🚀 go-pugleaf

Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?

DCI


On 11 May 2007 23:08:46 -0700, dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:

>-----Forwarded Message-----
>From: Robert Norse rnorse3 at hotmail dot com
>                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/huffsantacruz
>Date: May 10, 2007
>
>Parking Lot Panic Expansion Law Headed for Downtown Commission 5-24
>by Robert Norse
>
>Thursday May 10th, 2007 1:35 PM
>
>Back from the graveyard: an expansion of the current Parking Garage
>Paranoia
>Law to include every single surface parking lot in the Downtown area
>banning
>those without cars and bikes and requiring those who use the lots to
>time
>themselves and make sure they spend no more than 15 minutes going to
>and
>from their vehicle or waiting in their vehicle.
>
>The City's ban on entering its 4 downtown parking garages as well as
>Parking
>Lot #9 (Elm St. between Cedar and Pacific) is slated to be broadened,
>if the
>Public Works Department has its way.
>
>I spoke with Matt Ferrell, outgoing Parking Supervisor, who confirmed
>that
>the issue of expanding the law had already been raised at the March
>Downtown
>Commission meeting (unbeknownst to me). I hope to have a tape of that
>meeting available for play on the air next Sunday on my
>Bathrobespierre's
>Broadsides Free Radio Santa Cruz show at 101.1 FM
>(http://www.freakradio.org) sometime between 10 and noon.
>
>The current law fines anyone entering Lot #9 or the garages unless
>they have
>a vehicle of bike there. If they do, they get 15 minutes, after which
>they
>become "illegal".
>
>The privatization (or perhaps we should say police-a-fication) of
>public
>space was primarily a response to homeless campers who (still) have no
>legal
>shelter in Santa Cruz (space for 40 for 1500-2000). Instead of
>legalizing
>safe sleeping zones as Fresno's mayor says he'll be doing, or
>suspending
>nighttime ticketing as San Diego and Los Angeles have done, or
>changing
>their Sleeping Ban law as Richmond has done, the Reilly-Coonerty
>Council has
>hired more 7 more CSO/Rangers to increase the homeless ticketing in
>the
>Pogonip and promoted "Lone Ranger" John Wallace to Chief Ranger.
>
>Wallace is a nice guy, but an uncompromising zealot regarding homeless
>people in public spaces. He gave out more "sleepcrime" tickets last
>year
>than the entire SCPD combined.
>
>His ticketing of shelterless people violates the federal Jones
>decision (as
>well as common sense and common decency). The seizure and wanton
>destruction
>of homeless property violates the Fresno Kincaid decision (not binding
>precedent here, but an obvious warning to us to stop treating homeless
>survival gear and valued possessions like trash). In laymen's terms,
>Wallace's policy (and City Manager Dick Wilson's policy) treats
>homeless
>people and their property like lower animals, undeserving of
>constitutional
>protection.
>
>I wasn't at the last Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, but it
>reportedly featured another "horror slide show" of wretched homeless
>camp
>sites and trash left behind. This is akin to showing human feces and
>piss
>and ignoring the locked or non-existent bathrooms.
>
>The Downtown Commission meets Thursday May 24 at 8:30 AM in City
>Council
>chambers at 809 Center St. Protests against an expansion of this
>abusive and
>selectively-enforced ordinance can be sent directly to City Council at
>420-5020 or to the Downtown Commission at
>(831) 420-5184 or e-mailed at pw-downtown-commission [at]
>ci.santa-cruz.ca.us
>
>Last year activists successfully fought to remove the parking lots
>from this
>absurd law. Now they're back, seeking to lock down more traditional
>public
>space (including Lot #4 where Food Not Bombs serves every Wednesday.
>They've
>already removed the last of the 24-hour portapotties downtown. Now you
>won't
>be able to wait in your car longer than 15 minutes or even enter one
>of the
>20+ public lots downtown unless you own or are traveling in a car or
>bike.
>If you don't stop the police state, it will stop you.
>
>
>Earlier stories:
>Parking Garage Paranoia Law Stalls Again (Thursday May 11th, 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/11/18225711.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic at City Council Tuesday May 9th (Monday May 8th,
>2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/08/18219341.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic Law: Training Tutorial Downtown 3 PM Saturday
>(Friday May
>5th 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/05/18211071.php
>
>Fifteen Minute Parking Lot "Panic" Law At Council Today (4/25)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/04/25/18177761.php
>
>-----End Forward-----

Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?

