Santa Cruz Indymedia : http://santacruz.indymedia.org
Home
Santa Cruz Indymedia

LOCAL News :: [none]

Text of the Downtown Ordinances That Kill the Voluntary Guidelines

Text of the Proposed "Forbidden Zones" and "Move Along Musicians" Ordinances coming up for Final Reading at Santa Cruz City Council as item #28 on the evening session on January 14th.
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-49 (Version 1) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING SECTION 5.43.020 OF THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO DISPLAY DEVICES
BE IT ORDAINED By The City Of Santa Cruz As Follows:

Section 1. Section 5.43.020 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
5.43.020 PROHIBITED LOCATIONS
(1) In order to assure safe, orderly and adequate public access and pedestrian traffic on city streets and sidewalks, no display device shall be placed in any of the following locations in the C-C Community Commercial; C-N Neighborhood Commercial; C-B Commercial Beach; CBD Central Business District and R-T Tourist Residential zone districts:
(a) Within ten feet of any building entrance or fence or other structure separating private property from the public right-of-way other than cyclone fences between vacant lots and the public right-of-way, or ten feet directly in front of any window. Where any such entrance or window is recessed from the public sidewalk, the ten feet shall be measured from the point at which the building abuts the sidewalk;
(b) Within ten feet of any street corner or intersection;
(c) Within ten feet of any kiosk or mid-block crosswalk;
(d) Within ten feet of any drinking fountain, public telephone or bench;
(e) Within any portion of the sidewalk between the license-area limit line of any sidewalk café or other open-air eating establishment and the curb of the sidewalk and in no other location within ten feet of any such license-area limit line; or
(f) Within ten feet of any vending cart.

(2) No person shall be cited under this section unless he or she has first been notified by a public officer or Downtown Host that he or she is in violation of the prohibition in this section, and thereafter continues the violation.

Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.


ORDINANCE NO. 2002-49 (Version 2)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING SECTION 5.43.020 OF THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO DISPLAY DEVICES BE IT ORDAINED By The City Of Santa Cruz As Follows:
Section 1. Section 5.43.020 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

5.43.020 PROHIBITED LOCATIONS
(1) In order to assure safe, orderly and adequate public access and pedestrian traffic on city streets and sidewalks, no display device shall be placed in any of the following locations in the C-C Community Commercial; C-N Neighborhood Commercial; C-B Commercial Beach; CBD Central Business District and R-T Tourist Residential zone
districts:
(a) Within ten feet of any building entrance or fence or other structure separating private property from the public right-of-way other than cyclone fences between vacant lots and the public right-of-way, or ten feet directly in front of any window. Where any such entrance or window is recessed from the public sidewalk, the ten feet shall be measured from the point at which the building abuts the sidewalk;
(b) Within ten feet of any street corner or intersection;
(c) Within ten feet of any kiosk or mid-block crosswalk;
(d) Within ten feet of any drinking fountain, public telephone or bench;
(e) Within any portion of the sidewalk between the license-area limit line of any sidewalk café or other open-air eating establishment and the curb of the sidewalk and in no other location within ten feet of any such license-area limit line; or
(f) Within ten feet of any vending cart.

(2) No person shall allow a display device to remain in the same location on the sidewalk for a period of time exceeding one hour. After one hour the person who placed the display device on the sidewalk shall not place a display device on the sidewalk within 100 feet of the original display device location. After one hour the person who placed the display device shall not place a display device in the original display device location, or within 100 feet of the original display device location, for twenty-four hours.
(3) No person shall be cited under this section unless he or she has first been notified by a public officer or Downtown Host that he or she is in violation of the prohibition in this section, and thereafter continues the violation.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.


