This is the beginning of the 'official' police intimidation surrounding the issue of serving and eating of food at Circle Park. For months now, many people have gone to Circle Park (including city officials and homeless advocates) in order to serve, eat food and provide other needed resources to those who need it most. The free food has not only helped countless numbers of people but has also brought with it a great deal of public and media attention.

'Unofficial' police intimidation started with verbal threats and random warrant checks and arrests. The police would stand far away and videotape people as they served and ate. They'd often walk around the park asking people questions like, "Who's in charge here?" and "What group are you with?"

In a meeting with the Las Vegas City attorney and local homeless advocates, the city stood firm in their belief that homelessness is a crime and that anyone aiding in this crime will be cited. Apparently, this was not a bluff. It's not clear yet if these citations will lead to court dates or if they're yet another intimidation tactic meant to scare people away from the park.

For more information, see these past stories:

Educating Metro Police
Breaking Bread with the Homeless
Kicked Out of Circle Park
Food Not Bombs

What exactly was the trespass?
I'll try to be there next week with a camera.

I can guess that the City's argument is linked to taxation. A homeless person would not technically be obligated to pay (property) taxes. Therefore, City ameneties, like parks, would be for (property) tax payers.

I can guess that the cops are mostly annoyed. Homeowners/renters near the park are calling and complaining. So the cops are annoyed they have to be there writing bogus trespassing charges when they could be having a free hamburger somewhere.

I can guess the City/Mayor/Mafia simply sees it as a distraction.
Don't want to distract the compulsive gamblers with scenes of charity while they are drunk driving.

The citation was for having a "food feeding event" where 25 or more is/was expected at said event.

Mom and another advocate were cited and verbally 86'd from Huntridge Circle Park for 6 months.

Being cited and then subsequently 86'd from Circle Park is a grand contradiction that I heard the ACLU say they would definitely fight against. Especially the 86'd part of it.

If one were to go to the city's website: http://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/Find/parks_facilities.asp# their hopes would immediately be squashed. The website states that the 3-acre park with a shaded outdoor stage and grass amphitheater is non-reservable.

And yet, you were cited for not reserving the park in order to hold a "food feeding event?" On its face, it's contradictory. It's a poorly written law, one that needs to be updated and clarified by a legislative, not judicial, body. Or at least the website needs to be changed in order to be more clear on what reserving versus getting a permit means. The courts in Las Vegas are as corrupt as they can be. The legislature is not much better, but it's better than the courts. Plus, with the legislature, there's more of a chance that 'we the people' can have an influence.

The sample from the CLV website doesn't mention picnic tables.

Are there picnic tables?

If so what the hell else would people be doing with them besides feeding?

City of Las Vegas's Strategic Plan 2005

Respect for, and belief in, individual difference and the worth of every person.

This Strategic Plan (which includes this commitment) was signed by Mayor Oscar Goodman, Michael McDonald, Lynette Boggs, Gary Reese, Larry Brown, Lawrence Weekly, and Michael Mack.

Maybe they are there for the business people to read their Wall Street Journals ???

Hey I really think this is an important local story that should be centered. There is no picture however. If it is alright with the author I will add one, but I would prefer someone from FNB send one. I will go ahead and post one, but if the author would like it changed just send me a new pic.

Thanks

Pic for center
by Editorial Participant Wednesday February 22, 2006 at 07:32 PM

i could probably turn some of my footage into
JPEG stills. what file type does the footage need to be to be put up on Indy Media?

I use JPEGs all the time. They are fine.

Wow that is not correct. The cite was for having an event where 25 or more people would be present and not obtaining a permit. Which you have been fighting with the city about. If you simply obtain the permit you would not be bothered. The officer is required to read the trespass warning to the subject who is being trespassed. The officer is not being rude he is doing his or her job. NRS 207. 200 defines it. So you should truly be honest and tell the whole story not half.

If one has some food at a public park and offers it to whomever might be there, how can one know it will be 25 or more people?

This event seems to be in a different category than one requiring permission.

It seems to be about helping people that really need help.

It seems this issue is mostly about control.
The City wants to control what is happening.

