Sunday, July 10, 2011

Over 100 Attend BBQ Against Attacks on Homeless and Public Space

Throughout Saturday, June 9th, over 100 Modestans, both renters, homeless, and mortgage payers, attended a BBQ in Downtown Modesto in defiance of the closure of Paperboy Park (aka Rose Garden Park) and to discuss ways to resist the new ordinances proposed by the Blue Ribbon Commission on Homelessness. Over a year ago, a crowd of about the same size gathered to protest the proposed park closure. Since then, those who originally helped shut down the park have called for even more attacks on public space and the homeless.

Currently, the BRCH would like to have a private security force police the parks, place surveillance cameras throughout, make food sharing a crime, and also centralize all homeless services in one out of the way place. This is coupled by a recent push to keep the homeless from traveling down La Loma Ave between Downtown and the Airport District where the Mission Shelter is located. These attacks represent an attempt to further police and control human movement and make everyday actions a crime (such as sharing food). They are aimed at pushing out the homeless and ultimately all poor people in an attempt to gentrify the area and make it safe for developers and business investors.

Those in attendance discussed plans to resist the proposed ordinances and Modesto Copwatch also gave a presentation on knowing your rights during police encounters and how to document police abuse. Besides the discussion, park goers also enjoyed hot dogs, grilled corn, and BBQ chicken. The event started at 12 noon during the allowed "public" use of the park but lasted until 3pm, two full hours after which it is illegal to use the park. Friendships were strengthened and it was made clear that both homeless and working-class people who are renters or home-owners in the Downtown have common enemies and common interests. Together, we can work together against threats to public space and increased repression.
at
Labels: , , ,

4 comments:

  1. The push to limit the use of McClatchy Park (Paperboy Park) was not an attack on the homeless. There was a group of people who were taking over the park every single day, all day. They were drinking, using drugs, fighting, yelling, and using the park and nearby business park lots as restrooms. A lot of people were scared to even walk past the park because of this group, most of whom were not even homeless. The new rules for the park were set up to give tools to the police to help control illegal activities in the park. The park is much cleaner now, and the police have not been harrasing the homeless there, even if they are there durning the hours that the park is supposed to be closed. It was never about forcing the homeless out. Your group sees this a "rich" against "poor" battle, but it is really about public safety and decency. The people who hang out at the park now, homeless or not, are not causing problems or creating fear among the nearby tenants.
    Regarding the food service, the community is not against sharing food with the homeless and the neady, however the groups that hand out food are not as organized that they should be, particularly when it comes to passing out large ammounts of food at parks without restroom facilities or enough trash receptacles. Where do think people end of throwing their garbage and going to the bathroom when there are not facilites near by? Please take a look at the facts and talk to some people from the nearby communities before you jump to conclusions and start labeling local homeowners and businesses owners as anti-homeless.

    ReplyDelete

  2. As someone that rents downtown I want to respond to the above poster.

    "The push to limit the use of McClatchy Park (Paperboy Park) was not an attack on the homeless. There was a group of people who were taking over the park every single day, all day. They were drinking, using drugs, fighting, yelling, and using the park and nearby business park lots as restrooms." -

    The "use" of the park is not "limited." The park does not exist as a public park anymore, besides the two hours a day that it is open. The park has been privatized.

    I've known personally people who hung at at PBP, and hung out there by myself. The constant police presence at the park made most of the things that you claim were going totally false. I also never saw any of these things that you claim happened at the park when I hung out there or when I talked to homeless people that hung out there as well. What I did see was a lot of people sleeping and maybe reading the newspaper. I also know of various people who work downtown and use the park on their lunch break - and they've never had any problems there.

    If there's a problem with people using the bathroom - maybe people should make a bathroom there. I also never smelled any feces of urine myself. I see no different in the way the park looks now as opposed to a year ago - accept maybe that the flowers are wilted because of the heat. Oh, I do notice one thing that's different, the fact that I can't go into the park for fear of getting a ticket or harassed by the police. That's a big difference.

    The police have harassed the homeless there - and continue to do so. Most people avoid the park because they are afraid of getting a ticket. If you want proof, go talk to some homeless people, all of them will generally tell you the same story. The police harass the homeless because they know they can get away with it and because they get a green light from the city to do so.

