Wilson, who they have the authority to fire. Repressive and murderous cops have to be taught that there are consequences for their crimes.
Other activists for the rights of the homeless have had their rights trampled by the police under the past three years of Green Party / Democrat Party rule in Santa Cruz as well. These have included James Nay who was arrested for writing things in chalk on the sidewalk opposing the sleeping ban, and David Silva who was arrested and given a psychiatric evaluation for asking City Council, "What's it going to take, self emollition to end the sleeping ban?"
Activist for the homeless, Robert Norse, was illegally arrested on September 19th and on October 3rd for circulating a petition at the Farmer's Market asking for an end to police harassment of musicians, artisans, and activists by the Santa Cruz Police at the Farmer's Market. The Farmer's Market is held in a publicly owned parking lot and, as a public gathering space, courts have ruled even on private property such as malls, that the First Amendment still applies. The need for Norse’s petition was partially inspired by the threat of police to arrest of peace activist John Theilking for a literature table he had set up on September 5th.
Judge Stevens later dropped the charges against Robert Norse in court along with dismissing the attempt at an injunction against him, but the arrests were another clear violation of the free speech rights of the people of Santa Cruz. These arrests have been coupled with the Green / Democrat city government's blatant fencing off of most of the areas that used to be used for free speech tables at the Farmer's Market.
Activists regularly pass out fliers, set up literature tables, and circulate petitions at the Farmer's Market for many causes. In 1999, rent control activist Bob Lamonica and activists for freeing U.S. political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal were threatened with ticketing and potential arrest by Officer Howes. Activists for both causes spoke out against the violation of their rights, and in the following weeks they defiantly set up literature tables and were left alone. While the outcome was good, the violent and arrest happy history of the Santa Cruz Police made these stands for free speech heroic.
Coupled with these blatant attacks on free speech is a constant low intensity warfare of harassment against human rights activists, the homeless, street artisans, and musicians. As the police often say to their victims, "this is Santa Cruz; we can find a law for anything." In 2000, Robert Norse was ticketed for sitting at the base of Tom Scribner's statue. Charges were later dropped when he produced a photo of City Council members doing the same thing. Activist K.C., who has attended a number of demonstrations, was ticketed for blowing bubbles, which the officer claimed were projectiles being thrown into traffic. That charge was dropped when it made the national news.
When dealing with the homeless, the police often illegally steal backpacks, vehicles, and identification. The police confiscations of identification have now become especially serious with the City’s emergency shelter program now requiring ID as a result of the National Guard Armory, who's building provides the shelter, now requiring identification to be admitted into emergency winter shelter. This is being done under the pretext of the "war on terror". In the summer, there is no emergency shelter in Santa Cruz except that which takes months to get into and only lasts one month. The new ID rule gives the police one more opportunity to victimize the homeless in the winter. The new rule also victimizes undocumented immigrants who may need emergency shelter.
Santa Cruz Police have stopped me five times under the manufactured pretext of jay walking, which carries a heavy fine. One of those tickets was thrown out of court and I was later arrested for another that I refused to pay. The police also took my car without legitimate legal pretext and arrested me that same day for watching, without intervening, the police hassle a homeless man. I never got my car back, but the charge for witnessing police misconduct and then becoming a victim of it myself was thrown out of court, after a tape of the incident made by activist and Free Radio DJ, Vinny Lombardo, was played for the judge. While this harassment was taking place, according to witnesses, a photo of me, drawn in wire rimmed glasses and a goatee, made to look like revolutionary leader Leon Trotsky, was hanging on the police station wall.
Emboldened by years of repression and harassment against the homeless, and getting away with repression against activists dealing with local issues, the Santa Cruz Police viciously attacked anti-war protesters on May 22, 1999. By Sgt. MacMahon's own admission in court, it was a lawful protest until the police intervened. The protest was against the US bombing of Yugoslavia. The target of the protest was a Democrat Party fundraiser where Congressional Representative Sam Farr (D) was giving a speech. Sam Farr had the nerve to vote for the war and then turn around and say on the news "Give peace a chance." Protesters were demanding an end to the war and exposing Sam Farr's real policies. Police brutalized protesters and five were arrested.
One of the main culprits in the attack was Officer David LaFavor. He had stated a couple years earlier to activist David Silva that it was his goal to clean the scum off of the streets of Santa Cruz. When asked who the scum were he listed the homeless, political activists, and street musicians. David Silva warned the City Council about Officer LaFavor at that time.
At the protest, the first person arrested, without reason, was Kao Ling Lao. The charge against her, Disturbing the Peace, was later thrown out of court. She was grabbed by police and taken through the crowd to a waiting patty-wagon. Angry protesters wanted to know what she was being arrested for and followed the police to the patty-wagon, which they peacefully surrounded, blocking its exit. As if to inflame the protesters to react with another provocation, the police then went after the only two people in the crowd who were carrying small children.
Videotape shows Officer LaFavor passing up other protesters and walking up to Julian who is holding her four-year old child. LaFavor immediately grabbed Julian’s wrist and put her in a pain compliance hold. A man with an infant was also grabbed by Officer LaMoss. Officer LaFavor then drags Julian around the patty-wagon and stops in front of me with Julian’s child screaming “Mommy! Mommy! Mommy!” in fear and Julian screaming in pain, her hand turned purple from the pain compliance hold. I demanded that LaFavor stop torturing the woman. LaFavor did not comply with my reasonable commands. I then used the force necessary to stop the crime he was carrying out; I punched LaFavor in the nose. Julian and her child were then able to escape.