Individuals helping one another, takes control away from the City Government.
It reduces the reasons we need City Government.

If the city had adequate methods for helping homeless people, this situation in Circle Park would not be happening.

Arresting people or threatening people with arrest;
threatening the ones who are actually doing something about the problem is the exact opposite
of appropriate method.

Re: Bad Info
by Hater98 Sunday February 26, 2006 at 06:15 AM

Hater98: Wow that is not correct. The cite was for having an event where 25 or more people would be present and not obtaining a permit. Which you have been fighting with the city about. If you simply obtain the permit you would not be bothered. The officer is required to read the trespass warning to the subject who is being trespassed. The officer is not being rude he is doing his or her job. NRS 207. 200 defines it. So you should truly be honest and tell the whole story not half.

Mom: I did tell the whole story.

The citation reads: "Did willfully and unlawfully conduct (a food feeding event) at Huntridge Circle Park where 25 people or more did participate or witness such event without obtaining a permit from the director. Signs posted."

There is no dishonesty here.

Hater98: If you simply obtain the permit you would not be bothered.

Mom: Circle Park is unreservable. It is impossible to obtain a permit here.

Hater98: The officer is not being rude he is doing his or her job.

Mom: I never said any officer was rude in this particular case.

I find it disturbing that "Hater98" would tell Mom to tell the whole story and not half. Obviously "Hater98" is not only a self proclaimed hater, but is talking out of his anus as well. I leave out the premise to this arguement because Mom nailed him right on. Mom has put in more work than anybody I know in Clark County. Show her the respect she deserves you maggot!

To the pigs: You can jail a revolutionary, but you can't jail the revolution!

-Fred Hampton

Wasn't Mom one of the chief attackers of the Sept 24th anti imperialism rally at Circle Park based on not having a permit (which was obtained prior to the rally)? It appears their may be more to Mom than meets the eye.

Mom never "attacked" the Sept. 24th rally...

At the time she just wanted to know IF the rally was going to happen unpermitted and anti-authoritarian or if it was going to be just another lame, liberal event where everybody protects and follows the rules of the police state!

Maybe Mom would have participated in the Sept. 24th rally if it were actually a revolutionary action like FOOD NOT BOMBS!

And, by the way- FNB was not created to give free food to priviledged white activists and college students!

Use your priviledge and abundance of resources to help others! If the majority of activists in Las Vegas are all just state-fearing liberals, Democrats, and Libertarians- then you will not ever end oppression for yourselves or others!

Mom has really held it down. They have always said socialism is female because of its mother-like characteristics and Mom is a shining example of what is meant by that. She is a mother (to many), a friend, and most importantly a revolutionary!

Re: Curious
by More Curious Tuesday February 28, 2006 at 09:05 AM Wasn't Mom one of the chief attackers of the Sept 24th anti imperialism rally at Circle Park based on not having a permit (which was obtained prior to the rally)? It appears their may be more to Mom than meets the eye.

Mom's Comments: I don't remember ever "attacking" the Sept. 24th rally at Circle Park. What I do remember is questioning whether there was going to be a permit or not. The replies that I got (I think) were vague and even though it is said that the organizers did get a permit, I still wonder.

The main reason I wanted to know was that I felt that PARENTS and grandparents had a right to know as much info as possible so THEY could make a personal decision whether or not to bring their children and grandchildren.

Although always a possibility of police abuse, I felt that a huge crowd going up against the system could possibly put people in danger.

And although we must go up against the unjust rules, laws, etc., I still felt that the parents and grandparents had the right to make that decision- whether they wanted to possibly make themselves and their children targets of authoritarian abuse.

I didn't think that "strangers" should have that sole choice (and all the information) to make others martyrs for the cause.

I'm glad I found an online discussion on this issue. I attended the neighborhood meeting yesterday which the mayor attended. I thought that everyone got a fair chance to express themselves on this issue, including the homeless themselves, who are most directly affected.

Basically, the residents feel like they've lost their neighborhood park because they are afraid to go there and be around all of the homeless. While they certainly aren't all bad people, drug and alcohol use, lewd acts, etc. are happening in the park, which would discourage any parent from bringing their children there.

