City Councilmember Don Lane Responds Publicly to Several Messages He’s Received Recently

During the heat of political debate- especially during a time of great tragedy- sharp words are exchanged. Some of us who are the recipients of those sharp words can feel a bit defensive and feel the need to respond.  And we get a lot of words of all kinds coming our way--- a lot of email and a lot of less direct communications through blogs and facebook pages and online comments and letters to the editor. 

Anyway, I apologize that I have not been able to respond to every person who has written to me directly or made comments in my direction through web and news discussion pages. At times, I try to keep up -- but I have another job, family obligations, some moderately bothersome health issues, and a good number of meetings and events to attend that are also part of my formal obligations as a city councilmember. It is probably worth noting that, between online petitions and computer generated emails, I have heard from about 2500 people in the last several weeks. Quite frankly, I can’t keep up.  I hope this lengthy document (warning: it is very lengthy) will adequately cover my perspectives/responses to many things that have come my way from many people in the community. Of course, I get a mix of critical comments and supportive comments. Obviously there is less to say in response to supportive comments other than “thank you.”  Thank you!  Thus the bulk of this piece is in response to more critical communications.

I’ve been torn about repeating a few of the harshest comments here.  While I encourage people to write me, I don’t want to encourage discourse that uses abusive language.  Perhaps by responding to that kind of language, I could be encouraging that language. In wrestling with this “language” issue, I decided to go ahead and repeat at least a few of the harsh messages knowing that they do reflect important concerns—even if they are stated in a way I find somewhat inappropriate.  I will simply suggest that people soften their language even as they pass along their criticism.  I think we’ll have a better two-way communication: I’ll listen better to the substance and feelings underlying people’s comments and I’ll respond more forthrightly with less defensiveness.  For instance, as one might imagine, I will not be responding to the phone message from a person who threatened my life last week (essentially stating: “you will end up at the bottom of the ocean”). Those are simply passed along to the police department.

Anyway…here are several of the things directed at me that I thought deserved some comment on my part…

1)       “We pay a lot to live here, yet I feel like an outsider most days. We pay a lot to have a business here, yet I feel like we are getting ripped off.  I am tired of being harassed for money. I am tired of strangers yelling at me. I am tired of looking over my shoulder constantly. I am tired of people not wanting to go downtown because they are afraid or just plain disgusted. I am tired of being afraid to go to Harvey West, Natural Bridges, Pogonip and the list goes on. I am tired of not feeling safe in my own neighborhood.
Frankly I am tired of always taking a back seat to the endless problems in our City. I feel bullied and pushed in to a corner. I want my needs to come first. I want my neighbors needs to come first. I want my kids needs to come first.
I want our Police Officers to come first. I want our Firefighters to come first. I want each and every business in our City to come first.”

This is an excerpt from a very significant letter… capturing some of the most important issues.  How are we feeling-- how are we experiencing our lives-- as residents of Santa Cruz?  Though this message was not sent just to me (it went to the entire City), as a city councilmember I think I should participate in the response.  I also know I feel a twinge of defensiveness because I have an impulse to assert that I don’t think things are this bad.  But I know that impulse is one I have to set aside.  If people are feeling frightened or disgusted—then that is their reality no matter what else I have to say. 

But it also presents a real challenge for a government institution (in this case, our city government) to address these significant emotions. Members of the institution (such as councilmembers) can personally join with others in the community in the grieving process – a process that was so important after the deaths of Elizabeth Butler and Butch Baker.  We can facilitate opportunities for residents to express their fears and sadness and other emotions. We can try to use comforting words.  But we aren’t therapists.  So what we do is implement policies and respond with “solutions” and programs and expenditures.  I happen to think these are genuinely helpful in getting at some of the problems that underlie many community feelings.  At the same time, emotions and government actions do not operate in perfect synchronization.  If the city government does something that is genuinely beneficial but the pain and fear and sadness that poured out in response to our recent tragedy is still strong and alive in the community, the government’s actions will not satisfy a good number of people.  I think there are two reasons for this: a) no matter how much the government does, including tangible improvements, it cannot guarantee perfect safety; and b) when people are in the mode of expressing their demands for action, they are not as open to hearing what concrete actions local government is taking and has recently taken. Almost by definition, it cannot be enough because the actions have not made the negative feelings go away.

So…I have pushed through some of my own defensiveness and worked even harder, along with many others in local government, to respond to exactly the concerns expressed by the writer of that letter. (please see some recent specific actions in the appendix at the very end of this blog post)  I do not expect that it will feel satisfying to the writer right away. But it is my job—our job—in government to take the kinds of actions we are able to take even if it doesn’t feel completely satisfying in the context of recent pain and tragedy. 