DCI


On 11 May 2007 23:08:46 -0700, dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:

>-----Forwarded Message-----
>From: Robert Norse rnorse3 at hotmail dot com
>                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/huffsantacruz
>Date: May 10, 2007
>
>Parking Lot Panic Expansion Law Headed for Downtown Commission 5-24
>by Robert Norse
>
>Thursday May 10th, 2007 1:35 PM
>
>Back from the graveyard: an expansion of the current Parking Garage
>Paranoia
>Law to include every single surface parking lot in the Downtown area
>banning
>those without cars and bikes and requiring those who use the lots to
>time
>themselves and make sure they spend no more than 15 minutes going to
>and
>from their vehicle or waiting in their vehicle.
>
>The City's ban on entering its 4 downtown parking garages as well as
>Parking
>Lot #9 (Elm St. between Cedar and Pacific) is slated to be broadened,
>if the
>Public Works Department has its way.
>
>I spoke with Matt Ferrell, outgoing Parking Supervisor, who confirmed
>that
>the issue of expanding the law had already been raised at the March
>Downtown
>Commission meeting (unbeknownst to me). I hope to have a tape of that
>meeting available for play on the air next Sunday on my
>Bathrobespierre's
>Broadsides Free Radio Santa Cruz show at 101.1 FM
>(http://www.freakradio.org) sometime between 10 and noon.
>
>The current law fines anyone entering Lot #9 or the garages unless
>they have
>a vehicle of bike there. If they do, they get 15 minutes, after which
>they
>become "illegal".
>
>The privatization (or perhaps we should say police-a-fication) of
>public
>space was primarily a response to homeless campers who (still) have no
>legal
>shelter in Santa Cruz (space for 40 for 1500-2000). Instead of
>legalizing
>safe sleeping zones as Fresno's mayor says he'll be doing, or
>suspending
>nighttime ticketing as San Diego and Los Angeles have done, or
>changing
>their Sleeping Ban law as Richmond has done, the Reilly-Coonerty
>Council has
>hired more 7 more CSO/Rangers to increase the homeless ticketing in
>the
>Pogonip and promoted "Lone Ranger" John Wallace to Chief Ranger.
>
>Wallace is a nice guy, but an uncompromising zealot regarding homeless
>people in public spaces. He gave out more "sleepcrime" tickets last
>year
>than the entire SCPD combined.
>
>His ticketing of shelterless people violates the federal Jones
>decision (as
>well as common sense and common decency). The seizure and wanton
>destruction
>of homeless property violates the Fresno Kincaid decision (not binding
>precedent here, but an obvious warning to us to stop treating homeless
>survival gear and valued possessions like trash). In laymen's terms,
>Wallace's policy (and City Manager Dick Wilson's policy) treats
>homeless
>people and their property like lower animals, undeserving of
>constitutional
>protection.
>
>I wasn't at the last Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, but it
>reportedly featured another "horror slide show" of wretched homeless
>camp
>sites and trash left behind. This is akin to showing human feces and
>piss
>and ignoring the locked or non-existent bathrooms.
>
>The Downtown Commission meets Thursday May 24 at 8:30 AM in City
>Council
>chambers at 809 Center St. Protests against an expansion of this
>abusive and
>selectively-enforced ordinance can be sent directly to City Council at
>420-5020 or to the Downtown Commission at
>(831) 420-5184 or e-mailed at pw-downtown-commission [at]
>ci.santa-cruz.ca.us
>
>Last year activists successfully fought to remove the parking lots
>from this
>absurd law. Now they're back, seeking to lock down more traditional
>public
>space (including Lot #4 where Food Not Bombs serves every Wednesday.
>They've
>already removed the last of the 24-hour portapotties downtown. Now you
>won't
>be able to wait in your car longer than 15 minutes or even enter one
>of the
>20+ public lots downtown unless you own or are traveling in a car or
>bike.
>If you don't stop the police state, it will stop you.
>
>
>Earlier stories:
>Parking Garage Paranoia Law Stalls Again (Thursday May 11th, 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/11/18225711.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic at City Council Tuesday May 9th (Monday May 8th,
>2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/08/18219341.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic Law: Training Tutorial Downtown 3 PM Saturday
>(Friday May
>5th 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/05/18211071.php
>
>Fifteen Minute Parking Lot "Panic" Law At Council Today (4/25)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/04/25/18177761.php
>
>-----End Forward-----

Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?

DCI


On 11 May 2007 23:08:46 -0700, dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:

>-----Forwarded Message-----
>From: Robert Norse rnorse3 at hotmail dot com
>                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/huffsantacruz
>Date: May 10, 2007
>
>Parking Lot Panic Expansion Law Headed for Downtown Commission 5-24
>by Robert Norse
>
>Thursday May 10th, 2007 1:35 PM
>
>Back from the graveyard: an expansion of the current Parking Garage
>Paranoia
>Law to include every single surface parking lot in the Downtown area
>banning
>those without cars and bikes and requiring those who use the lots to
>time
>themselves and make sure they spend no more than 15 minutes going to
>and
>from their vehicle or waiting in their vehicle.
>
>The City's ban on entering its 4 downtown parking garages as well as
>Parking
>Lot #9 (Elm St. between Cedar and Pacific) is slated to be broadened,
>if the
>Public Works Department has its way.
>
>I spoke with Matt Ferrell, outgoing Parking Supervisor, who confirmed
>that
>the issue of expanding the law had already been raised at the March
>Downtown
>Commission meeting (unbeknownst to me). I hope to have a tape of that
>meeting available for play on the air next Sunday on my
>Bathrobespierre's
>Broadsides Free Radio Santa Cruz show at 101.1 FM
>(http://www.freakradio.org) sometime between 10 and noon.
>
>The current law fines anyone entering Lot #9 or the garages unless
>they have
>a vehicle of bike there. If they do, they get 15 minutes, after which
>they
>become "illegal".
>
>The privatization (or perhaps we should say police-a-fication) of
>public
>space was primarily a response to homeless campers who (still) have no
>legal
>shelter in Santa Cruz (space for 40 for 1500-2000). Instead of
>legalizing
>safe sleeping zones as Fresno's mayor says he'll be doing, or
>suspending
>nighttime ticketing as San Diego and Los Angeles have done, or
>changing
>their Sleeping Ban law as Richmond has done, the Reilly-Coonerty
>Council has
>hired more 7 more CSO/Rangers to increase the homeless ticketing in
>the
>Pogonip and promoted "Lone Ranger" John Wallace to Chief Ranger.
>
>Wallace is a nice guy, but an uncompromising zealot regarding homeless
>people in public spaces. He gave out more "sleepcrime" tickets last
>year
>than the entire SCPD combined.
>
>His ticketing of shelterless people violates the federal Jones
>decision (as
>well as common sense and common decency). The seizure and wanton
>destruction
>of homeless property violates the Fresno Kincaid decision (not binding
>precedent here, but an obvious warning to us to stop treating homeless
>survival gear and valued possessions like trash). In laymen's terms,
>Wallace's policy (and City Manager Dick Wilson's policy) treats
>homeless
>people and their property like lower animals, undeserving of
>constitutional
>protection.
>
>I wasn't at the last Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, but it
>reportedly featured another "horror slide show" of wretched homeless
>camp
>sites and trash left behind. This is akin to showing human feces and
>piss
>and ignoring the locked or non-existent bathrooms.
>
>The Downtown Commission meets Thursday May 24 at 8:30 AM in City
>Council
>chambers at 809 Center St. Protests against an expansion of this
>abusive and
>selectively-enforced ordinance can be sent directly to City Council at
>420-5020 or to the Downtown Commission at
>(831) 420-5184 or e-mailed at pw-downtown-commission [at]
>ci.santa-cruz.ca.us
>
>Last year activists successfully fought to remove the parking lots
>from this
>absurd law. Now they're back, seeking to lock down more traditional
>public
>space (including Lot #4 where Food Not Bombs serves every Wednesday.
>They've
>already removed the last of the 24-hour portapotties downtown. Now you
>won't
>be able to wait in your car longer than 15 minutes or even enter one
>of the
>20+ public lots downtown unless you own or are traveling in a car or
>bike.
>If you don't stop the police state, it will stop you.
>
>
>Earlier stories:
>Parking Garage Paranoia Law Stalls Again (Thursday May 11th, 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/11/18225711.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic at City Council Tuesday May 9th (Monday May 8th,
>2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/08/18219341.php
>
>Parking Lot Panic Law: Training Tutorial Downtown 3 PM Saturday
>(Friday May
>5th 2006)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/05/18211071.php
>
>Fifteen Minute Parking Lot "Panic" Law At Council Today (4/25)
>http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/04/25/18177761.php
>
>-----End Forward-----