I do agree that the city doesn't have a good plan to help the homeless, and DIY efforts shouldn't be criminalized. However, to wait until the homelessness situation improves for us to have a park we can use is too much.

One proposed solution was to make Circle Park a children's park, where unless you are with a child, you cannot visit this park. Although this is a harsh measure, banning many residents along with the homeless, it does two things - makes Circle Park a place where kids can play as well as keeping our neighborhood from being an epicenter for the homeless population.

I know there are no easy answers, but discussion is good.

Any park is liable to have creeps in it, and creeps can be dressed nice or not and live in a house, a car, or a box and they can be in a park with a kid or be in a park by themselves. In ANY park, you have to keep your constant attention on your child. Yes creeps are out there, but they are not in a higher concentration at Circle Park just because there are larger numbers of homeless people there.

Why don't families feel it's important to let their children interact with many people from many different backgrounds? My child still talks about John, this guy we met who basically couldn't work anymore due to a hand injury that never got fixed in this fucked up healthcare system we have in this country... Probably most parents who have been conditioned to be afraid of homeless people would not have let their child talk to this man- his hand was not easy to look at, his teeth weren't faring so well, and his hair was wild, but his face had happiness wrinkles and his eyes were sharp and kind and he spoke without resentment or hatred about his circumstances.

The only times I feel it's unsafe to bring my child to the park is when I know the cops are going to be giving the food bringers trouble for doing something that needs to be done. That's when the tricky questions come, because you don't want to instill a distrust for cops in a child, but you don't want to lie either. So when we hear the cops are calling the homeless people names and violently arresting people they don't like, it is difficult to answer the type questions children ask, like "are the cops here to help us or hurt us?" So do I say, "well, we're clean and white and arrived in a vehicle, so they're here to help us, but see those other people? They walked here, their skin is tired and dirty, they're hungry and have no money. The cops are not here to help these people, the people who actually need the help. They're here to help us! Because we're clean and white and don't want to have to be near the people in society who are not making it." Or do I just say, "it's hard to say." and leave it at that?

It's pretty sick that the cops and the city are using children as an excuse to kick out the homeless people. My child would not like knowing that he was being used to keep John out of the park.

Hater wrote: "The officer is required to read the trespass warning to the subject who is being trespassed. The officer is not being rude he is doing his or her job. NRS 207. 200 defines it."

Sounds like the words of a trolling cop, be careful.

More Curious wrote, "Wasn't Mom one of the chief attackers of the Sept 24th anti imperialism rally at Circle Park based on not having a permit (which was obtained prior to the rally)? It appears their may be more to Mom than meets the eye."

Sounds like a trolling communist, be careful.

I live there by Circle Park Resident Thursday May 25, 2006 at 05:49 PM

Resident: I'm glad I found an online discussion on this issue. I attended the neighborhood meeting yesterday which the mayor attended. I thought that everyone got a fair chance to express themselves on this issue, including the homeless themselves, who are most directly affected.

Mom: I was also at the meeting and I think it went well. Yes, I think everyone who wanted to speak (who was there) got a fair chance to express themselves. (But it definitely was not advertised enough.) And also, one meeting is not enough, in my opinion. I think we should have more meetings before a final decision (on whatever that might be) is made at a city council meeting.

This one meeting last night basically let the few neighbors vent. And it did also give the homeless a chance to defend themselves. But a few of the neighbors who spoke went to the extreme, imo. For example, the mother who said that she can't take her child to the park because the homeless "look" at her child. Don't all human beings look at other human beings during a course of a day, everyday? It sounded like she was trying to make all homeless people into pedophiles. I will give her the benefit of the doubt, maybe she was just nervous about speaking. But pedophiles can be anywhere. There is not a bigger percentage of pedophiles in the homeless community. Unfortunately, some people are intiminated by anyone who is different from them or different from who they have been used to being around.

The other extremist was the guy who wants to round up all the homeless and bus them to Utah. Sheesh, I feel sorry for anyone who has to live or work with him.

God, I'm more comfortable around the homeless and needy than I am around uppety-up folks. I have found the oppressed to be more humble, more honest, sometimes more outspoken but only to the point of telling it like it is. I have more to fear from politicians, lawyers, business owners, etc. because it seems they always have a greedy agenda.