The writer suggests that we examine our City’s and community’s priorities and this is a very proper request.  I might offer some “facts” that suggest the City already does have policies in place that reflect the priorities she desires.  But we might not quite be ready for a debate about the facts on this. I just need to listen to expressions of frustrations and concerns and emotions and allow space and time for healing. When everyone is ready to work with facts and numbers and programs, we’ll do a lot more of that.  I don’t think everyone is there yet. But for those who are ready, I will offer a little bit data (below) along with my perspectives.

2) “The criminals [are] sucking up all of his [Don’s] gifts.”

The City’s contribution to the day services program of the Homeless Services Center this current budget year is $42,000.  (There are other overnight “shelter” programs that receive city funding but these do not seem to be as controversial because they are more structured and obviously could not be the ones causing drug-oriented campsite problems since the people in these programs are staying indoors at the shelters.)  There are approximately 800 to 1000 unsheltered homeless individuals in the Santa Cruz area.  This means that my colleagues and I on the City Council are allocating about one dollar per person per week on day services for homeless individuals in our area.  I understand that some people wish we would not even spend that much but it is hard to see how one dollar per person per week is the decisive factor in why our community has so many campsites with drug abuse occurring in them.  This becomes even harder for me to understand when we see that many of those using homeless day services are getting jobs and finding housing and are not addicted to drugs. 

This seems to be a good time to include a reminder that some critics are selective in stating their assumptions about what I support and what I don’t support. So let me state something clear and unequivocal.  I am fully aware that we have a big problem with dirty campsites and the drug abuse that takes place in many of those campsites. I am not in denial that this is a problem in our community.  What some of my critics seem to have ignored is that fact that I was the mayor of this city during the period last summer and fall when many dozens of troublesome and dirty campsites were removed by city staff.  If I did not support those cleanups, I imagine the community would have heard about it. But the community did not hear that from me. 

The main disagreement I have with some of my apparent critics is what the long-term solution is to change this situation.  I agree with Deputy Police Chief Rick Martinez’s widely publicized comment (made at a City Council meeting this year) about our drug problem…that we can’t arrest our way out of the problem and that reducing demand for drugs through treatment is likely the thing that will change the situation.  I think simply cleaning out campsites on a regular basis and cutting a modest amount of funding for a program that is genuinely helping a lot of good human beings (who are experiencing a very difficult life without a roof to sleep under) will do little to improve the dirty campsite situation.  We already have some evidence of this. The City has already made major reductions in funding to homeless day services over the last few years and the City cleaned out more than 100 campsites last year and the City issued more camping citations last year than it has in quite a long time… yet I’m not hearing anyone say that we have reduced the basic problem. Places that have been cleaned up seem to be regularly re-populated and the mess returns. 

3) “Constantly framing yourself as soft (loving) - thereby implying others are hard (haters) – feels cheap, phony, and passive aggressive (vilification by other means).”

I suspect too many people are projecting onto themselves my criticism of a handful of people who say genuinely hateful things about homeless people in our community.  It is not hard to find words like “scum” and “animals” and “leeches” being used to describe some homeless people in Santa Cruz. If you are not one of those using that kind of language, then you need not take it personally. I’m not talking about you. But there are some people using dehumanizing or hateful language out there and I don’t have any problem framing myself as different from those people. This is not “passive aggressive”—this is directly aggressive in my challenge to people who use that language.

4) “Pushing your personal agenda (HSC, 180/180, x number of homes in x number of days) with the power of your political office feels abusive.”

I highlight this quote simply to note my puzzlement. At the beginning of my term as mayor in early 2012, I talked regularly about my support for the idea of the 180-180 campaign. It was written about prominently in the Sentinel and the Good Times and other local news media. I also spoke in broad terms about my desire to gain community support for new solutions to addressing homelessness.  At the end of 2012, I ran for re-election and received the most votes of any of the candidates.  For me to continue to support policies that I clearly articulated support for last year seems the opposite of abusive.  If I had said all those things about homelessness, won the election, and then changed my tune, that seems like it would be abusive.  

Perhaps there is some concern here about my supporting programs that I have volunteered my time with.  It would be abusive of my office if I had some personal gain by supporting those programs but I have no financial interest in those programs.  I work for them in a volunteer capacity because I think they do positive things for our community. 

5) “There are so many addicts flocking to our town”

It is virtually impossible to know if this statement is true or not.  Many people state it as gospel without citing any studies, data, research or verifiable facts.  Anecdotes should not be completely discounted but they can’t be relied upon as the foundation of our overall understanding of a community problem.  A leader in the surfing community recently recounted to me how dozens of his local friends have become addicted to drugs. As I just said, I know I have to be careful about anecdotes, too, but his story is instructive. Almost all of us know locals that have become addicted to one drug or another here in Santa Cruz.  Our drug problem has many local roots and it is simply an easy way out to claim that it is primarily about outsiders. I personally know a couple of local homeless drug addicts who worked for me more than 20 years ago when I was in the restaurant business. Again- just anecdotal evidence—but sufficient to reinforce my concern that we not jump to easy conclusions about outsiders as the cause of our drug problems.