Nassim Zarriffi stepped in against the other case of police child abuse that day, where he came up from behind and pulled Officer LaMoss's arm up saying, "You're hurting the baby". The baby was being pressed in between the arresting officer and the father and Nassim was concerned for the baby’s safety. After Nassim’s action, the father and child were then also able to escape as the police turned on Nassim Zarriffi. He was charged with Misdemeanor Assault on an Officer and Misdemeanor Resisting Arrest, I was charged with Felony Assault and Battery on a Police Officer and Misdemeanor Resisting Arrest. In addition, James Cosner and Vinny Lombardo were charged with Resisting Arrest. The arrested became known as the Santa Cruz 5 and gained support in Santa Cruz, around the country, and around the world.
Due to massive pressure demanding justice, the Citizen's Police Review Board found that excessive force was used against Julian that endangered her child, and excessive force was used against myself when I was arrested. Despite these facts, I was convicted in court due to the actions of a hostile judge, Judge Attack, due to the incompetence and hostility of my attorney, Ben Rice, and due to the conservative nature of the jury. I endured 7 months in the Santa Cruz County Jail where I was held in solitary confinement for much of the time, beaten by guards, and faced other abuses from authorities.
Officer Lafavor no longer works for the City Government. According to a source in the Santa Cruz City Government, LaFavor was given the choice of being fired or resigning. He has, however, after resigning, gotten a job in another police department. [In his wake at his new job, a women has called me telling me that she called the police about being the victim of a domestic dispute, but Officer Lafavor showed-up on the scene and beat her-up instead.]
Today, the slander against the May 22nd demonstration continues on the national TV show called "Great Police Chases." They have repeatedly shown falsified video completely out of sequence showing me punching Officer LaFavor, but removing the video of Julian and her child before the punch was thrown, replacing it with other video of Officer LaFavor. The show, after deliberately falsifying the events of the demonstration also mocks the protesters for being “pacifists”. Opposing America's unjust wars and bombing of civilians does not necessarily make one a pacifist. I’m certainly not one.
When I ran for City Council in 2000, the Santa Cruz Sentinel repeatedly referred to me as "the cop puncher" while other candidates like Arne Leff were referred to by their professions. In this context, Arne Leff would more appropriately have been called the “constitution crusher”.
Despite the clear video tapes showing the violence and abuses of the police, no member of the Green / Democrat City Council ever took any action on behalf of the Santa Cruz 5 nor the right to protest while we were being prosecuted. Fitzmaurice's silence can be contrasted to the decision of the membership of the Green Party to put out a statement demanding the charges against me be dropped and Officer LaFavor be fired.
Will the Green Party be hi-jacked nation wide by opportunist career politicians who protect the status quo while the majority of membership is unwilling to make any significant moves to hold them accountable? The experience in Santa Cruz suggests it will.
The unwillingness of the Green Party to seriously take on police abuses and anti-poor laws with their position of power reflects a petty bourgeois reformist outlook, rather than a revolutionary working class perspective. The program of the Green Party sees the petty bourgeois owners of small businesses as their counter-weight to evil multi-national corporations. It is an economy of small businesses that they see as their maximum program, a program where small businesses are the base of the economy. The reality in Santa Cruz is that most of these small business owners are the biggest proponents of anti-homeless laws and the culprits in paying some of the lowest wages that cause homelessness.
In opposition, I promote methods of class struggle against all exploiters who trample on the rights of the poor and working class whether they be big or small capitalists. I call for doubling the minimum wage. Any business that can't pay a living wage should be driven under. I call for rent control to curb the gouging of the landlords. I call for firing the city manager, the chief of police, and Officer Connor Carey as a first step towards curbing police abuse. I call for an end to anti-homeless laws. I call for the city employee's living wage to be extended to part time employees paid for with cuts in the six digit salaries of the likes of Dick Wilson. I call for the unity of working and poor people against the bosses and their government and call for an end to all racist, sexist, and homophobic policies. I oppose US wars to subjugate the people of the world to U.S. corporate interests. I oppose the degradation of the planet’s ecology for the profits of the capitalists. I support the people in organizing unions, strikes, demonstrations, alternative media, an anti-capitalist worker's political parties to take on the power of the capitalist system.
It is on this platform I ran for office while being homeless in 2000 and received close to 3,000 votes, and it is on this platform I may run again in 2002. This was very respectable given the fact that 3 of the winners only got around 8,000 votes and they did it with much more money. But whether I run or not, and whether I win or not, change will only come through all who are fed up with the system taking an active role in making change.
******
Additional points by Steven Argue, August 4, 2012 -
This was a plan of action. As pointed out, I knew it was unlikely that I would be elected, but thought it was worthwhile to use my campaign the expose the lies of the local City Council, police, courts, corporate media, Democrat Party, and Green Party. If I had gotten elected I would have used my position to further the struggle for justice by continuing to expose the lies of the ruling class, mobilizing the people against the institutions of the capitalist state, and fighting to make changes even when that meant introducing bills that had little chance of passing to expose where everyone really stood.
Honest politicians who tie ourselves to the needs of the proletariat have just about no chance of getting elected in America today. Not being elected was expected. A far bigger problem was that I worked hard in advocating this program without adequately addressing the need to build a revolutionary organization around it. To be fair, there was no adequate revolutionary socialist party in the United States at that time, and this is a problem I’m now trying to address with the building of the Revolutionary Tendency (RTSP).
In addition, here are some other key points where I think I needed to address the issues in a clearer more revolutionary manner:

1. I was correct in calling for the doubling of the minimum wage, despite the lies from City Councilman (and fake socialist) Mike Rotkin. He claimed that municipalities “can’t raise the minimum wage” and said of the city council “we would have done it long ago if we could have”. Later, other municipalities did raise the minimum wage and the issue was also put on the Santa Cruz ballot, but defeated due to the campaigns of the local petty bourgeoisie against it. At that time, Mike Rotkin was exposed as a blatant liar when he campaigned against raising the minimum wage, despite claiming in the past he would have supported it if it was legally possible for the city to raise the minimum wage. Rotkin, still a fraud, is no longer on the City Council but teaches a fraudulent version of Marxism at the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC).

2. My call for firing Police Chief Belcher was, in part, to draw attention to the fact that the City Council did, in fact, actually have the power over the local repressive police. Instead of just advocating measures to change the police force starting with firing the chief of police, firing Officer Connor Carey, ending enforcement of drug laws, ending racial profiling, and repealing anti-homeless laws, I should have also more clearly advocated the need for firing the entire police force and starting over by hiring a new police force drawn from supporters of the proletarian revolution.

3. I was correct in advocating rent control, but instead of just advocating rent control, I should have clearly advocated the revolutionary expropriation of the land lords and bankers to provide everyone with housing at 10% or less of our income. This would immediately eliminate homelessness.

4. I was correct in advocating the decriminalization of marijuana and other drugs as part of ending this police state’s mass incarceration of the poor and working class, but I should have more clearly advocated the total smashing and abolition of the bourgeois courts and prison systems as they currently exist and the building of a proletarian justice system.

5. I was correct to advocate measures that would make Santa Cruz more bicycle and pedestrian friendly as well as advocating massive subsidies for public transportation to expand the bus system and make its services available for free. Yet, short of a proletarian revolution that nationalizes the oil, coal, auto, and gas industries on a national scale, eliminates their corrupting power over politics, and takes immediate actions towards slowing emissions that cause climate change, we are presently peering over an abyss of climate change that will cause millions upon millions of human deaths and could possibly spell the end of human civilization. Breaking with the oil politicians of the Democrat and Republican parties on a local and national scale is essential for our future, as is a proletarian revolution that puts the management of our economy and environment in the hands of the majority of people. Nothing short of a total break from capitalist politics offers any future for humanity.

Wealth and power are monopolized by a few capitalists in America. We do not live in a democracy. It is not through begging for fairness that the wealthy capitalists will share wealth and power with the majority. It is through instilling in the ruling class the fear that we will rise up and take the entire pie that we sometimes win a piece of the pie. The only way we have ever created that kind of fear is by seriously organizing for revolution to take the entire pie. And that is what we want. It is by organizing militant unions, effective strikes, and a political party seriously geared towards advancing both militant proletarian action and socialist revolution that both reforms and revolutions are won. These are the goals of the Revolutionary Tendency of the Socialist Party (RTSP). Join us.

Also, in Santa Cruz, join this coming protest for Ed Frey, see: "USA: Human Rights Activist Ordered to Six Months of Jail, More Repression Scheduled" (This is a current article with a flyer for the August 7th and 8th protest for Ed Frey attached at the end) [http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/07/29/18718520.php]
Also see the following articles from Liberation News: "City Council Passes Resolution Preventing Vigilante Justice Against Homeless (satire)" [http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/08/21/18442098.php]