Keep Venice Free – No OPDs

By Greta Cobar

What else could possibly be done to change the welcoming spirit that has been the trademark of Venice for as long as it’s been on the map? How about bringing in Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) that would make it illegal to park without a city-issued permit from 2am to 5am.

The California Coastal Commission has voted against OPDs in Venice on June 11, 2009 and June 10, 2010. Because neither the legislature nor the circumstances have changed since, it is expected that the same vote will yield the same results come June 2013. The judicial system of the US is heavily based on precedent rulings.

The Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) was scheduled to hold a Town Hall meeting on OPDs on April 4, but that meeting was canceled and the next tentative date is May 6.

The reason the last meeting was cancelled and the date for the next one is still up in the air is because of disagreement between Linda Lucks, VNC President, and the Outreach Committee of the VNC, concerning who should be on the panel answering the public’s questions at the Town Hall.

“I’m not going to accept this,” Linda Lucks told the Beachhead about the current selection of panel members. They include Mark Ryavec of the Venice Stakeholders Association; Arturo Pena, Bill Rosendahl’s Chief of Staff; Jane Usher, former President of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission; and Tamara Martin, LADOT representative in charge of OPDs. All of these individuals are strong supporters of OPDs.

Town Hall meetings in Venice have historically been dominated by strong, outspoken opinions and enraged citizens on all sides of an issue. But the current effort of the VNC Outreach Committee is to have the next one be non-controversial and non-confrontational. According to this committee, the option of not having OPDs is not an option anymore.

Following the Coastal Commission’s 2010 ban on OPDs in Venice, Mark Ryavec’s Venice Stakeholders Association filed a lawsuit with the City of Los Angeles in which he argued that no Coastal Commission approval is needed in order to establish OPDs in Venice. City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, although at first against Ryavec’s lawsuit, changed his mind and joined forces with Ryavec against the Coastal Commission.

“An earlier, tentative settlement went to the Commission about a year and a half ago, but it was rejected by extremists on the Commission. In the intervening time the Commission membership has dramatically changed,” said Mark Ryavec,

Although the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) Board voted to approve OPDs in 2010, then Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission Peter Douglas joined forces with the 38 Venice residents who had filed an appeal against OPDs by filing his own appeal.

As a result, the Coastal Commission in 2010 voted against the establishment of OPDs in Venice.

Unfortunately Peter Douglas passed away on April 1, 2012, and the Coastal Commission went from what the World Bank had previously called “the strongest in the world” to what Steve Blank, a Commission member, predicted at the time of Peter Douglas’s death: “Once he’s gone, this commission will implode in the blink of an eye and all we’ll be talking about is the color of the concrete used to pave over what’s left of the coast.”

Currently a tentative settlement between Ryavec and the Coastal Commission has been reached, which would allow OPDs throughout Venice if the Coastal Commission were to approve them. In addition, two-thirds of the residents of each block would have to sign the petition asking for OPDs in order for them to go into effect.

Linda Lucks, although not the most outspoken liberal member of the VNC Board in the past, is now taking a strong stand against the Town Hall panel being represented only by Ryavec and those who agree with him and his settlement with the Coastal Commission.

As a result, Ryavec and his Stakeholders Association on March 25 filed a request for an investigation of an ethics violation by Linda Lucks. According to the request, Lucks should recuse herself from involvement with deliberations concerning OPDs because she has a conflict of interest due to her position as Capital Campaign Coordinator at the Venice Community Housing Corporation, which has opposed OPDs.

“The ethics charges are groundless, I don’t have a conflict of interest,” Lucks told the Beachhead.

Ryavec has previously been a big advocate of the Oversize Vehicle Ordinance (OVO), which prohibits RVs from parking on certain streets between 2am and 5am. “Vehicle dwellers have simply moved to vans, small trucks, and SUVs, which are not subject to the restriction on oversize vehicles,” Ryavec stated.

“The city of Los Angeles cannot justify this proposal as a way to address homelessness,” wrote Kim Thompson, a San Fernando valley resident and regular visitor to Venice, in his 2010 appeal to the Coastal Commission against OPDs.

Undoubtedly public access to the beach would be restricted under OPDs. According to the Coastal Act of 1976, “the public should have 24 hour access to the beaches.”

The midnight to 5am curfew that is now in place in parts of Venice under LAMC 63.44.B.14(b) is not only selectively enforced, but also illegal. A person sleeping on OFW during that time is likely to be harassed by the police either with a ticket or an arrest, while someone walking his or her dog is likely to be ignored by those same cops.