6) "When you're as vested as he [Lane] is in his ideas and programs, it's never easy admitting some of your ideas and programs have failed the community at large. That's the kind of thing that not only makes a grown man cry, it makes him desperate for approval.”

This one contains much good material to comment on.  First, to the extent I needed approval, that need has sort of run its course. I ran for re-election to the city council last year and I got an approving number of votes. For an elected official, that’s pretty much the “approval” process. Now that the election is over I’m putting less emphasis on formal approval.  I continue to seek to act with broad support from community members but I also recognize we are not always a community with universal agreement on big issues—so seeking everyone’s approval is an exercise in futility. 

I am vested in some of the programs related to homelessness that I have worked on.  Some have been very successful (Rebele Family Shelter, Page Smith Community House) and some have not been very satisfying.  Some readers may be surprised to know that I have owned up to shortcomings in my work around homelessness.  I see the Day Center program at the Homeless Services Center as having been less successful than I would like.  Historically, it was focused on just providing survival services and had limited resources to help people move out of homelessness.  This is a problem that I contributed to creating and then, about a decade ago, contributed to working on changing it.  For instance, when I was a staff member there, I initiated one small program to improve transitional skills at the Day Center. After I left HSC, that program grew and is more successful than ever—though it still has more potential for improvement. When a program is not working well, it might be fair to say that it should be abandoned.  It is also fair to say it should be evaluated and improved to make it work better. I have followed this second approach and it has paid off in several instances.

The author of that comment also jumps to a conclusion that could be correct or it could be completely wrong. He assumes that my ideas and programs around homelessness have failed the community at large. This could be correct.  However, I think a stronger case can be made that the community at large has failed to address homelessness in a serious way.  This is one that I absolutely have some responsibility for and have no problem admitting it…and this is why I am putting so much energy into getting the community more engaged on the issue of homelessness. And I have been putting less and less emphasis on my own specific ideas for solutions to homelessness…and more emphasis on getting other people to take leadership in implementing collaborative, proven solutions that will be the most effective. 

7)   “There is a difference between being liberal and being enabling. People like [SP] and Don Lane are enablers. They don't draw distinctions between those in need and bums taking advantage of the situation. Or at least have not answered when asked how they distinguish between the two.”

I think this comment is an important one…and it also requires that I answer one question with another.  (I do appreciate that I was first labeled as an “enabler” but then later given a reprieve and asked if I could justify my position.)

Here’s my question: is Andy a person in need or a “bum”? Andy is a 60 year old long-term alcoholic who has been on the streets of Santa Cruz for many years. He is frail and in need of much medical care AND he gets picked up by the police for public drunkenness on a regular basis. Sometimes his drunken behavior leads not only to his arrest but to his prosecution in the court system. Sometimes he passes out and hurts himself and gets taken by ambulance to the emergency room. Once in a while he is hospitalized for a longer period because his alcoholism and the fact that he’s lived outside for a decade means that he has liver disease and ongoing skin infections. People like Andy burn through all these different resources.  Is Andy a bum or is Andy a person in need?  And even if he does land in some peoples’ “bum” category, what does it make sense to do about Andy?  My own personal short answer is that Andy is a person in need.

In many cities, people like Andy are brought indoors into a very small housing unit with social worker support… and they get much healthier and stop being arrested and reduce their drinking and they stop causing a bother to other people in the community. And people who are assisted and managed this way actually cause the community to spend fewer dollars in this subsidized, social worker-supported housing situation.  Since Andy is almost certainly not going to be employed again, we can either “enable” him to continue to live outside and suck up tens of thousands of community dollars or we can “enable” him to live indoors for a smaller amount of money and “enable” him to stop being a bother to so many other people in the community.

There is a much richer discussion that needs to take place about the concerns related to enabling.  I will try to write more about this in another post.  For now, I would simply raise this question: for a person living in the most desperate of situations, is giving that person meals and medicine enabling him/her to stay dependent or is that meal and medicine simply making it possible for him/her to stay alive? And does offering the food and medical assistance encourage him to get additional help to change his situation or does it encourage him to perpetuate the status quo?  There is an important debate to be had here…but I think my question shows why I’m not prepared to jump to the same conclusions some others jump to.

8)  “I told Don Lane and their City Council Country Club, that they should put some porta potties down by there, so We The People do not have to surf in bum poop. And he said that they would get too much resistance from the community catering to the homeless......... seriously! It blows my mind that I even have to argue for city officials to even consider having public restrooms.”

Reading this one was a particularly a frustrating because it kind of missed the point of an earlier message from me to the writer on this subject.  I told the writer that I personally support the idea of having more restrooms and/or porta-potties available overnight because there are so many people living outside a night that need a healthier place to poop. (Healthier for everyone in the community.)  I also told him that, since I am frequently criticized for doing things that might be seen as making Santa Cruz a more attractive place for people to “choose to be homeless,” that I would probably not be the best person to lead this charge. I suggested that people like the writer and others who were properly waving the red flag about too much outdoor pooping would be the most effective leaders of this drive-- and if they could build community support for it as a public health issue I would support them.  (This will be a good moment to invite further debate on this question: should we enable hidden campers to continue to poop wherever they camp or should we enable them to poop in restrooms?) 

