As We See It: Misguided mission

As We See It: Misguided mission

There are 728 comments on the Santa Cruz Sentinel story from Jul 8, 2010, titled As We See It: Misguided mission. In it, Santa Cruz Sentinel reports that:

Homeless advocates have set up camp at the County Government Center for four days now.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Santa Cruz Sentinel.

First Prev
of 37
Next Last
Writ of Lawn

Soquel, CA

#1 Jul 8, 2010
They have nothing but time.
Morgan

El Cerrito, CA

#2 Jul 8, 2010
Since Norse doesn't live in Santa Cruz he probably was clueless as to the County (not City) ownership of the "County" Court House.
The "gang of 14" that follow him are far outnumbered by those of us who vote and want this city cleaned up.
Try Berkeley Robert. Maybe you number of followers would "swell" to twenty or so.
Rain on the protest

AOL

#3 Jul 8, 2010
I agree with a poster from yesterday who suggested setting the courthouse lawn sprinklers to go of about 3 AM. Hey, with water shortages, they certainly can't be watered during the day.
Reality Check

Danville, CA

#4 Jul 8, 2010
Ah, a common sense editorial. How refreshing.
Now just admit that Laird is a carpetbagging Waste of Manager trough feeder and should step down, accept the inevitable defeat (the voters have already spoken) and save the county a few hundred thousand dollars.
Zurc Atnas

San Francisco, CA

#6 Jul 8, 2010
Poorly thought out? Well of course it is. Look who thunk it up. Talk about bass ackwards

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#7 Jul 8, 2010
We say "Sleeping Ban" and the SENTINEL says "camping ban." THis distortion is done deliberately because the general public has no problem with cities regulating camping. Neither does HUFF. But section "a" of MC 6.36.010 makes it a $97 "crime" to fall asleep anywhere out of doors or in a vehicle between the hours of 11PM and 8:30AM. Section "b" is called "The Blanket Ban" which outlaws "setting up bedding" between the hours of 11PM and 8:30AM. In actuality, police interpret this as "use of a blanket" and will ticket anyone wide awake after 11PM if they are using a blanket in any way. They can HAVE a blanket. They just can't use it.

Tonight, July 8, 2010, there are exactly 46 shelter spaces (32 for men, 14 for women) available for temporary, emergency shelter for a homeless person walking in off the street. The estimate of 1500 homeless people, while fluctuating on a day to day basis, is generally agreed upon by the City, Service providers, and activists. This works out to shelter for only 3% of the homeless population. However, 30% live in cars and another 20% are "sofa surfers" so 6% is likely an accurate number for July 8th.

A study which "proves" shelters are "only 84% full" misrepresents the reality of the situation. Only families in remission from drugs and alcohol can use the family shelter. Only working single adults with income can use the Page Smith Transitional housing program. Only battered women can use the battered womens' shelter. Others have difficult requirements such as the Jesus, Mary, and Joseph shelter, where clients are expected to maintain a vow of silence. Simply because one, very specialized shelter has empty spaces does NOT mean that the people seeking shelter that night will get it.

Claiming that there are "400 shelter beds" in the City of Santa Cruz is either due to gross neglect during the research phase for this editorial or it's meant to purposely mislead the public. And coming from the "newspaper of record" for Santa Cruz County, it is shameful either way.---- Becky Johnson of HUFF and housed supporter of Peace Camp 2010.
Donny B

Fairfax, VA

#9 Jul 8, 2010
Becky Johnson wrote:
We say "Sleeping Ban" and the SENTINEL says "camping ban." THis distortion is done deliberately because the general public has no problem with cities regulating camping. Neither does HUFF. But section "a" of MC 6.36.010 makes it a $97 "crime" to fall asleep anywhere out of doors or in a vehicle between the hours of 11PM and 8:30AM. Section "b" is called "The Blanket Ban" which outlaws "setting up bedding" between the hours of 11PM and 8:30AM. In actuality, police interpret this as "use of a blanket" and will ticket anyone wide awake after 11PM if they are using a blanket in any way. They can HAVE a blanket. They just can't use it.
Tonight, July 8, 2010, there are exactly 46 shelter spaces (32 for men, 14 for women) available for temporary, emergency shelter for a homeless person walking in off the street. The estimate of 1500 homeless people, while fluctuating on a day to day basis, is generally agreed upon by the City, Service providers, and activists. This works out to shelter for only 3% of the homeless population. However, 30% live in cars and another 20% are "sofa surfers" so 6% is likely an accurate number for July 8th.
A study which "proves" shelters are "only 84% full" misrepresents the reality of the situation. Only families in remission from drugs and alcohol can use the family shelter. Only working single adults with income can use the Page Smith Transitional housing program. Only battered women can use the battered womens' shelter. Others have difficult requirements such as the Jesus, Mary, and Joseph shelter, where clients are expected to maintain a vow of silence. Simply because one, very specialized shelter has empty spaces does NOT mean that the people seeking shelter that night will get it.
Claiming that there are "400 shelter beds" in the City of Santa Cruz is either due to gross neglect during the research phase for this editorial or it's meant to purposely mislead the public. And coming from the "newspaper of record" for Santa Cruz County, it is shameful either way.---- Becky Johnson of HUFF and housed supporter of Peace Camp 2010.
and the number of beds that BJ cites (46) is a distortion of the truth (typical of BJ's posts). It only reflects the beds available at one homeless center. It does NOT take into account other facilities.
Craig