ORDINANCE NO. 2002-50 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ ADDING SECTION 5.43.021 TO THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO DISPLAY DEVICES
BE IT ORDAINED By The City Of Santa Cruz As Follows:
Section 1. Section 5.43.021 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby added to read as
follows:
“5.43.021 EXEMPT ZONES
Notwithstanding the distance restrictions set forth in Section 5.43.020 the City Council by resolution may from time to time designate exempt zones where display devices may be placed on city streets and sidewalks at locations where placement would ordinarily be prohibited by Section 5.43.020. In designating an exempt zone the City Council shall first determine that the placement of display devices in the exempt zone will not impede or interfere with the safe, orderly and adequate public access and pedestrian traffic on city streets and sidewalks.”

Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.

ORDINANCE NO. 2002-51
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING
SECTION 9.10.010 OF THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO AGGRESSIVE SOLICITATION
BE IT ORDAINED By The City Of Santa Cruz As Follows:

Section 1. Section 9.10.010 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.10.010 DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this chapter:
(a) “Solicitation” means any verbal request, or any non-verbal request made with a sign, by a person seeking an immediate donation of money, food, cigarettes or items of value. Purchase of an item for an amount far exceeding its value, under circumstances where a reasonable person would understand that the purchase is in substance a donation, is a donation for the purpose of this chapter. A person is not soliciting for purposes of this Chapter when he or she passively displays a sign or places a collection container on the sidewalk pursuant to which he or she receives monetary offerings in appreciation for entertainment or a street performance he or she provides. This Chapter does not apply to peddling and soliciting activity governed by Chapter 5.40 of this code.
(b) “Person” means and includes both individual persons and organizations.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.

ORDINANCE NO. 2003-
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
REPEALING ORDINANCE 2002-36 AND 2002-43 PERTAINING TO DISPLAY DEVICES

WHEREAS, on July 24, 2002, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2000-36 amending Section 5.43.020 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code pertaining to noncommercial display
devices;
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2002-36, as adopted, served to expand those areas in the CC Community Commercial, C-N Neighborhood Commercial, C-B Commercial Beach, CBD Central Business District and R-T Tourist Residential Zone Districts where the placement of display devices on City streets and sidewalks would be prohibited including, but not
limited, to display devices used by street performers in connection with the receipt of monetary donations for street performances;
WHEREAS, subsequent hearings by the Santa Cruz Downtown Commission indicated that there was a level of misunderstanding or confusion relative to the new distance
regulations which might have had the inadvertent effect of discouraging legitimate, legal and desired speech-related activity in permitted locations;
WHEREAS, it was therefore necessary to immediately amend Ordinance No. 2002-36 so as to extend the effective date of Ordinance 2002-36 and thereby provide additional time
for the public education process which is necessary to assure that the newly enacted regulations do not have the deleterious effect of discouraging speech-related activity
which was actually permitted under the regulations; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2002-43 was therefore adopted as an emergency ordinance on September 10, 2002 to extend the effective date of 2002-36 to January 15, 2003 so as to
provide the Downtown Commission with the time necessary to conduct the necessary public education and formulate recommendations relative to the implementation of
ordinance 2002-36;
WHEREAS, at its regularly scheduled December 10, 2002 meeting the City Council considered the Downtown Commission’s recommendations and decided to adopt a new
ordinance to implement a 10-foot distance requirement in lieu of the 14-foot distance requirement that would be imposed by Ordinance No. 2002-36 and to possibly implement
a one-hour time limitation relative to the placement of permitted display devices on sidewalks;
WHEREAS, the City Council also determined that it would cause unwarranted confusion to allow Ordinance Nos. 2002-36 and 2002-43 to go into effect thereby temporarily
imposing a 14-foot distance requirement which the Council deems inappropriate;
WHEREAS, it is therefore necessary to adopt this ordinance on an emergency basis to assure that Ordinance Numbers 2002-36 and 2002-43 do not take effect or are no longer
effective.
WHEREAS, this Emergency Ordinance is therefore necessary to preserve the public peace, health and safety.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Santa Cruz as follows:
Section 1. Ordinance Number 2002-36 is hereby repealed.
Section 2. Ordinance Number 2002-43 is hereby repealed.
Section 3. Pursuant to Section 612 of the City’s Charter, and for the reasons set forth herein, this Ordinance is hereby adopted as an Emergency Ordinance and shall therefore
become effective and go into effect immediately upon adoption.
 