9) “I am sincerely confused by Don's article. Is allowing people to camp in filth without basic amenities compassionate? Is it what he perceives as a lack of compassion the problem? Of course it's awful a fellow human being is living that life. I absolutely wish better things for those folks.”

I selected this comment because it actually makes the same point I was trying to make. My thanks to the author. I don’t think we have any disagreement.  All I’m hoping for is more recognition that, as she stated, “ it’s awful a fellow human being is living that life.” This reflects the compassion I feel.  I think we’ll come to more successful solutions when we think about changing the conditions of the person living in this dreadful mess. If we just clean away the mess and focus only on the anger over the fact that he made that mess, I don’t believe we will prevent it from happening again. 

10)  “It’s crazy that a lot of people don't even make 50,000 a year working full time here in Santa Cruz yet this amount is spent per person on the especially needy homeless. Their medical conditions are a result of their drug use- a choice they made.”

There are two very separate issues here that need responses.  The first one is fairly straightforward: the writer makes an assumption that is simply incorrect in most cases. Their medical conditions are not generally a result of their drug use.  This is, quite frankly, a belief held by many people that is simply not backed up by the evidence and data we have.

The other point is one where we have more agreement. It is correct that many of the most “needy” homeless individuals do cost our community a lot of money under the current system of cycling them in and out of emergency services without moving them out of homelessness.  As I have written elsewhere, and has been demonstrated in study after study around the country, moving the most medically vulnerable (most unhealthy) into subsidized housing is cheaper for a community than continuing to pay for an array of emergency medical and law enforcement services. The person now costing as much as $50,000 could soon be costing a lot less if we change our approach.

11)  “Mine is me ,my granddaughter, and 2 nieces ! My grand daughter is 6th generation in this county! What will you tell her if she gets poked by a needles doing Junior Guards and has to be tested for AIDS for 10 years? Please Mr. lane, explain to me how this is NOT a crisis to you???????”

It is a crisis to me.  It is why I have supported every effort that our city has made to take it on (City Police, City Parks, City Public Works efforts and city contracts with Save Our Shores).  This question, of course, suggests that I said something to convey that I do not think this is a big problem. I do not think the writer will find that I have said anything along these lines.  I have two granddaughters who live not far from Santa Cruz and visit our beaches on a regular basis.  I have the same strong interest in safe beaches that every parent and grandparent has.  It is unfortunate that elected officials are often seen as not connected to the same reality as other ordinary citizens.  I live right here in Santa Cruz and have another job (in addition to being a councilmember) and I shop at the same stores as other folks and walk on the same streets and paths beaches. I see it as serious problem in the same way that many others do.

12)  “Something tells me that Don Lane is making some kind of profit off of the more homeless people he gets into town, because it really does not make sense for a Mayor of a town to invite more and more homeless into very small town.”

This is such an important comment for me to address because it goes right to the heart of misunderstanding two huge issues in this community.  But before I go to the big issues, I’ll repeat what I said above-- I do not have any financial interest in any homeless services or any agencies that work on homeless issues.

I received many communications early last year along the lines of this: by supporting more housing for medically vulnerable homeless people, you are inviting more homeless people to come to Santa Cruz from everywhere else. Many communicators seem to have not read past the headline and missed the fact that I was talking about a project for chronically homeless people with significant health problems and not about a program to house everyone.  When the local project focusing on chronically homeless persons started its work and made a priority list, the top “candidates” for housing on the list had lived in our county for an average of 19 years.  Clearly this was not a program serving newcomers from elsewhere.

The other misconception that should be corrected is the idea that Santa Cruz County is doing something unique here that will draw people from everywhere else.  Just to give a feel for the reality out there, let me note that Fresno, Livermore, Santa Rosa, Contra Costa County, El Dorado County, Santa Clara County, Santa Barbara and more than 30 other cities and counties in California are implementing a similar program to the one I spoke favorably about.  I think it’s important for us to take a look carefully at what others are doing before we come to the conclusion that we are going it alone.

13)  “Don Lane- answer me this.... why are the hard working people of this community dealing with all the negative impacts such as picking up garbage from the homeless junkies (not from this community) that you are inviting to our town?”

As my critics on the left side of the political spectrum will tell you, I have supported our city’s camping ordinance; supported campsite cleanups by the city and by organized volunteer groups; supported additional security patrols in troubled areas; supported a stepped up focus on the river levee and supported the new bike trail through the Pogonip to that many believe has discouraged some drug dealing and campsites.  There is a difference between supporting constructive services for persons experiencing homelessness in this community and inviting addicts from other places to our community.