According to the Coastal Act of 1976, “the public should have 24 hour access to the beaches.” Under that same act, the city needs a permit for “any sort of curfews or restrictive ordinances that have such a negative impact on coastal access” said Charles Posner, Coastal Program Analyst with the California Coastal Commission in a phone conversation with the Beachhead in January 2012. The city does not have such a permit.

OPDs come at a price to all residents: they cost money. And the fee will be increased on a yearly basis. All of a sudden we will have to pay to park in front of our own houses and will end up paying outrageous parking tickets when we forget to put up the permit. Our friends will have to leave in the middle of the night or pay for the ticket more than they would for a hotel room if they just decide to crash over. Or, even more trouble can come about if they decide to leave after drinking because they’re worried about getting a ticket.

Although OPDs would be a hassle to the residents, the more important issue to consider is the public’s right of access. Do we want Venice to become the equivalent of a gated community?

Just because certain fractions of the VNC are trying to make it seem as if OPDs are inevitable, the settlement reached by Ryavec is tentative, just like the ones reached in 2009 and 2010. The Coastal Commission cannot afford to discredit itself by issuing a ruling opposing its previous decisions. Neither can it afford fighting and losing, based on the Coastal Act and on precedent rulings, the lawsuits that would inevitably follow.

The Coastal Commission is going to hold a hearing on the settlement on either June 12, 13 or 14 at the Long Beach City Council Chambers, at 333 W. Ocean Boulevard, in Long Beach. The public cannot attend this meeting, but letters opposing OPDs can be mailed in. Also, keep an eye out for the Town Hall meeting, currently scheduled for May 6, and come to voice your opinion during the Question and Answer section.

Food for the Soul

By Anne Alvarez

New Life Society is a local grassroots non-profit which was founded in 2001 by Millie Mims, in the mountain community of Badger, California. The original intent was to provide shelter on the family property to people who were in need of temporary housing.

For over ten years, Millie helped people who came to the community and needed lodging. She began going to the local farmer’s market, asking for donations of fruits and vegetables for the small local school, and for families that were in need of food.

In 2010, Millie relocated to Venice, and immediately set up a spot on the Boardwalk to feed the homeless and anyone in need of a hot meal. She sets up a minimum of five days a week, across from the Venice Bistro at 3:30 in the afternoon, and stays until all six gallons of homemade soup, 2 1/2 gallons of salad, rice and bread are all distributed.

She is able to maintain this schedule through the generous donations of local farmer’s markets. On Sundays, she heads to the Mar Vista Farmer’s Market, where local farmers, like Lupe Cordova and her grandson Kyle Moran, donate on a weekly basis.

For about six months, New Life Society was out on the Boardwalk, seven days a week. However, the number of volunteers needed was not met, and she has been unable to maintain that schedule. “We are in need of help on Thursdays and Fridays, in order to get back to a seven-day-a-week feeding schedule. We also need a person with a car to come to the apartment where the food is prepared, to help pick up and drop off at the beach … We need help with people serving, and we need someone that can return back with all the containers. We are also looking for volunteers to help with clean up in the evening for 1 hour, either from 6 to 7, or 7 to 8 PM, would be ideal.”

The New Life Society offers clean water, vegetarian food and emergency shelter to all. Millie and her company are true advocates in the fight to end hunger and homelessness. Remaining persistent in her commitment to help those in need, she is a strong, wise and gentle human being.

Currently Millie is in search of a building in the Venice area, where New Life Society will be able to offer shelter to some of the unhoused looking to get their lives in order.

If you are interested in volunteering please visit http://www.newlifesocietycalifornia.org or you can reach Millie at 310-398-1901.

VNC Monthly Meeting: The Great Storage Bin Debate

By Jamie Virostko

It was a particularly long night at the VNC monthly meeting on January 22^nd with the Winter Shelter Storage Program Motion taking over an hour of the night’s minutes. Other motions on the Agenda, included a Resolution on a Proposed $3 Billion Street Repair Bond Measure; Speed Monitoring Radar Signs on Pacific, and; Reconsideration of a Vote to Approve the Mural Ordinance.

During Announcements, the community was introduced to Greg Smith, a politician running for City Attorney, and also met a representative from Snap Tech, a company that has recently moved into 523 Ocean Front Walk.

Later in the meeting, the LAPD reported that, in 2012, overall crime was down 5.8% in Venice, with a 6.9% drop, specifically, in the Oakwood area. There was also a report from the Department of Transportation concerning its plan to address the proposed terms of a settlement agreement following the Coastal Commission’s twice rejection of the City’s application for overnight parking districts in Venice.

Shortly after calling the meeting to order, Linda Lucks “broke the rules” and gave the floor to Bill Rosendahl, out of order, to provide his Government Report, as he would have to leave early. He gave us the rundown of issues currently on the top of his agenda, namely his long battle to fight the expansion of LAX and to close the Santa Monica Airport.

