Todd Occupy Downing on August 22, 2012, at 12:00PM – #1

How is trying to contact OLA via social media at the exact same time this "article" was posted count as reaching out? You couldn't wait even an hour to thump the CCA line? Certainly managed to get plenty of comments from Capt Frank and others. And how can you even quote Frank without mentioning he is the same commander that caused a melee and injured several LA residents during Art Walk in July?

Pershing was a square on August 22, 2012, at 12:28PM – #2

Occupy might be chased out of Pershing Square, but they just moved up to Angels' Knoll, dragging their carts full of crap with them. For the last few days they've pretty much taken over up there.

Just because you give your group a name, it doesn't mean you get to take over parks. Whatever intellectual, political, or social capital Occupy had is gone. This group is just a bunch of freeloading losers adding nothing to the neighborhood. The homeless are here because they don't have a choice really, these turds purposefully screw up our parks.

zeMinimalist () on August 22, 2012, at 12:52PM – #3

Let's not kid ourselves, at this point Occupy LA and Homeless people can pretty much be lumped into the same category. That being said, people, including homeless people are not allowed to live in a park, dirty up a park, take drugs in a park, vandalize the park, harass people in a park... If they can not abide by these very basic rules, then apparently they've answered their own question of "doesn't society accept us?" Honest people in LA are trying to make this a nice place to live. Why do I get the feeling that Occupy LA will end in Jonestown?

Kim Cooper on August 22, 2012, at 01:43PM – #4

I am troubled by Captain Horace Frank's description of the behavior of people frequenting Pershing Square as being "decadent." It is not the role of a police force to make moral judgements about its citizens, and when the context is public gatherings in Pershing Square, one is inevitably reminded of the terrible LAPD crackdowns on homosexuality during the decades of the 20th century when same-sex love was criminalized.

I am also troubled by Brady Westwater's baffling suggestion that the use of the park by a group of people congregating together for non-commercial social interaction and protest can in any way be interpreted as "privatization." These gatherings are the antithesis of privatization, and are how Pershing Square has been used historically by generations of Angelenos.

The fact is that Occupy LA has been vocally protesting the privatization of public space by the business lobby group Central City Association and its Purple People private security force. It was not until they began their protest that paid lobbyists began visiting City Council to beg for help dealing with the supposed problems of public gatherings in Pershing Square.

There are a lot of homeless people downtown. Since the County-led clean up on Skid Row proper, LAPD is enforcing a no-daytime-sitting rule on the sidewalks where the homeless used to congregate. People have to go somewhere, so why not to a public park? Occupy LA as an organization can no more be held accountable for the behavior of private citizens in the park than Captain Frank can.

Pershing was a square on August 22, 2012, at 02:30PM – #5

@Kim Cooper - You make it all sound so innocent. The fact is that Occupy essentially lives in that park. It's a public space, not a campground. Why would anybody want to go in there? They've got like 6 shopping carts filled with crap, they're laying around everywhere, it smells like pee. When their activities intimidate or make others feel not welcome, then they are privatizing the park.

Kim Cooper on August 22, 2012, at 03:05PM – #6

Pershing was a square: it sounds like you're describing homeless persons who can be found all around downtown Los Angeles. In fact, I've heard from members of Occupy LA that they're also troubled by the conditions of the park and by the behavior of some people who spend time there.

The people you are describing may be present in the same park where Occupy LA holds its General Assemblies, and they may even feel some affinity with the group's message and almost certainly partake of Occupy LA-provided food when it is available, but unless you can identify actual participating members of the protest movement who are living in the park, storing their possessions in shopping carts, and urinating in public, this seems like a red herring.

Dion on August 22, 2012, at 03:13PM – #7

These occupy losers need to be arrested and sent back to mommy and daddys house. im tired of their bullshit.

Dennis Smith on August 22, 2012, at 03:29PM – #8

I'll believe that Jose Huizar and his P.S.P.T.F. really want to clean up Pershing Square when the city makes a genuine committed effort to end the major rat infestation that has existed in Pershing Square for more than twenty years, long predating the appearance of the Occupy campers. Otherwise, this will just be another attempt at social engineering to somehow safeguard the park from homeless habitation, much like the redesign of the park itself which is now decried for making Pershing Square into a sunbaked concrete slab, bereft of lawns and greenery that could make the space more inviting to the public but might also be used by the poor who are often considered to be loitering instead of lounging.