There are good people and bad people in the homeless community- just as there are good people and bad people in the non-homeless community.

All the homeless ask for is to be allowed to survive and die with dignity. And it helps when they know someone cares about them.

Resident: Basically, the residents feel like they've lost their neighborhood park because they are afraid to go there and be around all of the homeless. While they certainly aren't all bad people, drug and alcohol use, lewd acts, etc. are happening in the park, which would discourage any parent from bringing their children there.

Mom: I understand that some of the residents are intimidated by the homeless. And I absolutely agree that drug and alcohol use is bad news. Lewd acts, imo, and from what I've been told are far and few between. And lewd acts would most likely be committed by the mentally ill. And this is just another issue that the city, county, and state have not adequately addressed.

Residient: I do agree that the city doesn't have a good plan to help the homeless, and DIY efforts shouldn't be criminalized. However, to wait until the homelessness situation improves for us to have a park we can use is too much.

Mom: You do have a park that you can use. The neighbor gentleman who has been in the area for years suggested that the neighbors SHOULD use the park. I agree with him. The more people who use the park, the safer the park would be. Try using the park and you will see that most of the homeless would be very respectful in allowing you to have your space. Anyone who bothers you for a cigarette or money, and you don't want to give them any, just say, "No, sorry, I can't today." Say it everyday if you want. Most will be very respectful about this. Any illegal (drugs, alcohol, sex) activity should be discouraged and reported.

The city (the city attorney and the mayor) has metro and the marshals actively enforcing laws which criminalize homelessness, ie. laying on a blanket, sleeping, eating, standing in the park. These are all innocent actions which no one should be cited or arrested for.

If the city put that much effort into social services throughout the valley, and also focused on "real" criminals, Circle Park and all neighborhoods, AND the majority of the decent homeless folks would benefit. Even the homeless do not like being around other homeless who are not considerate of others.

I will say though, in the past year that I have been going to the park, the biggest problem is with the mentally ill (number one), then the drug users, and lastly the severe alcoholics who ALSO are mentally ill.

But I will add that I truly believe that ALL of the above have a right to daily food, water, shelter from the heat and cold, a safe place to sleep, and relieve bodily functions. If they want to go to work- which many do, they also need a place to shower and shave, and a safe place for them to leave their few personal belongings.

Residient: One proposed solution was to make Circle Park a children's park, where unless you are with a child, you cannot visit this park. Although this is a harsh measure, banning many residents along with the homeless, it does two things - makes Circle Park a place where kids can play as well as keeping our neighborhood from being an epicenter for the homeless population.

Mom: I spoke with the homeless today and even they do not think this would be fair to most of the neighbors. They believe the park should be used by the neighbors, the children, and the homeless. Even if this park was made into a children's park, it would be a VERY dangerous park for children in the middle of two very busy streets. This would only be done as a way to get rid of the homeless there.

Your comment about Circle Park being an epicenter for the homeless popolutation is something I would like to address. I don't believe that "Circle Park" is an epicenter. I think we have to learn the facts. I don't even know all the facts. However, say we have over 10,000 homeless people in the Las Vegas Valley. X amount are mentally ill. X amount are heroin users. X amount are meth users. X amount are chronic alcoholics. X amount at little or no fault of their own became homeless. X amount are veterans with low income. X amount of veterans are homeless because of an experience directly related to the military. X amount come to this city and blow all their money in the casino. (Many of these folks are the easiest for us to help because with a little help, they get back on their feet, get a job, make a little money and GO back home.) X amount want to be homeless- free.

Then we have to look at the resources: social services, catholic charities, st. vincent's, las vegas rescue mission, shade tree. We also have some places who pack in the homeless for $100 a week each to share a bed with the bed bugs, spiders, and mice. Then we have the "individual" folks who share food, water, clothing, their own homes for individuals to take showers, etc.

But getting back to the "epicenter". We have 64 parks in the city. And the beautiful parks are where the homeless would rather be than sleeping in the alleys with the brown recluse. Yes, I've seen a lot of spider and ant bites. And there is more chance of violence (committed by the non-homeless gangsters) in the alleys. Most of the folks will tell you that they feel safer in the parks.