Before discussing the first motion of the night, the LA City Attorney addressed a recent court case which impacts how the City of Los Angeles must deal with the personal property of homeless people. The Federal Government has told the City that it cannot summarily destroy the property of a homeless person. The Constitution protects the right to own personal property regardless of whether one has a residence or not. Now, the City of LA has the complicated problem of not being able to remove what may or may not be the abandoned personal property of a homeless person without due process. That due process could get expensive.

Shortly thereafter, we got to the Winter Shelter Storage Program Motion, which would be debated for a very long time and relates to the above in that it could be a potential, at least partial, solution to the City’s homeless clutter problem. For now it is simply a short-term, pilot program. Council President, Linda Lucks, recused herself, as she works for the VCHC and has a conflict of interest. Steve Clare, who operates the Winter Shelter and Arturo Peña were on hand to explain the details.

The Winter Shelter closes on March 1^st and is operating at 70% capacity, which means over 40 empty beds. It is a high funded program where the homeless are put in contact with health care and other city services. Each empty bed represents a person who is not being helped and funding that is going to waste.

A main reason that homeless people do not access the program, is because they have to abandon their personal property (should it be more than can fit on their lap), when they take the bus to the Winter Shelter. That personal property would almost certainly be lost as a result. The City, along with some people from the community, is implementing a pilot storage locker program (modeled after others in existence) to help fill those empty beds and collect data concerning its future and those of similar programs.

Most of the community present seemed to be for the program, which would provide temporary storage space for the personal property of about 22 homeless people.

Since the bins were to be placed near the beach, the issue was raised of needing a Coastal Permit. From what I understand, an injunction is to be filed by the Stakeholders. Another argument against the storage bins was that they would enable homeless people to live on the beach. You know, because if I had a locker by the ocean where I could put some of my crap, I would stop paying rent and just live there.

A few people took issue that the personal property was not going to be searched before storage. What if they put a gun in or a bomb in there? Really folks? An open and free beach where 16 million people from all over the world and their backpacks, purses and luggage mingle in heavily populated shops and restaurants every year, and we think, because no one is going to search the stuff of some homeless folks, that it will cause a major security issue? Ok.

As the debate moved to the Council, we quickly learned that the VNC itself was very dissatisfied that it could not properly vet the Winter Storage Locker Motion before it was brought before them. Though the point had been made numerous times, many council members felt the need to repeat their frustration again and again. To some, it even seemed their primary reason to oppose the motion, not its actual merits.

All in all, citing compassion and a willingness to try something new, the VNC, approved the Motion by a vote of 8 to 5. Nearing 10pm, when they closed the matter, well over half of Official Agenda had not been covered.

Declare a “Shelter Crisis” in Los Angeles

One of the state’s most powerful tools to assist the vulnerable homeless population is hardly being used. Buried within California’s legal codes is a 25-year-old statute that allows counties and municipalities to declare a state of emergency when a “significant number” of homeless people exist in a community, allowing them to convert public facilities into shelters and even to change zoning codes to site shelters in most neighborhoods.

Just under a year ago the Huffington Post made the following report – but nothing has changed and, in fact, it’s probably become worse – with no relief in sight: California Homeless Crisis Grows As State Is Reluctant To Use Powerful Law (CA. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 8698-8698.2)

“Across the country, women and children are the fastest-growing segment of the homeless population,” the alliance says. And shelters across the state have only enough beds for a small fraction of the dispossessed: The St. John’s Shelter for Women and Children in Sacramento turns away hundreds of people each night for this reason and leaves them to fend for themselves.

Yet since the law was passed in 1987 — and as the homeless population increased — few communities have invoked the statute, and when they do, it is almost always just to set up temporary winter shelters. As a result of a lack of political will, neighborhood resistance and budget constraints, this law has rarely been tapped to ease the suffering of the dispossessed.”

“It is almost unparalleled in its potential,” National Coalition for the Homeless executive director Neil Donovan said about the statute. “But it’s a challenge [for California] because of the financial crisis that they’re in. Other communities use similar statutes far more effectively. I’m thinking of Boston, which opens up its armories when overcrowding happens.”

The reluctance to take action frustrates advocates for homeless people.

“It’s a very powerful statute in the sense that once a shelter crisis has been declared — it could be done on a statewide level by the governor or on a county level — there are just about no restrictions to housing the homeless anywhere,” said civil liberties lawyer Mark Merin. “But there are very few instances where it has been invoked. Any mayor or board of supervisors which has not declared a shelter crisis should be asked – Why not?”