 


New Comments are disabled, please visit Indybay.org/SantaCruz

Comments

Proposed E-Mail to City Council by Coleen Douglas

COLEEN DOUGLAS HAS BEEN FACILITATING AN E-MAIL AND IN PERSON DIALOGUE BETWEEN STREET PERFORMERS AS A GROUP AND BETWEEN THEM AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. THE NEXT MEETING OF STREET PERFORMERS IS 2 PM AT WIRED WASH CAFE ON SUNDAY JANUARY 12. ANY HELP FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. I AM TAKING THE LIBERTY OF PASSING ON HER APPEAL. --ROBERT NORSE

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:04:41 -0800
>To: cdouglas (at) cruzio.com
>From: Coleen Douglas <cdouglas (at) cruzio.com>
>Subject: Pls send email to City Council TODAY
>
>Friends,
>
>As you may know, since November I've been working as a facilitator with Santa Cruz Street Performers to solve disagreements with merchants downtown by using mutual respect, common courtesy, and dialogue. Next Tuesday January 14th, the City Council may pass an ordinance revision that would kill this dialogue process. They need
to hear from citizens who support the dialogue option immediately.

>If you feel so moved, TODAY OR TOMORROW, cut-and-paste this letter into a new email, and send it to all the Council members via the email list below (also included is City Clerk, official record-keeper). I'd really appreciate it!

>Thank you, Coleen
>
>P.S. I'm off to Cuba tomorrow morning til Jan 19, so I'll miss the Council meeting itself. This is my final effort on behalf of dialogue downtown before the Council meeting.

PROPOSED E-MAIL TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS

>TO:
>TFitzmaurice (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us, MPrimack (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us,
>EPorter (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us, SKennedy (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us,
>CMathews (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us, EReilly (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us,
>MRotkin (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us, cityclerk (at) ci.santa-cruz.ca.us
>
>SUBJECT: No 1-hour Move-along law
>
>Dear City Council,
>
>On January 14, I urge you NOT to pass the 1-hour move-along section of the revised display device ordinance. Instead, encourage the merchants, street performers, and residents to engage in mutually-respectful dialogue to create agreements that work for all of them.
>
>I want my downtown to be lively, safe and inviting. The laws you propose are too rigid, and discourage talented musicians, as well as political tablers, from being a part of the downtown scene.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Your name and address
>
 

Text of the Voluntary Street Performers Guidelines (1980-2002)

SANTA CRUZ STREET PERFORMERS

Dear performer,

This paper was designed by and agreed to by your fellow performers. We are making them available to merchants, and city officials, so that everybody knows the agreement. It might be handed to you by one of them but it comes from many of us.

In 1980, thirty-five Santa Cruz street performers met to address a proposal by city officials to pass laws that would ban or severely restrict street performing in Santa Cruz. In an effort to avoid inflexible laws, the performers proposed instead, to come to an agreement that recognized the rights of performers, people working in the businesses downtown residents, and others who us the downtown.

35 street performers came to consensus on those guidelines and agreement was reached with merchants, the Downtown Neighbors' Association, the City Council and other interested parties. A few times since, performers met with representatives of the Downtown Association, city officials, and others to update the agreement.

The following list of voluntary guidelines represents that agreement. We believe that these guidelines reflect the unwritten rules that street performers have worked with for centuries (street performing is at least as old as stores).