Sorry, I got off track. Basically, my point was going to be to compare the number of homeless to the number of beds in the city for the homeless. And I think it is unrealistic for the city to think that the majority of the homeless should all go up to Owens and Main Street area for food, water, shelter, sleep, showers, and social services.

Resident: I know there are no easy answers, but discussion is good.

Mom: I believe that there is no one way of ending homelessness- or minimizing it. I do believe that it has to be a collective effort. Many individuals have taken on the responsibility of helping anyway we can. Food and water, imo, is a priority. We cannot help dead homeless folks. We have been working day and night, 7 days a week with food, water, clothing, jobs, identification, mental health, drug rehab, taxi-cabbing, bus tokens, and housing with no city, county, or state funding.

The non-profit organizations who received the $3 million dollar grant are overloaded with clients. The non-profit shelters are doing what they can or want to.

We need more resources from the city, county, and state. We do NOT need more law enforcement citing and arresting homeless (on a daily basis) for innocent actions.

Re: DIY efforts shouldn't be criminalized.

I agree. The DIY efforts are needed because the government cannot or will not take care of the many issues of homelessness. Criminalizing innocent actions or humane actions only promotes the hatred, misunderstandings, and animosity between the homeless and non-homeless. Even most of the marshals don't want to be giving out these citations. The "good" cops and marshals are being used as a buffer between the city and the homeless. And the non-homeless residents are being used as a buffer between city and the homeless. This is just a distraction from the fact that the city, county, and state has inadequate resourses.

Oh wait, let me take that back. This city has plenty of money to sell govt. land to outside high-rise condo builders, take property by eminent domain for casinos, give land to outside contractors for a baseball park, build a new arena, etc., etc., etc. but they don't have the resourses to build real affordable housing (not $710 per month rent) or give us more locations for social services.

I still believe there are plenty of answers out there for us all to research and work together. We must be persistant TOGETHER to encourage the city, county, and state to do more. Also, community and individuals must be willing to help and not totally depend on government.

I don't think that the Circle Park or any other city park should be an all or nothing deal. I think we can figure this out so everyone can benefit in one way or another.

Resident, thanks for posting your comments. Please know that my long-winded note is/was not directed AT you. You've given me the opportunity to voice my opinions. And I may be naive or even wrong. But I am certainly willing to work toward positive solutions. Thanks, Mom

Here's an interesting poll.

And then, go figure, the City of Las Vegas kicks out Family Promise who has been successfully helping homeless families in a residential neighborhood for the past TEN years. All because they (God forbid) have an office and the neighborhood is not zoned for offices.

Jon Ralston on the Family Promise eviction, the latest humiliation of the homeless by the mayor and City Council

"For most Americans, homelessness invokes images of men sleeping in parks or panhandling on the street. However, data reveal another side of homelessness -- it is the face of families with children," explained Nan Roman, president, National Alliance to End Homelessness. "Despite perceptions, our paper shows that homelessness is different and imminently more solvable than Americans believe."

The poll revealed that almost half of the voting public believes that single adult men are more likely to be homeless than families and that only 25 percent of the homeless population is made up by families with children. In reality, over the course of the year almost 600,000 families with 1.35 million children experience homelessness, and 50 percent of the homeless population is made up of people who live in families.

Re: the biggest problem is with the mentally ill (number one), then the drug users, and lastly the severe alcoholics who ALSO are mentally ill.

I did not mean that all severe alcoholics ARE mentally ill. I meant that the severe alcoholics who are ALSO mentally ill can be difficult to deal with.

Also, sorry for the spelling errors in my last post.

To Resident, Mother and Mom: Thank all three of you for posting your comments and opinions on this topic here.

While I don't think everyone concerned will come to agree on everything about this topic, nor should they, it's a good thing to see the debate on this topic being started and, I hope, continuing in a such a civilised, reasonable vein.

My own sympathies are with the homeless and those who care for them first.

However, it doesn't mean that there aren't legitmate concerns on the parts of Circle Park neighbourhood residents about the impact of the homeless staying there, and so on.