14)  “Don, if you spent half the time in the trenches cleaning the needles, fecal waste, urine gallons etc as you typing comments on facebook telling everyone how much you have done to help get us into this situation, you wouldn't have to type comments telling everyone how much you have done to get us into this situation”

Over the past 5 years, I have participated in about a dozen organized cleanups, including a few that went into very ugly campsites.  Unfortunately, late last year, I managed to create a herniated disk in my neck and was pretty limited in my physical activity. (Not only did I not participate in cleanups—I haven’t ridden my bike in more than four months and have abandoned other sports for that same period.) I went to the site of one small scale cleanup just prior to surgery on my neck last week and did a bit of cleaning but had trouble bending down to the ground so I didn’t do much. Once my neck is healed, I will participate once again.

That said, I should note that I am in one of those “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” situations.  Lots of people (including me) do work on these cleanups. I am grateful to those who do that work. However, only a handful of elected officials are able to respond to these kinds of issues on behalf of city government.  I am one of those few and I think it is appropriate for me to spend some time writing to members of the community who care about these issues.  And besides… during my recovery from surgery, I have a brief period where I can spend even more time writing about hot topics in the community.  (Obviously, I have a bit too much time since this post is getting awfully long!) 

15)  “Don, you are saying two separate things in your post-one, you are saying that the 180 fewer people on the streets are our most vulnerable and frail, very poor health or are disabled. So are you saying that these 180 most desperate are also the ones who you also say are getting police rides, ambulance rides, nights in jail etc.?”

Actually, I think the ideas are consistent.  A lot of the first group the writer describes are living out of doors in very poor conditions and they get very sick very quickly… so they end up in an ambulance, then the emergency room and then in a hospital bed.  Or they might have a significant mental illness so they do something inappropriate in a public place and get arrested and then sent to a public facility to temporarily deal with that mental illness (jail or mental health facility).  So it is not hard to see how these are many of the same people.  Frankly, a decent number of the people who fit into both categories are elderly chronic alcoholics.  No matter how one prefers to categorize them, they really do fit into both groups. 

 16)  “Do you see anywhere in there that Don Lane thinks solving crime is a top issue, or cleaning up local toxic waste is a top issue?”

I’m glad someone raised this question so directly.

a) In 2009, when the killing of two teens captured the attention of the entire community, I supported, along with the entire city council, the hiring of additional police officers.  This was at a time when the city was cutting department budgets right and left.  Only a person who believed that crime was the priority issue would be supporting more expense on police during an era of budget cutting.

b) The next year, I brought forward a ballot measure to increase funding for public safety at a time when city revenues were down and we needed a way to sustain law enforcement funding.  Some of my colleagues, who are normally labeled as more focused on law enforcement than I am, were lukewarm in their support of this measure. I still pressed ahead and the voters overwhelmingly approved the measure I co-authored.

c) For many years, our county had a body called the Criminal Justice Council to coordinate work between local government agencies dealing with crime issues. It had ceased to function in the early 2000’s.  As the City of Santa Cruz representative to a working group that came together to work harder on gang violence and youth violence issues, I teamed with a few other local officials to revive the Criminal Justice Council so that we could increase our countywide efforts to reduce gang crime. I also co-authored a city budget measure to allocate city funds to get the Criminal Justice Council back in business and to support other gang violence prevention activities.

d) In 2009, based on an invitation from the SCPD, I became a volunteer mentor in the PRIDE program, which serves young teens who have started down a path toward crime—and who the SCPD felt would benefit from a program that presented positive options and positive role models.  This was a strictly voluntary activity that allowed me to both help as an individual and to become an stronger advocate for this local crime prevention program.

e) During my year as mayor, youth violence prevention was a top focus area and many people in the community believed supporting projects such as our local teen center would be of particular value in crime prevention.  Thus I initiated one fundraising project for the teen center and played a leading role in two other related fundraising efforts.

f) Many folks are also aware of the significant work I did on bringing the Warriors basketball arena to town.  I worked on that for several reasons… and one important reason was that our city plans had recognized that the lower Pacific Avenue area was not the safest and friendliest part of town. Along with many others in city government, we extended ourselves to make the Warriors deal to improve safety in that section of town. 

g) In 2012, while serving as mayor, I was approached to help improve the situation on the San Lorenzo River levee (petty crime and “toxic waste’).  I put a fair amount of time facilitating work between community volunteers and city staff members working hard to improve safety and cleanliness on the levee. Most of the folks involved feel that real progress has been made there and that my active role made some difference. 

A few more general thoughts on “toxic waste.” I actively promoted Measure E during my own campaign for City Council in 2008.  This measure provided funding to help us keep our waterways and beaches cleaner.  I have consistently voted to use these funds for cleanups and to reduce pollution in our waterways and on beaches.  And I joined my colleagues a few weeks ago in making an emergency allocation of city funds to increase our cleanup efforts.  We have also done persistent work to discover sources of high bacteria counts at the beach.  We have both implemented specific projects and conducted careful research to discover the real sources of the bacteria so that we can effectively decrease it.