Los Gatos, CA

#10 Jul 8, 2010
Once again, as is her tactic, BECKY is the one distorting the truth. She says that today "there are exactly 46 shelter spaces". But she is speaking of only one facility. Today BECKY linked an article to prove her point, but neglected to say that within the article the director of the Homeless Services Center said that there are "approximately 100-200 beds available in the City of Santa Cruz alone". BECKY is known for deleting information which do not support her statements. She is known to supply random numbers which do not calculate support for her comments. Two days ago she said the number of shelter spaces was 6%, then yesterday she quoted it as 8% with the caveat that it could be 10%.

Readers should reference the other two comment threads on this subject. They document BECKY's refusal to accept verified numbers from The Homeless Census Survey, her willingness to change numbers at whim, and her inability to supply numbers and calculations that support her claims.

In short, BECKY is the one who is distorting the facts. Something that has been well documented by people looking for real answers and workable solutions.
Hey Fat BJ

Santa Cruz, CA

#11 Jul 8, 2010
Do you realise that you are protesting the nonexistent sleeping ban in the wrong jurisdiction?

So much for your "Graduate Degree"!!
Insanity Cruz

Belmont, CA

#12 Jul 8, 2010
Look at this ad. Santa Cruz is insane.

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/scz/npo/183232924...

After reading this, your collective heads will explode.

Why the heck is the homeless shelter putting an ad out for a janitor when these people need jobs to survive? What is wrong with hiring one these bums to be a janitor?

And why can't these bums contribute to the shelter by cleaning it themselves just like youth hostels?

A homeless shelter ain't The Ritz.

I am tired of this Santa Cruz stupidity.
Right Wing Lunatic

Garden City, NY

#13 Jul 8, 2010
The Bubonic Plague, also known as the Black Death, killed 1/3 of the European population. Jobs were very easy to find, but some were still homeless. Factories were desperate for workers. It became a requirement for every man to get a job. The ones who didn't want to work traveled around begging. When the law came after them, they skipped town again.

Back in the old days, the homeless sold themselves into servitude. In exchange for shelter, food, and clothing for self and family, they worked.

Until the 1950s, homeless shelters were called poorhouses, workhouses, and poor farms. Everyone had to work in exchange for food, clothing, and shelter. In the 1950s the government created welfare, also known as outdoor relief. The homeless didn't have to work anymore. Poorhouses and workhouses closed.
Reality Check

Danville, CA

#14 Jul 8, 2010
Becky Johnson wrote:
... Others have difficult requirements such as the Jesus, Mary, and Joseph shelter, where clients are expected to maintain a vow of silence...
Note that Becky is stating and out and out LIE here. I just spoke with this shelter and the lady LAUGHED when I asked if their clients were expected to maintain a vow of silence.

BECKY, YOU ARE A LIAR.

From the Library's Community information database:
"A Christian, nonprofit shelter for the homeless started by Peter Carota in 1982 when he founded St. Francis Catholic Soup Kitchen. Can stay up to 30 days but must be looking for work and housing during that time. Provides food, clothing, shelter and love to those who are in need.

ELIGIBILITY: Homeless persons and families are interviewed before being accepted, call for an appointment. "
Craig

Los Gatos, CA

#15 Jul 8, 2010
Becky Johnson wrote:
We say "Sleeping Ban" and the SENTINEL says "camping ban."
Actually, BECKY, pretty much everyone calls it the Camping Ban. Not only The Sentinel, but the city, most everyone posting in these comments, the average citizen, and most importantly the ordinance itself call it the Camping Ban. You HUFFies are almost exclusively the only group calling it a sleeping ban.

Now, let's talk about ordinance MC 6.36.020 Camping Permitted. Let's go to (d) Camping.(I) In the yard of a residence with the consent of the owner or occupant of the residence, separate from the street. YOU have REFUSED to let one homeless couple sleep in your yard due to your bigoted roomate's sensitivities. And better yet Robert Norse, your millionaire ex-boyfriend, could buy a very large piece of land and allow people to camp there. But he does not. YOU told us that because he can't help everyone he chooses not to make such a gesture. It sure is a good thing he was not the Captain on The Titanic otherwise everyone would have died.