On May 11, 11:19 pm, never@million wrote:
> Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?
>
> DCI

Dunno.  I don't know anything about the car break-in rate in Santa
Cruz.  If it were San Francisco you would need to lock your belongings
in the trunk since break-ins are common.  Tourists in Santa Cruz would
naturally feel their cars would be safer without poor people milling
in the parking lots, but you never know because their presence might
deter the professional auto break-ins.

<never@million> wrote in message 
news:r3na43pe6f4e1l8914i2n2gs0g05a2m9ul@4ax.com...
> Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?
>
> DCI

X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com , spammer.

eBuyer wrote:
> <never@million> wrote in message
> news:r3na43pe6f4e1l8914i2n2gs0g05a2m9ul@4ax.com...
> > Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?
> >
> > DCI
>
> X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com , spammer.

Aww, did the poor baby read something he didn't want to read?  fucking
moron. rr.com is not going to be your mommy. YOU decide what to read,
bitch. *I* will decide what to write.

"Timothy Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1179349157.568630.95170@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> eBuyer wrote:
>> <never@million> wrote in message
>> news:r3na43pe6f4e1l8914i2n2gs0g05a2m9ul@4ax.com...
>> > Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?
>> >
>> > DCI
>>
>> X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com , spammer.
>
> Aww, did the poor baby read something he didn't want to read?  fucking
> moron. rr.com is not going to be your mommy. YOU decide what to read,
> bitch. *I* will decide what to write.

The spam report sent to rr.com has nothing to do with the text of the
message; rather it was about abuse of Usenet. 

In article <57idnSgNC43ee8PbnZ2dnUVZ_uOmnZ2d@lmi.net>,
eBuyer <itsme@home.not> wrote:
>
>"Timothy Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:1179349157.568630.95170@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> eBuyer wrote:
>>> <never@million> wrote in message
>>> news:r3na43pe6f4e1l8914i2n2gs0g05a2m9ul@4ax.com...
>>> > Interesting post. will this effect tourist coming to the area?
>>> >
>>> > DCI
>>>
>>> X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com , spammer.
>>
>> Aww, did the poor baby read something he didn't want to read?  fucking
>> moron. rr.com is not going to be your mommy. YOU decide what to read,
>> bitch. *I* will decide what to write.
>
>The spam report sent to rr.com has nothing to do with the text of the
>message; rather it was about abuse of Usenet. 
>
>

I'm sure that it gave someone a nice chuckle.