17)  “Mr. Lane, Perhaps you can tell me...Where do these transient leeches acquire their sleeping bags and tents and bedding and all the crap they stash along our seashores? The resident cave dweller at the end of my block would have a new tent and bedding and clothing and much more crap every time we cleaned the cave out. Rumor has it that these leeches just go to some homeless supply bank and get more, no questions asked. Where is this place? How are handouts controlled? What is the name of the organization responsible for this?”

Some human beings- not “leeches”-- that are homeless acquire their free sleeping bags from a variety of organizations…all the ones I am familiar with are either church groups or charitable organizations. It often happens in the cold winter months—frequently in association with holiday season charity.  There are also homeless individuals that are employed or have disability income and purchase these items with their own money. There are others who earn money selling drugs and then use some of this money to buy bedding.  It is also worth noting that many thrift stores are sources of these supplies at a very low cost.  

18)  “Give the police what they need to their jobs, and become public advocates for the community, not the criminals, not the bums, not the drug addicts.”

Mostly, I should just refer back to item 18 above in responding to this. However, I want to say directly that I have a solid working relationship with the leadership of the police department and believe that I have been quite supportive in providing the police what they have requested to do their jobs.  One way you might see this --beyond taking my word for it—is to look at the things that the police have requested of the city council over the past few years and try to identify something significant that I have not supported. I don’t think you will find it.  This does not mean I automatically support everything our SCPD recommends—but I normally find that their recommendations and requests to the City Council are sound and sensible so I am pleased to support them.

I should also note that I have one possible disagreement with this writer that should be acknowledged. There are many members of “the community” who are also addicted to drugs.  I do publicly advocate for more treatment for these community members. Many law enforcement officials also advocate for this…so that would be in keeping with the writer’s suggestion that we give the police what they need to do their jobs.

19) 

 a. “All of the explanations I have heard put forth by people like you, who work for more resources for homeless people, do not explain why Santa Cruz has so many more than other similarly-sited towns in central California. The biggest difference between Santa Cruz and those other towns is that Santa Cruz has an unprecedented level of services available for homeless people.”

b. “San Luis Obispo's homeless services seem to be working for everyone. Santa Cruz's homeless services do not. Why do we do things so very differently here?”

I put these two separate comments together because my response applies to both. 

Please follow this link to a map of homeless services in San Luis Obispo. http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/AssetFactory.aspx?did=15360  A quick look at this map shows that San Luis Obispo has a very similar level of homelessness services compared to Santa Cruz.  Santa Cruz does have a higher number of homeless persons than San Luis Obispo but it is not because Santa Cruz has a significant difference in services.  We’ll have to look harder for an explanation because this SLO map demonstrates that quality services are not the decisive factor.

San Luis Obispo’s approach to dealing with homelessness may appear from 150 miles away to be working for everyone. However, if you check this article in San Luis’s daily paper: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2013/01/28/2373058/homelessness-city-budget-spending.html you will see that their city council is also struggling with homelessness and the current state of affairs is not working for everyone.  (The headline of the article for those not wanting to click on the link is: “Addressing homelessness will be SLO's top priority, City Council decides”)  If you read the comments that follow the article, you will see there is similar dissension in that community about homeless issues.

If you look at this link: https://calcoastnews.com/2012/12/hill-hammers-thoma-for-homeless-questions/ you can see about some pretty heated public debate on homeless services in San Luis Obispo. Alas, we are not alone and not the only community of a similar size that has challenges with homelessness.

20)   “You need to change your tune, publicly, to get my attention. Stop making me feel like I'm heartless when I speak up, or that people that spend HOURS every weekend trying to make this town safe for kids, families and tourists alike are only out there to disturb the addicts and make their lives harder, they're actually just trying to make it clean and safe.”

The writer of this comment wrote an excellent, heartfelt letter and has been a tireless advocate for her neighborhood.  I feel very badly that she feels as though I’m saying she’s heartless when she speaks up.  I will (as I did earlier in this blog) express the idea that I think SOME people I am dealing with when I discuss homelessness are not dealing with the some of these issues in a very humane way. 

The fact that I say things that apply to SOME commenters on these issues does not imply that everyone who raises concerns about drug needles and campsites is doing anything wrong.  I have applauded many of these efforts and, when more physically able, have participated in them.  I have listened attentively at public meetings and have listened respectfully to even the most hostile of comments.  I have supported the same public safety efforts that the majority of my colleagues have supported.  I stood in the courtyard at city hall last week and listened patiently while a woman yelled at me non-stop for ten minutes during the families march to city hall. I did not yell back or say anything negative about her comments.  I recognize that she is worried for the safety of herself and her loved ones. 