HOURLY ROTATION
It is recognized that one performer or act monopolizing an area for a long time can make it difficult for other performers and for the people working in the downtown businesses. One-hour rotation is thought to be reasonable. It is also recognized that the performances take place in front of businesses and that the people working in that business may ask a performer to relocate after one hour if they are experiencing a problem. While it is agreed that the public streets belong to no one, it is suggested that talking with people working in the stores will many times help to prevent misunderstandings.

BLOCKING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC
Gathering a crowd so large that they block the sidewalk can create a problem for people trying to pass by. The performer is usually in the best position to address the audience and help to keep a clear passage on the sidewalk and through doorways. It is also recognized that performances taking place in front of business doorways and windows can be problematic, and that people working in these businesses have a right to request that performers move aside to prevent that problem.

SPACING
It is recognized that too many performers on one block combine to create a sound that is disturbing to all, including the workers and passers-by (the
audience). It is suggested that musicians be sensitive to their instruments (the sound of bagpipes or conga drums carry further than that of a dulcimer).

DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS
It is also recognized that we share the downtown area with downtown residents. When he was still alive and active on behalf of the rights of street performers, Tom Scribner (the street performer whose statue still entertains on Pacific Avenue) asked that we respect his and other residents' need for sleep. The city has a curfew on noise disturbance. From 10:00pm till 8:00am musicians are in danger of being cited under this ordinance.

CONTRIBUTIONS
Contributions from satisfied listeners is the only financial support afforded to a sidewalk entertainer. Offensive vocal solicitation is not only rude behavior
that works against all street performers but is not very good for tips either. An open instrument case or other receptacle is considered appropriate.

YOUR COOPERATION AND RESPECT FOR OUR NEIGHBORS IS
APPRECIATED

"Sidewalk entertainment has no cover charge. There is no age limit, no dress code, and no minimum drink. And it's not plugged into any nuclear power plant or any other source of power but natural human energy."
......Artis the Spoonman
 

From one of the creators of the Voluntary Guidelines

The following is part of a commentary written by professional bubble performer Tom Noddy, who was also a street performer in Santa Cruz for many years back in August 2002. Those interested in a deeper discussion of the issue should search under "Voluntary Guidelines" or "Downtown Ordinances" for more discussion. I have taken the liberty of reposting this commentary.

A debate/discussion of Street Performers and the Downtown Ordinances between Tom Noddy and Scott Kennedy can be found in the KUSP website archives (August or September).



THOUGHTS FOR SANTA CRUZ STREET PERFORMERS

Hello, My name is Tom Noddy. I hold no official position in city government or any other disorganization. For many years I performed a puppet show as a street performer in Santa Cruz and on the streets across this and other countries. In the early '80s I helped to organize street performers here when the city tried to ban the practice of our art. Since then I've helped when
asked by performers, merchants, residents, city council members or others to address street performer issues in Santa Cruz. I'm still an entertainer (I do an act called Bubble Magic with soap bubbles) but not on the streets (a little bit of wind and I have no act at all). As a professional entertainer I travel in and out of town, sometimes for extended periods.
You may know that the City Council has recently passed some new amendments to laws that restrict street performers in Santa Cruz. The process is not finished ... some Council members have indicated that they will look for ways to soften the effects of these baffling changes while at least one is looking into ways to require permits or licenses for the right to perform downtown.
Now and again there has been confusion on the streets here regarding what laws or regulations apply to street performers and who actually knows the laws. The downtown hosts use to help with these matters but they too have become hopelessly confused and have sometimes
spread misinformation. The downtown police have stumbled on some of the complications. I have concerned myself with these issues since the late 1970s and I assure you, if you are not now confused then you really don't understand what is going on.
Let me try to give you an idea of how it looks at this moment (understand, some parts of this thing are fluid and are changing even as I write this).