Please sign our petition to send a message to Governor Jerry Brown and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa that we need to start making good use of this statute to DECLARE A “SHELTER CRISIS” IN LOS ANGELES (CA. GOV. CODE § 8698-8698.2) - http://chn.ge/X9H5xI

Barbara Peck

The Benefit Network

http://www.benefitnetwork.org/

A Consequence of Being Human: Homelessness and Human Rights

By Daniel James Keegan O’Connell

We all lay down once in a while. Be it sunbathing, napping, reading a book, or just stretching out, we all do it. Personally I like the beach; I can do all of the above on the beach. The thing is, the act of lying down can be controversial, because it has been occasionally illegal. Not here though, at least not in LA anyway. The 2006 Jones v. City of Los Angeles case found the need to lay down, specifically to sleep, to be a consequence of being human. Furthermore it found that “needing to sleep” when there is nowhere available to sleep, should not be an act for which a homeless person might be punished, ticketed, or woken up and told to move on, when there is no available option. So protected by the 8^th amendment, under cruel and unusual punishment.  Additionally, in the 2012 Lavan v. City of Los Angeles case, the court ruled that if one happens to leave their belongings upon the street, that said property cannot be legally removed and/or destroyed, as protected by the 4^th amendment. They may be removed, if found to be causing an obstruction or a hazard, but they must be held somewhere and the owner identified (most likely by a posting), so that they might be recovered again. Much like that unfortunate towing-of-my-car incident of 2010.

Interestingly, these rulings combined, not only apply to a happy Englishman like myself who might fall asleep on the beach, or allow his parking meter to wane. These things also apply to the 51,000 homeless men, women and children (yes, children) who are currently thought to be displaced or homeless within Los Angles.  Let’s consider that number for a moment, approximately fifty one thousand people who do not have the credible option of going to sleep anywhere tonight that doesn’t consist of a charity bed, a mobile home, or a combination of cardboard, blankets and the sidewalk. The traditional ‘park bench’ is not an option though; as parks have the right to close and kick us all out, understandable. This issue comes down to streets.

We are all aware of homelessness, sometimes we see it, and sometimes we do not. Often times we see it and are not quite sure what might be done about it. Occasionally we see it and a strong emotion is invoked within us. That emotion is really the point of this. What do we feel and what are we to do with that feeling about the issue of homelessness? Someone must help them though; someone must be able to do something? Of course, organizations and systems exist: Shelters, and services, and intake, and support. We all know this. But what can we do? I feel the question is equally what should we do as it is what shouldn’t we do. I discussed this with the office of Councilman Bill Rosendahl, relatable to West LA, specifically Venice. We spoke about the points raised above, we mused over what it is like to be a resident and a social advocate, and we came to this one conclusion: It is a matter of heart and mind, a battlefield if you will, whereby we struggle with how homelessness affects us emotionally and intellectually.

The 9^th Court of Appeals has helped us with that, we can now say with intellectual certainty that the homeless community are disadvantaged and their rights must be protected. A matter of fact. We must also consider it a matter of rights, human/civil or otherwise. And if we are to trespass those rights of another human being, because we don’t like to see what we see when we look at people sleeping on the streets, we might also ask ourselves: how is it that I am so privileged to the protection of the amendments and that person is not? When we call someone to tell them about what we see, we must be thoughtful of who we call, unless there is a crime, we can frustrate the police, who now face limited powers. Perhaps we might call a charity, like PATH, and ask them advice on how to help a person, not necessarily money, just how better to assist or where to kindly report a person who must sleep on the street, as a consequence of being human, and having no home. They must be somewhere, just as we must be somewhere, and we should not try to punish people for that.

Venice Homeless Person Not Guilty – For Erecting a Toilet

By David Busch

I love you.

After a year now of controversial Venice arrests, 12 jurors have found that a homeless person’s “porta-potty” erected here in Venice on Third Ave. near Rose – and which was torn down and destroyed by the LAPD last April – had been a lawful benefit to this community.

I’m David Busch.

And the porta-potty was mine.

The potty, covered with hippy peace signs – and bearing a smiley-faced placard, stating, “Hi, I’m your porta-potty” – had been erected by me as a way to serve all of Venice.

And, like all basic human needs must be – it was free. For I have been given so much to my spirit, I now know this.

I first came here to Venice in 1980 and rented for a couple of years on the boardwalk. I was a diesel mechanic back then – for the city; and today I’m a proud Venice Hippy.

But early this year, after pushing literally hundreds of us “homeless people” and youth travelers several blocks off the people’s Boardwalk from midnight until 5 am each night with the City of L.A.’s  illegal beach closure and with no toilets available until nearly 8 am, I was actually arrested by LAPD – and charged with “creating and maintaining a public nuisance” (P.C. 372), for erecting a much-needed homemade porta-potty behind Digital Domain.