I have gone this distance…through 20 comments and many pages so far… without saying this sharply. But I will say it now:  I am committed to making sure that homeless people as a “class of people” are not bearing the blame for all -- or even most-- of our community’s crime and safety issues.  There are criminals that live in houses and criminals that live outside.  There are people addicted to drugs that live in houses and people addicted to drugs that live outside. There are victims of crime that live in houses and victims of crime that live outside.   All I ask is that a broad and diverse group of people not be blamed for the bad actions and behaviors of individuals who happen to be part of that group.

On a related point about groups and individuals…please note that there are individuals who are the source of some of the comments (a couple quoted in this blog post) that I find troubling. Those individuals also happen to be active participants in particular community groups. Still, I have not once in this entire (very long!) post named groups that should be blamed or targeted for doing something I thought was wrong based on the actions of a few participants in those groups.  I cannot say that I have never been guilty of that “group-blaming” behavior… but I am not doing it today and I’m working very hard to continue to avoid it. 

While I have been mildly bothered by a handful of inappropriate comments people have made about me, I have no complaints about people holding me accountable for my actions.  However, if you are one of those few who are loudly and broadly blaming a broad group of “homeless bums” for the ills caused by a small subpopulation of the group casually labeled “the homeless,” I respectfully and directly ask that you stop doing this.  It is not contributing to our shared goal of becoming an even safer and healthier community. If you are not doing the kind of indiscriminate blaming, you can ignore those last two sentences because I am not talking about you and not in any way criticizing you and I apologize if I have implied something different.

21)  “I don't really care about homelessness as a problem, particularly among people who voluntarily poison themselves with drug/drink. I do care very much about crime, theft, antisocial behavior, and the trashing up of our environment. What are you going to do about those things, Mr. Lane?”

Comments such as this one are among the most baffling I receive.  People communicate with me fairly often along these lines: “why are you spending all that time on those ‘worthless’ and/or ‘homeless’ and/or ‘drug addicts’  and/or ‘transient’ and/or ‘bums’ when you should really be dealing with crime and safety and environmental damage and drug problems and concerns that I have for my family and me.”

I feel like I’ve said this loud and clear many times over the past couple of years but I guess it is not clear enough…so I will say it again:  Addressing the problem of homelessness in our community will contribute to reducing instances of substance abuse, instances of crime and some types of environmental damage.  It will save taxpayer money and improve our local economy.  If we reduce homelessness in our community, it will be better for every child and every adult in this community. Our community will be safer and healthier.

If we do all the kinds of things discussed earlier and described below around improving community safety AND we make an effective effort at reducing homelessness in Santa Cruz we will multiply the improvement in safety and health.  I believe doing BOTH is the best approach for our community.

22)  “Don Lane is a sanctimonious prick”

There may be something else I did, but I suspect the kind of comments I made in the following email exchange could have led me to earn that blast.  My point in including it is to say essentially this: when I go too far it can cause others to go even farther.

[A community member wrote the following in a message to me about a new program to house the community’s most medically vulnerable homeless individuals]: "Taking away section 8 housing from people on waiting lists in order to house those who likely will die on the street soon anyway seems like a bad way to save money (a good way to extend the lives of those on the streets, but frankly I don't much care about people who don't care about themselves)."

[This was my response at the time]: “I think this statement explains why it will not be likely for us to have a productive conversation about homelessness. I am very sorry that your life experience has been so hard as to bring you to a place where it becomes easy to dismiss human life so simply and easily. I also feel badly that your life experience has brought you a place where you are able to assume that hundreds of people "don't care about themselves" just because they are sick and do not have a home... people you do not know and whose individual life stories you know nothing about.”

This was an excessively self-righteous response on my part. It was not helpful to a constructive conversation. I should not have gone that far.  However, I’ve been trying to take a stance around finding the humanity in every individual, even the ones others have dismissed with some kind of dehumanizing description.  My approach is not a universally shared approach and a good number of people believe that once a person has degraded him or herself to a certain level, they should be shunned.

This is simply a difference in how we view the world. I might sound self-righteous when I state my views. I would also suggest that those who feel strongly about shunning the drug addicts living in filthy conditions and making a big mess probably sound similarly self-righteous in their certainty about how those people should be viewed and treated.  To me this is an important moral and ethical issue and I will continue to take a strong stand on this. I will take a less “sanctimonious” stance going forward and I will also listen to those who disagree with me and recognize they have strong feelings, too. That’s the best I can do.

--

Wow, that was long… and that didn’t even go as deeply as I would like to go into one of the BIG controversies: Why are there more of certain controversial categories of people (homeless, campers, people living on the streets, people hanging out downtown, transients, pick your favorite label...) here than in other apparently comparable cities?  I’ll post that soon and add a link here.

Finally, I would be remiss if didn’t convey my appreciation to folks who have been working hard to make our community safer and cleaner, to folks who have constructively pushed for improvements to community safety and to folks that have offered their many kind and generous words of support during a difficult period.  