    Regarding the sharing of food, the BRCH has stated that they want to make it a crime to share food in the parks. Plain and simple. They want to drive away the homeless from the parks because they think that if no one brings food, then they won't hang out in the parks. It's as simple as that. It has nothing to do with this smoke screen of "making people more organized," but in removing the homeless from the downtown.

    If waste and trash are issues in big parks, then people should put more garbage cans in, start compost piles, etc. Perhaps we find these problems because the homeless frequent parks where there are no facilities as you've described - aka Tower Park.

    It's nice that you're lumping 'homeowners' (I'm guessing of the masioneque variety?) and business owners as one block, yet when you talk to renters and homeless people in the downtown you'll find totally opposite information. Perhaps you should take some of your own advice, because we have the media, the city government, and the police telling us everything you've been saying for years.

    -a renter downtown

    ReplyDelete

  3. I thought I could post a comment and receieve a reasonable reply, but you cleary have a warped perspective on the what has been going on downtown. I am not a business owner, though I do work downtown. I also know some people who rent at an apartment directly across from McClatchy park, and have been informed numerous times that they were scared of some of the people who were hanging out in the park all day. If you did not see a problem with the drug abusers who where trashing the park and hassarsing people who walked by, then perhaps you were not paying much attention. Most of the people causing problems were not homeless, yet you act like this is an attack on homless rights. You should be focussing your attention on bringing back the shelters and drug treatment programs, instead of whining about people not being able to sleep in parks or about being able distribute food at facilites never intended for mass food distribution. Your mentality of "just put more trash cans and bathrooms in the park" does not help a person get off the streets and or get the help that some them really need.
    Nothing I stated about what was going on the last couple of years was false. I witnesses numerous incidents myself and spoke with many people in the downtown community (renters, workers, and owners) who were in fact scared to walk past the park. Please try to focus your energy on something that could bring about real positive change for people having a hard time in Modesto, and could be positive for the whole community.

    ReplyDelete

  4. It's interesting that the above poster points out that much of the problems of those who used Paperboy Park (or any public space for that matter) came not from the homeless, but from other elements such as drug dealers.

    They tell us that instead on focusing on "homeless rights" we should instead focus on them (these drug dealers we keep hearing about). The problem is, the homeless were the main reason that those on the Public Safety Committee and others gave for the shutting down of Paperboy Park last year. And, if we both agree that the homeless are not the problem in the case of the 'misuse' of Paperboy, then their targeting for the purpose of shutting down the park is even more unwarranted.

    Furthermore, many of the homeless people that I know that used to attend Paperboy would share the same concerns as you and your park neighbor friend. Perhaps they should work with each other in an attempt to drive out anti-social elements. Too bad they didn't come out for the BBQ, it would have been a great place to talk about these issues and make those connections...

    The issues are much greater than "our whining" and they affect everyone who lives downtown and who enjoys hanging out in the parks. We're talking about if parks are going to be heavily policed or not. If we will have to pay to use them or not (beyond taxes that is). Will certain people feel safe from police harassment in the parks. We will receive tickets for sharing food in the parks.

    Homeless are also being told to not travel down La Loma Ave in an attempt to keep them out of the area. Thus, human movement through the city is even being policed. These are real issues and they impact all of us.

    I don't think anyone has stated that simply more trash cans and bathrooms will stop homelessness or help them "get off the street or get what they really need." But surely, limited access to public places will certainly NOT help the homeless, nor will the criminalization of things like sharing food. Furthermore, at a time when so many people are just one paycheck away from homelessness or facing foreclosure, are we really going to tolerate such threats to public space and these attacks on the homeless community when so many of us may be forced to join them soon?

    It's ironic, but one of the groups that has pushed so hard against the homeless in the last couple of years, the La Loma Association, also fought against a alcohol treatment center that the Mission was attempting to put in several months ago. It would seem that every time there is an attempt to create programs aimed at the homeless, the same people that wanted Paperboy shut down also want the programs aimed at fighting homelessness shut down as well. It's the same logic. Cut the resources, and they will simply go away.

    Of course, this is the exact opposite to what it will actually take to begin to stop homelessness, which is a problem caused by economic and social problems. Addressing this along with all of recent attacks on the homeless and public space are all positive things. And hopefully they will just be the start.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)