Pershing was a square on August 22, 2012, at 03:36PM – #9

@Kim Cooper - I'm sure one of those "concerned" occupy people wasn't the guy who let his pit bull run around unleashed and subsequently attacked two small dogs in the span of 15 minutes a few weeks ago on Hill st. They would never do anything like that. I live, work, and walk in downtown. You know who's who just by going outside on a daily basis. Occupy may hold GA's in pershing, but they're also there the rest of the time. Stop romanticizing a movement that has outlived its relevance. I find it interesting that most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between our regular homeless people and occupy. Says something in itself, although that's disrespectful to people like Eddie the shoe shine guy who actually works and contributes to society, while in a wheelchair.

As for the shopping carts, it's hard to misidentify them as one holds a large "Occupy" sign. That collection of carts has been down at their corner for weeks, although I've seen some of them now up in Angel's Knoll - yet another green space for them to destroy and deny the rest of the people who actually pay taxes for public upkeep.

The only red herring here is that Occupy stands for anything other than the perpetuation of its own existence.

Katherine McNenny on August 22, 2012, at 04:08PM – #10

One thing stands out for me in this article- CD14 urging “street teams” from LAHSA to go out and offer services to people. DTLA needs these roving service providers more than just about anything else right now. I hope this service extends into Skid Row as well.

I truly wish the LAPD could focus on protecting and serving this community instead of trying to interpret and carry out what I feel is a schizophrenic mandate from the Civic Leaders and/or the CCA regarding the homeless. The thousands of homeless who eat at our Missions, must wander during the day until the shelters open at night. They can either chill out on the sidewalks or in the parks- those are the choices now.

We have a human logistical design flaw in downtown. Reasonable accommodations for all people need to be made.

Jonaya Kemper on August 22, 2012, at 04:27PM – #11

@Pershing was a Square

Seriously, when was the last time you took a blanket and sat in Pershing Square? Oh, wait. You, like everyone else, most likely haven't.

Well before Occupy got there, Pershing Square was essentially abandoned by the city. In Downtown's history, Pershing Square used to be beautiful. Lovers strolled the grounds, people had picnics. It was filled with trees and grass and benches for people to congregate. There was a large and gorgeous water feature. When heatwaves hit, whole families would sleep in the park for relief.

Did Occupy come along and turn it into a dirty, rat infested, sun scorched architectural monstrosity? No, they didn't. I did not see them come in with bulldozers and really hideous design aesthetics. That was in 1993, and some of the Occupiers might have not even been BORN yet.

What I have seen, is them try and help people who the city would rather pretend doesn't exist. They talk to the homeless and if they are human beings. Feed them, break up fights, tell them about services and shelters. Educate them. In short, I have seen them show more compassion to people who are the most vulnerable members of society than I have EVER seen from anyone else living, working and walking in downtown.

We get it, you don't like Occupy.

Let's get back to the facts. The idea that somehow Pershing Square's decline was based on them is just laughable. The park has been in decline for decades. Occupy hasn't even been there that long. Look at Pershing Square's current design from an public art and landscaping standpoint.

A public park is supposed to be inviting to ALL of the citizens of the place in which it is provided. In a warm climate, a park generally offers cool breezes, shade and places to play and relax. Freestanding benches so one might read or relax while enjoying lunch are also generally good ideas.

You know what isn't a good idea in a city that is usually reeling from high temperatures and a desert climate? Concrete. It retains heat, shows wear and tear, and is both artistically and physically unappealing.

Even if there was not a single homeless person in that park no one would still want visit it. It's ugly, dirty and infested with rats. Hot dirty concrete is not hospitable to the citizens of Los Angeles, whether they pay taxes or not. The benches are placed so that one would have to sit museum style staring at each other around the perimeter unless you brought a blanket.

So let's say you bring a blanket. Go ahead and sit down. What's that? It hurts? Hot. Concrete.

Most of Pershing Square is made of it except for a small bit of grassy knoll. Which, I will point out, I haven't seen people sit on anyway.

So, now that that's been discussed let's talk about the real elephant in the room, because obviously you know nothing about the city's history with regards to this square. Don't worry, I'll link the Wikipedia article so you can catch up.

The Police hate Occupy. The city hates Occupy. Random commenters will chime in after me and tell them to get jobs. Hell, you might even tell me to get a job, but thankfully I already have one.