All Robert would have to do is buy a big piece of property with a fraction of his inherited millions, supply water, toilet facilities, and waste removal, and you're in business. But you always have an excuse for why you guys can't do this. Don't you, BECKY? Besides, it saves him a lot of money too.
localmom

Alameda, CA

#16 Jul 8, 2010
I'd like Robert Norse and Becky to pick up the numerous folks who sleep along Plymouth St and that huge highway camp between 17 and 1 and take them directly to their homes, to their front yards. Last week my son got to see a woman relieving herself in the bushes by our home, bare behind and all. Being homeless does not mean you can come and camp in my neighborhood and be so disrespectful. You have certainly worn out your welcome.
Donny B

Fairfax, VA

#17 Jul 8, 2010
Craig wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, BECKY, pretty much everyone calls it the Camping Ban. Not only The Sentinel, but the city, most everyone posting in these comments, the average citizen, and most importantly the ordinance itself call it the Camping Ban. You HUFFies are almost exclusively the only group calling it a sleeping ban.
Now, let's talk about ordinance MC 6.36.020 Camping Permitted. Let's go to (d) Camping.(I) In the yard of a residence with the consent of the owner or occupant of the residence, separate from the street. YOU have REFUSED to let one homeless couple sleep in your yard due to your bigoted roomate's sensitivities. And better yet Robert Norse, your millionaire ex-boyfriend, could buy a very large piece of land and allow people to camp there. But he does not. YOU told us that because he can't help everyone he chooses not to make such a gesture. It sure is a good thing he was not the Captain on The Titanic otherwise everyone would have died.
All Robert would have to do is buy a big piece of property with a fraction of his inherited millions, supply water, toilet facilities, and waste removal, and you're in business. But you always have an excuse for why you guys can't do this. Don't you, BECKY? Besides, it saves him a lot of money too.
Ah, but you see... BJ and Norse/Kahn are "advocates". That means they just pay lip service to subjects of their campaigns. It doesn't mean they do anything substantive (i.e. All mouth and no action).
localmom

Alameda, CA

#18 Jul 8, 2010
Insanity Cruz wrote:
Look at this ad. Santa Cruz is insane.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/scz/npo/183232924...
After reading this, your collective heads will explode.
Why the heck is the homeless shelter putting an ad out for a janitor when these people need jobs to survive? What is wrong with hiring one these bums to be a janitor?
And why can't these bums contribute to the shelter by cleaning it themselves just like youth hostels?
A homeless shelter ain't The Ritz.
I am tired of this Santa Cruz stupidity.
Incredible! Wow, guess no one who uses that facility wants to apply.
Becky The Liar

Santa Cruz, CA

#19 Jul 8, 2010
...nuff said.
Just Sayin

Danville, CA

#20 Jul 8, 2010
Insanity Cruz wrote:
Look at this ad. Santa Cruz is insane.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/scz/npo/183232924...
After reading this, your collective heads will explode.
Why the heck is the homeless shelter putting an ad out for a janitor when these people need jobs to survive? What is wrong with hiring one these bums to be a janitor?
And why can't these bums contribute to the shelter by cleaning it themselves just like youth hostels?
A homeless shelter ain't The Ritz.
I am tired of this Santa Cruz stupidity.
Wow. Just wow.
I've never contributed directly to the HSC (though certainly my tax dollars are spent there) but I now have the urge to donate at least one crate of size Large jock straps. They've got to have huge balls to spend our money to clean up after the bums who can't bother to clean up after themselves.

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#26 Jul 8, 2010
"protesting the nonexistent sleeping ban "

BECKY: So MC 6.36.010 section a is "non-existent?"
How do you figure. It is a subset of the Camping ordinance. the entire ordinance is called "Camping Prohibited" Section a is the part of the ordiance that bans the act of sleeping, hence a sleeping ban, or a BAN on sleeping. How do you get around the fact that SLEEPING --absent a tent, absent a blanket, absent a bed, absent lying down, is a CRIME between 11PM and 8:30AM in the following places: anywhere out of doors on both public and private property and it is banned inside any building not designated as a residence or motel.

Just switching the label doesn't absolve you for banning sleep for people who are too poor to pay for a motel room.

Didn't your mother ever teach you to be kind to people? You sound so mean and filled with hate. What happened to you that you would try to explain to ME that I am crazy for believing there is a SLEEPING BAN in Santa Cruz. I think YOU'RE crazy for not accepting the plain facts right in front of your eyes:

see: http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruz/

“Freedom and Responsibility”

Since: Apr 10

Glenwood, CA

#29 Jul 8, 2010
Since the campers are apparently breaking no laws, why should they move on? They've been seeking a lawful place to sleep for some time, and now they have it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 37
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Camping Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Federal Court Rules Against Boise Anti-Camping ... Oct 1 Frozen Raccoon Lady 9
BeeLine Camper (Aug '09) Aug '18 Geo Ewing 64
Need info on Banner Travel Trailer Madison Rea... (Jul '11) May '18 CampinMel 10
News A girl's guide to surviving some of the most ex... May '18 Why 2
News Takaka freedom camping spot may be blocked to a... (Nov '17) Nov '17 jancsi 1
1961 Terry Travel Trailer Day Camper (Apr '09) Aug '17 Unpolished 38
Vintage Cardinal Travel Trailer (Oct '10) Jul '17 oldcamperman 4