Where up to 120 people – and still without toilets right here in Venice – have been attempting for all this time, to this day, to find themselves a safe spot for nightly shelter in Venice. As the poor, youth travelers, street kids – and we hippies in Venice – long had on the Beach and Boardwalk, before its illegal closure. And with  plenty of room for both us and the thousands of tourists we welcome here, in our own Venice way.

So starting with a tent, I had began collecting donations of soap, cleaning supplies and toiletries; and I soon found myself daily emptying and carefully re-cleaning a bucket, and a toilet seat lid for the porta-potty. Later, a beautiful lady here named Mariska donated a bigger tent. One homeless man, living in his car, donated rolls of toilet paper he bought himself – each week. I kept things washed, and had some water with chlorine for occasional spills.

This setup was in line with procedures outlined in Red Cross emergency manuals.

For months, maintaining this potty further required the hauling of some tightly-sealed 5 gallons buckets for nearly four city blocks, down to the Rose area Beach toilets once they were opened.

But I want you to know, I now know that any of us can do it – and juries will stand with us on this.  And even the hazmat officials who arrested me agreed that our porta-potty beat out the City’s Beach toilets for over-all cleanliness.

At the end of the four day trial, the verdict was handed down in Los Angeles’ LAX/Airport Superior Court on Wednesday, December 19. And in declaring me innocent, this jury had to find that the utility of my  conduct to the  community outweighed any other offense.

Additionally, I was also charged in this trial by LAPD with violating the Los Angeles municipal code LAMC 56.11: leaving or permitting to remain “any article of personal property upon any parkway or sidewalk.” For having, on Third Ave., my homeless shopping-cart wheeled box, which holds my, and other people’s on the streets, possessions.

At trial the jury deliberated for many hours over two days, and after three requests to the Judge for the

– Continued from page 1

court to clarify the law and testimony, including one  seeking a further explanation of the ordinance, which was denied, the jury, in response, returned its verdict to me on this second charge: “Guilty.” For violating LAMC 56.11.

This is despite the fact that in Los Angeles LAMC 56.11 has been significantly constrained for several years by a Federal injunction, due to a prior homeless lawsuit against this homeless-abusing city: “Lavan v Los Angeles.”  This injunction had specifically been brought to prevent the seizure and destruction of homeless people’s property that is merely left on the sidewalk, and not abandoned, just as I had  maintained in this instance.

But for several years, this injunction has also brought the ire of some vocal, and winey,  LAPD officers here in Los Angeles, who claim that they cannot tell what an imminent threat to public health and safety is. And a bizarre crusade to overturn this law by our current Los Angeles City Attorney, Carmen Trutanich.  And now in Venice, LAPD is using this ordinance to harass the youth hitchhikers here – and lump them all in with us homeless, in violation of their rights to continued coastal access.

And so, strangely, and despite this injunction’s being upheld in a recent 9th Circuit appeal – at my  trial, the judge would not allow jurors to hear about this injunction. And not even a simple proposed, jury instruction that merely would have stated that the charge must be balanced – by all people’s 4th Amendment right to property.

My attorney here in Venice, John Raphling, who has represented me on this, further argued that this  Los Angeles city law is so vague that merely locking one’s bicycle to a pole, or parking one’s car in Venice, on the face of it, violates this crazy ordinance.

Yet housed people aren’t driven from Venice over it.

To me it is so sad to see that our Venice, a community of 42,000, has absolutely no shelter beds now whatsoever; and this, additionally, while our Councilman Bill Rosendahl was recently bombarded by another homeless-hate campaign for his support that we homeless people merely have access to some kind of day-storage facility here.

I ask you, “What good is an equal  ‘Right to Property’ anyway – if we haven’t even a legal place to keep it? Do they make housed people here now carry their houses around on their backs, everywhere they go?”

What will you do when you loose your own house?

So, for standing up for this storage, the City Attorney’s Office demanded at my sentencing – for parking a box on the sidewalk in Venice – that I be entirely banished from Venice for three years.

The honorable Nancy Newman was this trial’s presiding Judge.

Newman, instead, sentenced me to no probation, one day in jail – and time-served for this arrest.

To me, the bottom line of this absurdly wasteful trial was that after three days, and hours and hours of truly bizarre testimony officially presented by LAPD officers, the jury, in cleaning up all this mess – just spoke for all the loving Venetians here.