Back to the issue at hand though, not a single person quoted in this article understand history, America's traditions with gathering spaces or the right to assembly. This particular piece of land is a public park. Occupy holds meetings in the park. You can hold meetings in that park. Go ahead. Go use that space. If Occupy, a group that spans teenagers to eighty year old grandmas, can feel safe enough to sit on the stairs and talk to each other,you can too. You live in downtown don't you? You work there? Well, so do they.

You want to change the public space, then change it. You don't need a solar powered trash can. Are you so afraid of your community that you can't even walk through a park that has security guards already placed there? Stop being afraid of people you've never met(xenophobic) and go meet them.

Meeting people and engaging each other is why the traditional American town square and public park was created. It was created for people to stand on soapboxes and espouse ideals, for families to stroll through, for students to sit down in and discuss. It was designed for people. Not some people. Not people with businesses. Not people who pay taxes. It was designed for people. All of them.

Jonaya Kemper on August 22, 2012, at 04:30PM – #12

Oh! I almost forgot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pershing_Square_(Los_Angeles)

You can also read this article, which actually comes from this VERY blog! Don't forget to read those comments.

http://blogdowntown.com/2007/05/2632-reverting-pershing-square

Pershing was a square on August 22, 2012, at 06:30PM – #13

@Jonaya - whatever. You don't know me. I often buy food or meals for the homeless. I'm also in that park a lot for many different reasons. Sometimes to sit, sometimes for the bands, sometimes just to walk around. And I agree with you and others - the design is awful and should be redone, it's not exactly hospitable for a variety of reasons. And parks should be used for a variety of purposes. But living in one and dragging all your crap with you shouldn't be one of them. But don't assume you know anything about me.

DTLAFamilies () on August 22, 2012, at 07:54PM – #14

Are you so afraid of your community that you can't even walk through a park that has security guards already placed there? Stop being afraid of people you've never met(xenophobic) and go meet them.

I was at a party in December where I met some members of Occupy LA. One of them was a woman who told me there was a dispute within the group over who was being allowed into the camp at City Hall. One faction thought that homeless should be freely allowed into the camp and no restrictions placed on their behavior, even if they were using drugs, defecating in public, etc. The other was mostly women who felt their safety was at risk from the deteriorating conditions within the camp, to the point where they were concerned they were going to be sexually assaulted. The women were overruled.

Fast forward to Pershing Square today. I have walked by it nearly every day for two years. I used to walk through it frequently during my morning walks around downtown. I have stopped doing that since Occupy took over the park. I am now, for the first time, seriously concerned about my safety. I have seen fighting, open drug use, obviously mentally ill people screaming and being encouraged in their behavior by Occupy members. As for those security guards you reference with contempt--one of them just got his ear bitten off by an Occupy member.

This is not about xenophobia. This is about a group exploiting sick and vulnerable people in order to score points against some ill-defined enemy that seems to have become the entire downtown community.

For the record, I gave money and support to Occupy when they first began camping at City Hall. No more.

Federica Garcia Lorca on August 22, 2012, at 08:28PM – #15

Simple question: where did these homeless folk come from? I'm pretty sure Occupy Los Angeles didn't create them. Harder question: where would you like the homeless folks to go ("anywhere else" gets you zero points, and you get bonus points if you can find a place with a restroom, storage, food, and a reason not to do drugs).

In other words, complaining on a blog is easy. Solutions are hard. If Occupy provides food to hungry people, they're part of the solution.

Let's stop the demonization of Occupy. They're not perfect, but all Occupy has done to downtown is chalk on the sidewalks and complain about CCA. They didn't cause homelessness, hunger, or drug use. Even Mr. Westwater says the problems were there in the park before Occupy. They didn't ask the police to invade in riot gear. I'll go so far as to guess that most folks here are on the same side as Occupy on most issues. Let's solve problems--maybe even solve them together.

Jonaya Kemper on August 22, 2012, at 08:49PM – #16

@ Pershing was a square

So did you buy meals or food for the homeless? Understand I was not attempting to hurt your feelings, merely to explain that Occupy never ruined that park. The city did. Many times over. If you read my entire little response, you'd understand that.

Now if people shouldn't live in parks... where do they live? Where do we put the growing homeless population in DTLA? Once they are forced from every single nook and cranny where do they go? Do we as citizens even care? Should we continue to look away when they shout and destruct on the street? Or do we look for a deeper reason? The homeless shelters are overflowing, the soup kitchens are open only at certain times. The mental health services are taxed and nonexistent in many cases?