I think that the homeless, homeless advocates, and neighbourhood residents should be talking with each other, not AT each other, and that a mutually satisfactory solution can be worked out between the three parties.

As for the city of Las Vegas, personally, I've no confidence that Mayor Goodman, nor the rest of the Las Vegas City Council, give(pardon my language here)ten dog-shits and five cat-shits about the homeless issue in this town, nor will they, unless enough pressure is brought to bear on them to provide sufficient resources, what have you, by these groups, and many others besides, until they actually do it, and in a timely manner.

Mayor Goodman's prior public statements about the homeless and the homeless problem in Las Vegas reveal him to be nothing more than the latter-day descendant of the kind of brutally-minded, Southern and Western small-town mayors and sheriffs, who took up upon themselves, often with the full knowledge and support of their communities' elites and most of their people, to intimidate, harrass, bully, beat, drive out, or kill anyone and everything in their towns that they neither liked, understood, or wanted.

The only difference between him and them is that he wears expensive suits, drinks expensive gin, and has a New York or Jersey accent. That's it.

As for the rest of the City Council, I don't know about them and their stands on the homeless issue, but I can reasonably guess that they either support Goodman, or are sitting on the fence on this issue, waiting to see what the public, or at least the politically active portion of it here, wants.

The Las Vegas City Council: Better Leadership Through In-Action!!!!!

As for people like the fella at the meeting who wanted the homeless shipped to Utah, well, they're soreheads in my book, and the best thing to do with soreheads is to let 'em rant and rave until they're done, then proceed onwards. If they keep on ranting, well, I'm tempted to say that they should be then told to sit down and shut the Hell up, as they've already had their turn to speak.

But, that's wrong-headed, if however emotionally satisfying, for two reasons.

One's that, underneath the soreheadedness, there are undoubtedly real concerns and griveances on the part of the person carrying on. If at all possible, those concerns and grievances should be addressed, without condoning whatever racial, class-based or other biases the speaker might have, and a way of bringing that person on board to finding a workable, mutually beneficial solution to the problem should be found.

The other's that, and this is a much more cynical point here on my part, by completely shutting the person up and out, it just feeds whatever need he or she feels to martyrise him- or herself to the rest of the world, and, most importantly of all, to him-or herself. It also gives soreheads like them propaganda fodder for them to screech out to the whole wide world about how "unfair", "unjust" and "hypocritical", those who are concerned about the problem are.

Now, what I've said above presuppose that most people who are barking mad about the homeless issue can be rational, and can be brought by others into the process of solving this problem.

That's not always the case, alas, and, in those cases where they can't, then it probably is best to ignore them and their demands as completely as possible.

Don't be rude to 'em, however much they might tempt you to be, 'cos that'll just feed their quest for attention and martyrdom. But, don't let 'em run away with the meetings or the issue, either.

To Troll Hunter: thanks for putting up those posts about the ones going after Mom, but, those posts are months old, and others have already responded to 'em. So, it wasn't really necessary of you to post what you did. Thanks, anyway.

To Mom: thanks for posting the link to Jon Ralston's Sun column on this issue. Normally, I disagree with Ralston and the vast majority of what he says in print, on-line, and everywhere else he can be found.

However, I think he hit the nail right on the head about Goodman, the City Council and their actions on the homeless issue.

Good on him for doin' that, and good on you, not only for posting the link, but for everything you do.

Troll Hunter wrote: " Sounds like a trolling communist, be careful."

Sounds like a trolling asshole. Be careful.

Asshole Finder: Please see the title of this commentary for my reaction to your post, thank you very much.

Oh, yes, the same goes for Troll Finder too, thank YOU very much.

Be seeing you.

As bad as the "news" is these days, I have recently begun to believe that nothing could really shock me anymore. But I was wrong! This is shocking and apalling! Good people, regardless of their faith or lack thereof, need to take a stand against this kind of prejudice and abuse against the homeless, some of our most vunerable citizens. Keep on feeding people who are hungry--regardless of the consequences! And until the city and government "officials" get a clue---STOP SPENDING YOUR MONEY IN LAS VEGAS!!