The LAPD testified that they never saw urination or defecation in any of Venice’s streets, gutters, or alleys – contradicted by testimony and photos, from their own hazardous waste officials, that more than 60 pounds of feces, and urine-deposited matter was collected by them from the streets, sidewalks and alleys around Third Ave.. And these Venice officers insisted that feces contained in a bucket and later dumped down the toilet was supposedly a greater threat to the public than the pounds of feces and urination that they, in fact, had found themselves smeared across Venice’s sidewalks, parking lots, alleys, and streets – and all of which, supposedly, was meant to pick apart my own effort to keep Venice safe.

Venice’s LAPD officers have now been given some new, common-sense orders by their own, highest authority – we the people. Twelve jurors have now instructed LAPD in Venice to open up their eyes, and recognize that even a homemade porta-potty by a homeless person here is far better than urination and defecation anywhere in Venice’s beautiful streets. I hope those that cry for “law and order in Venice” aren’t just hypocrites and will recognize that this is now the law.

Homeless porta-potties, simply and properly maintained, are not a public nuisance – and without something better to meet human need and sanitation – they are a benefit to all in the community.

Finally, I just especially want to thank my Defense Attorney John Raphling, who provided his own services to all of us here in Venice in this matter pro-bono, and is a member of the National Lawyers’ Guild.

Because with this victory, you can bet we all who’ve loved Venice have even more plans. And adequate toilets for Venice are just a start.

To sign a petition demanding more available public toilets, go to change.org and search “Access to toilets is a human right.”

I love you.

——————————————————

David Busch has recently taken a vow to begin and end all his conversations with I love you.

Circumstance and Opportunity

By Ronald McKinley

There is a bike parked just left of the multi-use utility pole on the corner of cold and homeless. We mill about; I mean “we”, not French for more sex. It’s cold, my hands barely work. I am writing with a pen. I prefer a lead pen. I make mistakes.

Just right of me is a man pacing. He is wrapped in a red and blue plaid blanket, the red like a freeway system intersecting at four points on a two dimensional surface. His hair is very curly framing his bearded face in a halo of thick curls. He, we are both homeless.

I will call him Laughter, that’s what he’s like.  Laughter only sleeps in the daytime, he feels safe. Sometimes I don’t see him for days. I asked him once where he went, he said he just walked. He was afraid of the police; he would leave if we just talked about the police.

The police cruise looking for drinking. Most people I see drink. I get offered beer a lot. I am not much of a drinker. Most homeless can’t afford to buy drugs most the time. The housed come to the beach looking to cop, this is how the drug trade is kept alive.

There is another man looking for snipes, cigarette butts, he opens them and puts them in a large plastic bag. Snipes walks back and forth across the street of Cold and Homeless.

He talks to himself: a full conversation. If you engage him, he will stop and talk to you, then he will return to his other conversation.

There are very few women out now it is 6:20 am. I have been here in this line since 4:52 am. This morning it is a brisk 37 degrees Fahrenheit.

A man, very slight, just walked up looking for services. He is wearing a white dress shirt and a black t-shirt under it. He was shaking and trembling from the cold. I offered him another t-shirt. He was about to leave. We, some people in the line for services, talked him out of leavening. I looked for something for him to wear. Laughter offered me the plaid blanket for him to wear. I told him to warm it with his breath. The cold and shaking man balled himself into the fetal S and I covered him with blanket. Being human means being humane.  My own little time-space entangled moment defines me and keeps me sane.

I do if only for this fragmented moment, there I am. Whoa! What a concept, each moment planned or unplanned should be lived. Don’t live for the moment, but live the moment.

We are separated by circumstance and a little wealth. Why does kindness require a permit and a surcharge?

If this is reality, make mine virtual. I could pause it, reformat it, get an update.

The man I gave the t-shirt to left, maybe he needed a new operating system. Maybe we all need a new operating system. Mine keeps restarting every time it seems I am getting somewhere.

I am houseless so I am suspect. I am lazy, dirty, drug user. The worst thing that can be done to a human being is to create situations where they have nothing to lose. No vested interest in country, community, humanity, self. The police heap their frustrations and the waste of their warped perceptions on people who want to just exist. “If you cut me, do I not bleed.” I need a transfusion. I need some respect. Everything on the planet belongs on the planet. Man-made things are an exception. No matter what the ad says, your car does not have more right to exist than me.

On a daily basis I dodge cars and SUV’s of distracted, bored people. People who seem to think, to me, that I should be here, there, anywhere. They look at but don’t see me. Some pretend I am not there, shifting their gaze to avert taking in my image. Some skid to stop at corners while texting, talking on their various devices. Engaging in the vice of the moment.

Not all my bad experiences are from the housed. There is a lot of violence in the streets. Some of the people need help. Some of these people should not be sleeping outside, left to fend for themselves. The war on the homeless makes everything worst. Yes, we are under siege. The constant pressure to find food and shelter while looking out for the haters and the police takes its toll. Fear of lower property values is enough to suspend civil rights. It seems to be a crime to be homeless. We are always judged by the most vocal and fanatical.