I'm sorry they inconvenience you. We as a city have certainly outright failed them.

Do you think the police force actually cares? Do you care? Instead of everyone on this board bitching about Occupy maybe they can go and volunteer to help these people instead of condemning them. We are a city short of resources and a community very very short on compassion.

@DTLA Families

You know, I believe in research. In college I was taught to research firmly every side of a story so as to better educate myself. Which is why I looked up the incident you spoke of. Now the article fails to mention the security guard by name or what he did in the situation.

Have you been to Pershing Square to meet any of the security guards? I certainly have. I certainly saw one trip a young boy on his skateboard so that he fell down a set of stairs. The boys got pissed and batted at him. Young punks, one might say. However, many, not all, of the security guards down there are neither tolerant nor respectful to anyone. Not occupiers, not non occupiers.

So the question is this. What is the entire story?

Also, this is about xenophobia. I believe this, because most people look at Occupy and can't tell the difference between a member and someone who is just mentally ill. It shows that DTLA looks at an entire group of people instead of actually getting to know them. They come in about every shade and from every background and if you were actually looking at Occupy it probably wouldn't be at 7 in the morning as the meetings start at 7:30.

Go to one.

Even if you come out thinking, "Holy hell they are batshit insane." It'll either solidify your point, or you'll have a new perspective. Listen to all sides of a story. The only way to stop fear of the other, is to talk to it.

Oh, and don't worry. There are plenty of police officers there all the time. You'll be fine.

DTLAFamilies () on August 22, 2012, at 10:03PM – #17

Let's talk about people who are truly helping the homeless: a group called Home for Good is distributing $105 million in grants to build permanent supportive housing for the chronically homeless. Their goal is to eliminate chronic homelessness in LA County by 2016.

http://www.ladowntownnews.com/news/homeless-service-providers-to-announce-million-in-grants/article_9238f57a-e72c-11e1-b5bc-0019bb2963f4.html

Compare this to what Occupy is doing. Does Occupy have concrete goals? A plan to work towards those goals? A goal that will result in real, substantive good for the homeless community?

And I see that no one commented on the fact that women in the Occupy movement were feeling physically threatened/fearing sexual assault and were dismissed by their compatriots.

Kim Cooper on August 23, 2012, at 07:55AM – #18

Home for Good is a partnership between the L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce and the United Way of Greater Los Angeles. When a business lobby group launches a new charitable initiative that is immediately recognized by the media as "driving policy" during a time when the area where the homeless and poor have traditionally congregated is being gentrified and the right of the public to gather in public spaces is under attack by private interests, one has to wonder if there are larger motives at play than simply helping those in need.

It seems to me like a great deal of money is being spent in getting a small number of individuals, who happen to be particularly incorrigible, off the streets of Skid Row and into permanent supportive housing. If the plan works and some of these people have a better life inside, that's fine.

But I worry that this aid is coming at the expense of funding for longtime established and successful homeless service agencies that are not seeking to steer policy along business lines, and at the expense of civil liberties. I worry we are losing a chance to steer the considerable charitable donation power of the downtown business community towards projects that help far more people than Home For Good seeks to do.

Do you think businesses ought to donate funds to 1) help get a newly homeless family off the street, or 2) to hire supportive staff to convince the sixty-year-old guy who came to Skid Row to be left alone in his addiction that he needs to move into an apartment and sober up? What if ten families can be helped for what it costs to help that one addict?

There's no right answer, but these questions need to be asked when a business group seeks to shape the city and county's policy on how we treat its neediest citizens.

Federica Garcia Lorca on August 23, 2012, at 06:38PM – #19

Maybe in four years all the people without housing in Los Angeles will roofs over their heads. In the meantime and because they don't have $105M (maybe 250 small houses + administrative fees)in grants, some people in Occupy Los Angeles are providing food, blankets, and clothing to the homeless, just as you are.

And some OLA "members" (it's not a membership organization) are living without permanent shelter. The OLAers living in the streets put out calls to their housed comrades to bring blankets on cold nights,or food, or protection from police crackdowns. The housed and the unhoused have free stuff giveaways, they share food, they join together in decision-making, they have fun together--including chalking. :-D

Is the problem here that you can't tell the housed Occupiers from the ones without housing? Would DTLA be more comfortable if OLA didn't include the homeless among its membership, and instead just delivered donations and left? That's the charity model, the Home for Good model: assume that "we" know what "they" need, parachute it in, and fly away. At least the Salvation Army, for all its proseletizing, has a permanent presence in the neighborhood.