THE VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES
When an effort was made to ban street performing in Santa Cruz in the late 70s the performers organized. Some wanted to fight against the merchants who were calling for a ban. Others wanted to convince them that street performing benefits the downtown.
The overwhelming support for performers from the community persuaded them to reason with us. Some merchants didn't want a ban, they would be happy with overregulation in the form of designated areas (two were suggested, both off of Pacific Avenue) & permits &/or licenses. Tom Scribner, the saw player whose street performance on musical saw has been honored with a statue downtown, was alive then & he told the merchants & city officials that he would be willing to be arrested before he would agree
to be licensed to perform for free downtown.
Instead, the performers indicated that they would be willing to help bring peace to the downtown by composing a list of voluntary guidelines for performers and that they would make that list of guidelines available to the merchants and city officials so that they could be distributed to future performers who might come to town. Our proposed guidelines were amended after negotiations with the Downtown Association (merchant group downtown). They were endorsed by the performers (35 performers came to
consensus on this agreement), endorsed by the merchants, endorsed by the neighbor organization, and editorials in several local newspapers endorsed this approach. Eventually, the conservative City Council in 1980 endorsed the agreement and the guidelines.
The agreement was that those guidelines would be used to address all performer matters that did not involve actual criminal behavior. Performers pledged to abide by that neighborly agreement and the city agreed to pass no laws to specifically regulate street performers. Naturally, street performers have always been bound by the same laws that everyone else is. Noise curfew, disturbing the peace, laws against blocking pedestrian traffic, these could all be used to deal with anyone who needed laws to help
him/her to be respectful of others downtown but first performers, merchants, police would try the more
neighborly approach. The agreement worked and city officials refrained from passing laws specifically to
regulate street performing.
City Council members came and went, performers came & went, downtown hosts came & went, downtown police officers came and went, shop owners came & went. Only a few of us who made the agreement in 1980 are still paying any attention to street performing matters in Santa Cruz (in a way, Tom Scribner is among those few). But over & over when people sat down to consider how to address the problems with street performing (or the problems with merchants who have a problem with street performing) people returned to the voluntary guidelines.
When the 1989 earthquake transformed the downtown into a pile of rubble and merchants in tents, the performers were still there bringing some smiles and some life to the streets of our town.
When they rebuilt after the quake they added to the population of elders in hotels and apartments downtown. At the same time they encouraged an outdoor scene and encouraged much more nightlife. We held a series of meetings with residents and this resulted in amending some wording to the guidelines to make the performers aware of the needs and rights of the residents (separate meetings with downtown drummers and residents resulted in another set of agreements specifically about their concerns).
When the downtown hosts became a permanent fixture on the streets they were supplied with copies of the guidelines & periodic meetings ensured that they understood the way the agreement had always worked ... they became the main outlet for getting the guidelines & the spirit of the guidelines out to the new performers & new merchants who came into the downtown.
As late as the summer of 2001 there were meetings with street performers, City Council members, police, residents, and others to address the "problem" of marimba music downtown (note: no merchants had complained, none attended these meetings). Those meetings ended with a pledge by all involved to try to use the neighborly approach to problem-solving described by the guidelines instead of resorting to a legalistic approach as a first response. Unfortunately, the legalistic approach has now
replaced that agreement.
The City Council, responding to demands by downtown merchants & others passed some very restrictive laws for the downtown. These "downtown ordinances" passed in 1994 were supposed to be about panhandling, sitting on the sidewalk, & general rudeness downtown. But one of the added bonuses was that a new law 5.43.020, was said to define street performing & political tabling as "Noncommercial
use." The same category used to regulate the placing of information tables & petitioning & other First
Amendment protected activity downtown.
These restrictive ordinances were only rarely enforced -- the community response and a court setback led city officials to back off on enforcement of the more outrageous aspects of these restrictions. Therefore, performers continued to be regulated mostly by the more flexible voluntary guidelines. Now, in 2002, the Downtown Association and the City Council have renewed the call for full enforcement of the 1994 laws and added much greater restrictions on top of them.
 

Calendar

No events for this day.

view calendar week
add an event

Views

Media Centers

Syndication feeds

Account Login

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software