The middle class is all but gone. The wealth has been redistributed upward. The most valued service of the Government School, Postal, Prison, and Armed Forces is being privatized. Are you so far from homelessness? I thought I was.

Written winter 2009, when I was house-less

 

Commissioner Burke Speaks to Beach Curfew

By John Davis

The most fundamental resource the California Coastal Act protects is access

to the beach, day or night, by anyone, of any color, or of any income bracket. The beach is our public trust. Over twenty years ago the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance locking the public out at night. In 2010 former Executive Director Peter Douglas declared that the City beach curfew violated the Coastal Act, and our State Constitution. He further stated the local curfew ordinance was not legally enforceable.

At the November 15th Coastal Commission meeting Commissioner William Burke indicated the Commission might be preparing for legal action against the City. He told the CCC Chief Legal Council and the Deputy Attorney General that they “better get out the letter machine and the lawyer machine and start it rolling… because the people are being penalized.”, to the sound of applause. He also said the City was “fit to be tied” referring to the Commission’s refusal to privatize parking at the beach.

Burke is a Los Angeles resident and perhaps he did not like the idea that he too could end up behind bars if he decided to visit the beach in the evening hours. The Commissioner is known for not taking things sitting down. He wants the City to know it is the State that is in charge, not the municipal corporation residing within it.

Jack Ainsworth, Deputy Director, said that he had held several meetings with the City, and one was held between 12 and 2am at the beach. He further indicated that one issue was driving the City, the homeless issue. He said it is really complex and difficult to deal with.

The Deputy made that statement while trying to explain why the City violation had not been placed on the agenda on behalf of Charles Lester, the new Executive Director. Lester’s failure to bring the violation before the Commission for judgment has led to the arrest of ordinary people who wish to use the beach, and it has festered for over twenty years. The homeless appear to be the City’s primary target. Fortunately, the Coastal Act does not discriminate against citizens as homed or homeless. It guarantees access for everyone, discriminating against none.

Thirty-Five year Venice resident David Ewing delivered this elegant message:

“This Commission communicated to the City the curfew is illegal. I just want to ask you Commissioners, how is this protecting the Citizens of California? How is this defending the Coastal Act if the delay in enforcement allows the city to accomplish its ends despite the coastal act?”

Other public comments pointed to violations of the U.S. Constitution for prohibiting the rights of assembly, free speech, and the right to exercise religion. All are prevented by the City curfew at night. Complaints against selective enforcement, (discrimination), and unwarranted arrests abounded. One speaker pointed out that staff was suppressing evidence of over 1000 “open cases” from the Commission. That term is used by staff to disguise violations. Another concern was that the Executive Director was engaging in misconduct by refusing to place the known violation on the agenda.

Lester stated it would be impossible to enforce the Coastal Act by bringing all cases to the Commission for action, which includes the curfew violation. Contradicting his boss, Deputy Director Ainsworth described an exchange of letters “back and forth which were quite acrimonious and nasty.” He finally declared to the satisfaction of the Commissioners and people that if progress towards a Coastal Development is not made that,  “we will move forward with enforcement action.”

Currently, the City may arrest, fine, and jail anyone who goes to their beach after 10pm.

Burke characterized the City’s resistance to the Coastal Act as being caused by a war between Councilman Rosendahl and the Coastal Commission because the Commission denied the parking regulation that was enforced by the City.

He indicated that Ainsworth should be talking to the decision maker, the full City Council, rather than only speaking to Councilman Rosendahl, the City Attorney, and the Parks Department. Only the full Council could make the decision to apply for the necessary Coastal Development Permit, Ainsworth responded.

Commission Staff have kept this violation away from the public and Coastal Commission since 2008. Finally, after relentless pressure by Venice residents, the Agency may soon stop the City from enforcing the archaic curfew. By passing the ordinance, the City Council believed it could override the California Coastal Act, the State, and Federal Constitutions in order to appease a handful of people who have beachfront homes. The ordinance clearly favors those few individuals at the expense of everyone else. On behalf of those homeowners, Rosendahl and the City are clearly putting the cross-hairs on impoverished persons who are exercising their right to beach access 24/7.

Being Thankful on Thanksgiving, and Always

By Anne Alvarez

Venice’s spirit shone upon Thanksgiving. It was a beautiful day for our less fortunate, and often invisible, Venice residents, many of whom started their day off with a holiday feast and warm welcoming smiles from the volunteers at the dinner held at the Venice Basketball Courts.