By the way, my city email address is dlane @ cityofsantacruz.com 

==

I know that was really long already but here is an appendix (as promised above) about what the City of Santa Cruz has done in the last few months to improve community safety. It is a little bit dated, with even a bit more progress being made in the two weeks since it was written.

    Public Safety Updates (from the office of our City Manager a couple of weeks ago). 

Police Staffing

1. City Council to consider a hiring incentive for new police officers. Staff are currently developing options.

2. City Council to consider increasing the number of community service officers and park rangers.

3. Nine trainee police officer applicants currently in background process.

4. Two lateral police officer applicants will soon be moving into the background process.

Campsite Cleanups and Additional Sanitation Facilities

1. Between Feb. 11th – Mar. 11th City staff and volunteers collected over 8 tons of refuse during campsites cleanup and illegal dumping pickup operations (included 35 mattresses).

3. City Council approved additional $50,000 for March – June 2013 (remainder of fiscal year) to aid cleanup efforts. These resources are being deployed in more staff hours and cleanup material costs.

4. City staff in development phase for a web app (potentially smartphone app) to improve reporting of illegal campsites, trash disposal, and needles.

5. City staff evaluating adding a temporary bathroom near the Gateway Center area and the River Levee

6. Cowell Beach Cave – the cave will be filled in the coming weeks (Coastal Commission staff approved)

Partnerships with Community Organizations for Cleanups

1. City staff partnering with Regional Transit Commission to improve cleanup coordination of their railway.

2. Parks Department is assisting the Santa Cruz Land Trust for better maintenance of Antonelli’s Pond.

3. City staff in regular communication with Clean Team and other community groups to create more efficient and safe cleanups.

4. Measure E funds aiding Save Our Shores led cleanups of the Levee.

Cooperation with Regional Partners to Address Public Safety Issues

1. This is ongoing, including the County Gang Task Force and Drug Task Force operations.

2. Sheriff’s Department provided incredible support to the City following the recent tragedy.

3. Much of the work related to this area will be conducted with the help of the Citizen Task Force.

Citizen Task Force to Address Public Safety Issues

1. Public Safety Task Force will investigate underlying issues troubling our community, including drug abuse, drug related crime and provide independent recommendations to City Council within 6 months.

2. Task Force application period open through Wed., March 27. The Mayor will pick a well‐balanced Task Force and will submit those appointments to the City Council for approval. The Task Force will likely convene in April. Find the application at www.cityofsantacruz.com/safetytaskforce.

Needle Exchange Reforms

1. The County is revising the needle exchange program to be based and operated out of their public health facilities. This will have several significant benefits including (1) increasing the number of locations throughout the County where needle exchange can occur, thereby diffusing the impact on the City of Santa Cruz in general and any particular neighborhood specifically; (2) providing trained medical staff that would

exchange the needles pursuant to established protocol; and (3) providing increased hours throughout the day, again to diffuse a concentrated impact on our neighborhoods.

In addition, the County is exploring efforts to clean up unincorporated public spaces impacted by hazardous waste, similar to those undertaken by the City and will be working to increase the availability of education and training on needle exchange and related public health topics.

2. County tightening oversight of the exchange program, instituting a 1 – 1 needle exchange, with few medical exceptions. County staff report that in recent weeks the needle exchange has received more needles than it has dispensed.

3. Fewer needles reported found by City staff and volunteers along the Lower Levee, Depot Park and West Cliff Drive areas over the past few months. Potential causes may be the enhanced patrols of the Beach Area and shutting down of the needle exchange site near Ocean Street.

4. County developing an advisory body, consisting of health officials and law enforcement representatives, to help oversee the exchange program implementation.

5. County considering a pilot kiosk program for safe needle disposal at targeted locations in the County.

6. Drafting ordinance changes to require local pharmacies that dispense needles to collect needles. The city will encourage countywide adoption of these changes.

Miscellaneous Safety Efforts

1. City in discussion with Coastal Commission to explore imposing curfew on Cowell Beach.

2. Lighting improvements made in the Cowell Beach and Municipal Wharf areas.

3. City staff (including police officers) met with the Homeless Services Center staff to discuss security improvements to their facilities.

4. Neighborhood meetings are being scheduled to obtain feedback from the community regarding public safety. The first was held at Grant Street Park and a second is scheduled for March 27 at the Resource Center for Nonviolence on Ocean Street at 5:30 pm.

5. The City is assigning full time security guards (10 hour shifts) to certain parks on a 30 day trail basis. A security guard has already been assigned to Grant Street Park. Beginning March 29 security guards will also be assigned to Laurel Park, Ocean View Park and San Lorenzo Park.

Key numbers to call:

Incidents requiring police response: 911

Illegal dumping/garbage – 831‐420‐5548

Graffiti – 831‐420‐5303

Issues with Needle Exchange, contact the County Human Services Agency at 831‐454‐4000