OLA is trying something else. It's called mutual aid. It was practiced by Jesus and Ghandi, who both were poor and lived with the poor, rather than dropping off their leftovers or $105M on their way to a loft dinner party or on the path to the White House (Antonio). It's different, it's unfamiliar in L.A. where we're carefully kept out of neighborhoods that don't reflect our race or economic class. But think about it for a moment: what if the homeless got to decide what to do with that $105M? Why is that so unthinkable? It shouldn't be.

For that matter, how many people in this conversation are homeless? Is anyone here even a little uncomfortable determining the lives and futures of people who aren't even in the discussion? Maybe we should be.

Kim Cooper on August 23, 2012, at 08:15PM – #20

A very interesting piece of citizen's journalism was posted today on YouTube: a series of interviews with workers at nearly every business that faces onto Pershing Square. Not one of the people in those shops expressed any problem with Occupy LA gathering in the park--on the contrary, a woman at Tommy Pastrami noted that they hold meetings in her restaurant, and that she likes them.

VIDEO LINK:

The business interviews start at 3:59 in the video, which begins with an interview with a gentleman sitting under an umbrella who says that the city came on Monday (prior to the complaints that were made at City Hall) to trim the trees so that they no longer cast any shade.

Are the many local businesses that have supposedly begged the city to implement a Task Force and clear Occupy LA and the homeless out of Pershing Square imaginary? If so, why is the park being so heavily policed?

jhnedwrds () on August 23, 2012, at 10:56PM – #21

As somebody who does business in the Park, operating the farmers' market, I can assure Ms. Cooper that Occupy supporters, including homeless people, did tremendous damage to my business and to the many farmers and vendors who sell at my market.

The farmers and growers and other vendors selling at the Pershing Square Farmers' Market have conducted their buiness in the most appalling conditions, witnessing fights, drug use and lots of other anti-social behavior within the Occupy/homeless encampment. On average, their sales declined somewhere between 40% and 50%. Nine farmers gave up; they couldn't put up with the smell, the flies and fleas and the panhandling any longer.

I discussed our problems with many Occupy activists. And, yes, many of those in their sleeping bags at Pershing Suare were Occupy activists, some homeless, some not. I explained the obvious, my farmers and vendors are clearly part of the 99%. They are the victims of a Farm Bill that clearly benefits very, very rich people and corporations at their expense. Small farmers have a very hard life for little reward and the Occupy activists made it that much harder.

So, I, for one, supported the creation of the Pershing Square Park Task Force. I applaud Council Member Huizar for his quick and decisive action. I am thankful to Captain Frank and his officers for their professionalism and how they conducted themselves at yesterday's farmers' market and I hope they keep it up. I assure you I am not imaginary and I assure you I am as concerned for the plight of the homeless as much as any Occupy activist I have spoken to.

Jony Edwards Operator of the Pershing Square Farmers' Market.

jhnedwrds () on August 23, 2012, at 11:51PM – #22

Just a quick comment. It was sad to see that not one of the people in the You Tube clip who receive boxes of fruit and vegetables at the end each market free of charge to distribute to the homeless had a good word to say about us.

Jony Edwards Operator of the Pershing Square Farmers Market.

Christopher Eaton on August 24, 2012, at 01:14AM – #23

Jonaya and Kim,

Your comments and sentiments are laughable. It's funny, I walk through the square all time and haven't ever once seen either of you there. The park was never as decrepit as you've described it, and Kim, Chicago and NY would NEVER put up with the Occupy Homelessness/Oakland rich kids hooked on methadone who don't want to work movement that we've lived with now for waaaaaaaaay too long. The real problem in the park is that there simply isn't enough programming for the rest of the 99 per cent who actually have lives and work. Screw the idiots living at the south end of the park. The current state of the park is disgraceful because of the Occupy fools and Jose Huizar's even more foolish response to their idiocy.

C.E. Stephan on August 24, 2012, at 06:11AM – #24

Kim Cooper makes money off of downtown's homeless. Her tour group takes people on a bus through downtown, talking about history and crime. If it got cleaned up her business would dry up. Hence her attempts to obfuscate and promote Occupy.