Spearheaded by Anthony Perez from the “Send Me a Penny Foundation”, in conjunction with Pastor Eric Tietze’s  “Heart of Compassion”. Both men are equally dedicated to ending hunger city wide.

Dozens of local volunteers, eager to give back any way they could, baked fresh goods. Others donated clothing, and all donated their warm and generous spirits to make this a special day for those that are so often forgotten. Ashley Adams and her girlfriend, Rebekah Soto, heard about the event online and happily donated their time. As did Santa Monica resident, Teresa Russell, who has been doing this for the past few years, donating clothes and helping out at the food line.

About 10 tables comprised one very large buffet table, filled with turkey, ham and all the side dishes and desserts one can imagine. Over 300 people were fed, with many taking large plates and bags of food to go. The smiles on everyone’s faces were priceless, such as Gregory Crumby, a Venice musician who has fallen on hard times for the past 6 years, and didn’t imagine he would be celebrating Thanksgiving this year. Gregory, accompanied by Tommy Mingo, heard about the feast being provided near the basketball courts from 7-9AM, and cheerfully showed up and ate all the holiday favorites that we so often take for granted.

Many thanks went out to “New Community Jewish High School” whose students began a campaign to donate 20 turkeys to the event, and were so successful, they wound up surpassing that number and donating 32.

 

If you would like to share in the laughter and fill your hearts and spirits with joy, you are encouraged to join the next holiday event taking place Christmas day at OFW Basketball Courts from 7-9AM.

If you are unable to make it to this event but would like to contribute:

 

Heart Of Compassion (323) 727-7997  hocdistribution.com

Send Me A penny Foundation (310) 619-3885  sendmeapenny.org

Police and Selective Enforcement

In yet another incident exemplifying waste of time and resources on the part of the LAPD, Ibrahim Butler was arrested Friday, August 24.

A resident made a citizen’s arrest on him for playing drums in what the resident deemed to be noise violation. It took twelve officers and a whole lot of hoopla to take him to jail and to seize about 15 drums that belong to four different people.

Ibrahim was released on $100 bail that same day and the police released all drums as well. While waiting for him in the lobby of the Pacific Division, Shelly Rachel Gomez over-heard a child tell an officer that he wants to go and see inside the jail. The officer replied: “No, you don’t. It’s nothing but homeless, stinky people in there.”

On the other side of the wall, Ibrahim was a first-hand witness to the discrimination leading to most arrests. He called it “profiling based on race and socio-economics.”

The current Ocean Front Walk ordinance, which established the allowed noise levels, is one of the best examples of legislature created and used for the sole purpose of profiling and selectively targeting individuals.

Created with the stated intent of eliminating mass-produced items from the West side of the boardwalk, ordinance 42.15 was inaugurated with signs that listed LAMC 63.44.B.14(b) first. Although numerous community meetings were held and attended by hand-fulls of city higher-ups regarding the 42.15 vending and noise level ordinance, LAMC 63.44.B.14(b) was not once mentioned. The public did not know that it existed, let alone that the LAPD were getting ready to start enforcing it, and most definitely not that the signs concerning 42.15 were going to start out by listing 63.44.B.14(b).

By the way, 63.44.B.14(b) concerns the illegal curfew selectively now being enforced on OFW between midnight and 5:00 am. A person sleeping on OFW during that time is likely to be harassed by the police either with a ticket or an arrest, while someone walking his or her dog is likely to be ignored by those same cops.

According to the Coastal Act of 1976, “the public should have 24 hour access to the beaches.” Under that same act, the city needs a permit for “any sort of curfews or restrictive ordinances that have such a negative impact on coastal access” said Charles Posner, Coastal Program Analyst with the California Coastal Commission in a phone conversation with the Beachhead in January.

While the illegal curfew is being selectively enforced, vending of mass-produced items is in full swing just like before the dozens of hours spent arguing about the ordinance. The police do not enforce the backbone of the legislature, whose one and only goal was to free up the space for self-expression and free speech.

More times than not local artists and performers are harassed on slow, overcast afternoons during the week for being out of a spot or other petty BS while on a crowded, sunny Sunday all spots are taken by vendors selling made-in-China crap they bought downtown the day before.

For example, Sheila Richburg was found guilty of selling to an undercover officer a $3 bracelet with beads that she hand-made out of paper. She was ordered to pay a fine and to complete 19 hours of community service. “It’s like they’re trying to get rid of the people the ordinance was supposed to protect,” she said.

Ibrahim was arrested just because some lady told the cops to get him, and the cops complied. Meanwhile several others were performing on the boardwalk, some with amplified sound, which Ibrahim didn’t even have. Next time you see an officer shitting all over Venice on a horse, why not place a citizen’s arrest on him or her?