Pershing was a square on August 24, 2012, at 08:22AM – #25

@Jonaya - do you live downtown? I'd be surprised if the answer is yes. If the answer is no, you have no skin in the game.

I counted no less than 15 occupy people at Angel's Knoll this morning - throwing their suitcases over the fence before the park opened, smoking pot on the sidewalk (at 730 mind you). Yesterday, they sat around drinking and smoking pot in the park. Also, people are not allowed to spread blankets in that park as it kills the grass. Do they listen? No, according to the security guard there. They are trashing one of the few green spaces in downtown. The regular homeless people there rarely violate the rules and they just do their thing. What's happening now is different. These are mostly younger people doing nothing, contributing zero to society. This is most likely their choice to live like this, and destroy our parks in the process. This isn't a movement, a political statement, or anything else. It's a bunch of losers sitting around getting high and drunk.

There may be some older occupy types who don't live in the park, who actually want to do stuff and help people, but that's not the public face, the face that people who live downtown see everyday. If so, occupy has a serious image problem.

It's pretty sad, because I think we're all on the same side of the political fence here. But while the Tea Party gets crazy wingnuts elected and are actually passing laws (or blocking them) that are messing up the country, we sit here and debate about who has the right to crap in public.

FedericaLorca1 () on August 24, 2012, at 09:12AM – #26

Let's stop infantilizing the homeless for a moment. Did anyone catch the perceptive political analysis of the guy with the umbrella in the video? None of these people are children, and I'm pretty sure none of them, if they're reading this, are going to take advice from anyone here. They're making life choices based on the options they have. For instance, if you're jobless as well as homeless, what rule says toking at 7:30 a.m. is any worse than lighting up at 7:30 p.m.? No one here has lit up a joint on a Saturday morning? Pershing Square is concrete and Angel's Knoll is grass: if you had to spend your day, everyday, in either, where would you spread your blanket, and at what point would the allure of the soft grass overcome some deliberately repressive park regulation? DT housed residents and workers can't make decisions for the homeless, but we can improve their options. No one's arguing for anyone's right to defacate in public. The solution begins accomodating everyone's very minimal right to defacate and urinate in private.

ProgressiveMews () on August 24, 2012, at 10:13AM – #27

What I find incredible is that those who oppose occupy, seem to believe that downtown LA was devoid of houseless people, sex offenders and drug users - prior to occupy.

I've spoken to the operator of the farmers market (Jony). He thinks that because the farmers at his market donate food to the houseless, that it equates to his caring about their plight; but he will also say in the same breath that he thinks all houseless people just need to leave downtown too. He totally believed that every single houseless person in Pershing was an occupier; it's as if he just noticed there were houseless people there, much like the others who are making the same complaints, pretending these things never existed before. He didn't even know that houseless people have been driven out of several areas over the last couple of months and he didn't even seem to care about their not having anywhere else to go, only that they shouldn't be near him. He even spoke with one of the occupiers at Pershing, said he wanted to work things out between them, so everything could be OK for all; that was obviously a LIE, since in the week following, he went to countless media outlets to continue to ignorantly smear OLA and has supported aggressive policing instead.

It's true what was said about OccupyLA's (OLA's) protest at City Hall. With much thanks to the LAPD for constantly dropping off or directing houseless and newly released people from jail to City Hall, the protestors did indeed have to have discussions about who and what should be allowed and how to deal with it. As a womyn, I'm far from satisfied with how it was handled then and I feel that what prevailed were concerns about having to use brute force to remove dangerous people (being potentially dangerous, liabilities and being against principle for some) and inviting police into the protest space to remove these dangers also wasn't an acceptable option - even womyn have opposed turning in dangerous people to the police and the prison industrial complex. Discussions about these issues continue to this very day within OLA (because these societal ills haven't ceased to exist) and they are often similar to conversations happening on comment boards like this one, in that people need to be reminded that these are all problems WITHIN SOCIETY at LARGE - not mutually exclusive to OLA, not by any stretch of the imagination!

The main difference is that OLA understands that what services do exist are overwhelmed and insufficient, to say the least. OLA isn't pretending that the system is taking care of these things, nor that it even has a desire to do so; neither do we pretend that harsh/oppressive policing and criminalization of homelessness is an answer - to anything.

Kim is absolutely right about the Home for Good type programs too, they are miniscule in comparison to the damages done to these communities in cuts, displacement and in lawmaking. Many of these programs are given drips and drabs by local entrepreneurs, lobbyists and developers, so they can justify the millions upon millions they get in various forms of corporate welfare (subsidies, tax breaks, cheap public land rentals or sales, etc.) that we taxpayers flip the bill for, to pay for their massive gentrification projects downtown. Of course, these projects are the very things that displace and/or eliminate affordable housing, houseless shelters, general service facilities and "clean out" the remaining areas where they are allowed to simply exist.

So OLA generally agrees that those who suffer most, should not be turned away. There are actually active participants/protestors that are houseless too; some left their homes to protest full time and others are houseless people who just appreciated what was being provided (necessities and community) and then eventually joined in the efforts.

OLA struggles as much as any other community does in dealing with the realities of houseless people and acknowledges that we do not have all the answers; but we also believe we can do something meaningful and that together, we can figure out more ways to do better! We feed people, donate clothing and toiletries, provide info on places where they may be able to find assistance of all kinds and encourage a culture of taking care of each other. This is clearly a strange and difficult concept for many people to grasp, this "taking care of each other" thing appears to be culturally unacceptable. I think it's most apparent when reading articles and comments which are anti-occupy, because those people consistently call on the system to take care of all their complaints, often want to have problems out of their sight and almost never look to members of their own community to discuss and implement actual solutions.

John G on August 24, 2012, at 10:19AM – #28

@ ProgressiveMews - "This is clearly a strange and difficult concept for many people to grasp, this "taking care of each other" thing appears to be culturally unacceptable"

Well, fighting police, pissing in public, and destroying public property is also culturally unacceptable...

Pershing was a square on August 24, 2012, at 11:16AM – #29

@Mews - I don't believe in criminalizing homelessness, I'd pay more in taxes it it meant better social services. I've given to charities that help the homeless as well as help by buying food for individuals. I hope that the huge grant given last week helps provide housing and services. I believe Reagan did a huge disservice by dismantling mental health care system. In an earlier life I worked as a counselor for mh/mr teens. I have something of an understanding of these issues.

What is not too much to ask is that all people who live in the community to respect each other, including the monopolizing and destruction of public space and not doing drugs, drinking, pissing, etc in public, all of which Occupy people engage in. So you're giving food to homeless - that's great. On the other end, you're destroying and monopolizing the parks. Members sit around drinking and smoking pot. This is not a positive contribution to the neighborhood. Yes homelessness has been an issue, nobody who lives downtown is ignorant of that fact. Nobody expects it to disappear or be swept away. But what is not needed is a huge group of faux Robin Hooders making the neighborhood worse. There's nothing you can say that justifies that behavior.

jhnedwrds () on August 24, 2012, at 02:57PM – #30

ProgressiveMews, I do not believe you have ever spoken to me because you are not representing my views accurately - or anywhere near. I do speak with certain Occupy activists and I am going to ask them if I may use their names for them to confirm what I have suggested

Here are my views on the homeless: They deserve help. As I told the Occupy activists I talk to, I would be willing to contribute substantially to the rent of a building where there was shade and shelter, chairs, tables, food, board games to alleviate their boredom, as well as medical care...but they must want all these things.

Occupy and some others on this blog on the other hand want no more for the homeless than to let them live out their wretched lives sitting and sleeping in parks or sidewalks. What a limited, short sighted view for everybody.

Why don't we do this? I will "adopt" - in other words I will provide shelter, food, a job - for one homeless person, if each Occupy supporter who has a home does the same!

Again, Pogressive Mews, you have never spoken to me...unless you feel the need to distort my views for your personal gain or agenda.

Jony Edwards Operator of the Pershing Square Farmers Market

Todd Occupy Downing on August 24, 2012, at 04:09PM – #31

Not to discourage Home for Good or anyone else from coming up with solutions for the houseless, because it is sorely needed, but for $105 million they plan on helping 50 to 100 people out of a population of nearly 18,000 in the Skid Row area alone. How many decades will the other 17,900 have to wait?

Federica Garcia Lorca on August 24, 2012, at 08:06PM – #32

@Todd_Occupy_Downing, don't forget that the Ninth Circuit is requiring net +1250 beds since 2006 to allow the police to bust people for sleeping on the sidewalk. Once that happens, the remaining 17,900 might get that old-fashioned "hot and a cot" after their police beating, fines that will force them into further financial despair, and a long rap sheet to go job hunting with.