Small changes can sometimes make big impacts, and it’s the city’s hope that subtly reorienting downtown benches will significantly cut back on aggressive panhandling and the tendency of homeless people to turn public seats into camp zones.
During a presentation Wednesday evening at the Canary Hotel, members of the Downtown Organization and Santa Barbara’s Redevelopment Agency unveiled a pilot project in which 14 benches on State Street’s 800 and 900 blocks will be swapped with nearby trash cans, newspaper dispensers, and bike posts, and then rejiggered perpendicular to the sidewalk instead of parallel to it.
Paul Wellman
Marck Aguilar presents during Wednesday’s meeting on the “State Street Bench Relocation Pilot Project”
The Redevelopment Agency, explained representative Marck Aguilar, provided $50,000 for the project, which includes design work and the labor of replacing brick, pouring new platforms, ubolting the benches, and tacking them back down. Construction is set to begin in April and finish in May — if and when the Historic Landmarks Commission signs off on the project in February — just in time for the summer tourist season.
Aguilar — stressing that there aren’t plans to completely remove any of the benches — said no changes had been made to the downtown seating since it was installed over a decade ago, but the city knew some kind of reworking was inevitable. The benches’ original purpose of allowing shoppers and those in restaurant lines to take it easy and enjoy State Street’s ambiance, said Aguilar, is too often bogarted by a crowd that annoys merchants and scares shoppers.
The thinking, he explained, is that people tend to linger longer when they have a nice sweeping view of the sidewalk, and they might be inclined to move on faster if that’s eliminated when benches are turned. Dave Lombardi, chairman of the Downtown Organization’s Safety Committee and owner of Fast Frames, noted that it would be uncomfortable for a person to sit sideways and hold a sign. “People are manipulating and monopolizing the benches,” Lombardi said, explaining his organization is always trying to balance the needs and desires of pedestrians and store owners.
Paul Wellman
Dave Lombardi presents during Wednesday’s meeting on the “State Street Bench Relocation Pilot Project”
If the relocation project is successful — Aguilar said he and his department will solicit feedback from the community on the plan’s effectiveness after it comes to life — the Redevelopment Agency will look at making similar changes to all State Street benches. The agency is also kicking around ideas of moving benches to face the street or removing their backs. They were originally designed to be only four feet long so people wouldn’t sleep on them, a strategy Aguilar admitted was only “mildly successful.” The concept of turning the benches into individual chairs was shot down because there simply isn’t enough money in the budget to make that happen, Aguilar explained.
Complaints of aggressive panhandling and general shenanigans on the part of the homeless people who use those two blocks of sidewalk rose dramatically around 2007 and have continued consistently since, said Lombardi. The stores hardest hit, he explained, are Cafe Zoma, Fiesta 5 Theatre, and the Apple Store — all on the 900 block of State Street, which recently became even more of a homeless magnet after Borders closed and left its front patio next to the public restrooms unused.
While managers at Fiesta 5 and the Apple Store wouldn’t comment on the matter, Cafe Zoma partner Krista Fritzen said she feels the cluster of seating near her shop and the theater attracts a crowd that is often “not family friendly” and creates “a circus of inappropriate behavior.” Never one to turn away a customer simply because of his or her living situation, Fritzen said she’s nevertheless fielded many complaints from customers unhappy with the scene just outside Zoma’s front doors. Fritzen also speculated that it may be the volume of benches — not their orientation — that’s contributing to the problem, noting the area has nine benches per block face (one side of the block between intersections) while there are only three benches per block face on the 400 and 500 blocks of State Street.
Wednesday’s meeting was attended by a number of city councilmembers including Frank Hotchkiss, who worried aloud if facing two benches toward each other would create an even more inviting area for the homeless. “Now they have a perfect little campsite,” he predicted, suggesting a pole be placed between the benches so “they can’t wheel in a cart.” Aguilar said that might be a possibility, but it could violate Americans with Disability Act codes. Councilmember Randy Rowse — vice president of the Downtown Organization — said the plan was the “best and cheapest test,” calling it mild compared to Santa Monica’s “draconian strategies” to deal with its homeless population. Sharon Byrne, executive director of the Milpas Community Association, noted that Santa Monica has a “much more determined stance of getting rid of homeless.”
John Dixon, owner of Tri-County Produce, who, like Byrne, has been outspoken in his criticism of Santa Barbara’s transient population, asked Aguilar how many people currently use the benches for undesirable purposes, and how often the benches are occupied by them. He also wondered what exactly would be the measure of success. Aguilar said it wouldn’t be “feasible or economical” to use staff time to gather such specific pieces of data, explaining he relies on anecdotal information from store owners and shoppers to gauge progress.
Contending that there is “very little aggressive panhandling in Santa Barbara,” advocate for the homeless Dr. Lynne Jahnke said there is indeed panhandling, but those who engage in it are “poor and desperate.” They have the First Amendment right to do so, she went on. Jahnke relayed that she wasn’t able to attend Wednesday’s meeting because she was babysitting the dog of a homeless woman recently admitted to the hospital.
Police spokesperson Lt. Paul McCaffrey said his department has issued very few aggressive panhandling tickets since the ordinance went into effect in 2009. A lot of people wrongfully think panhandling is a crime, said McCaffrey, explaining it’s an act protected by free speech laws.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace






Previous Month



Comments
Just remove the benches. This is just your typical waste of money recommended by your chamber of commerce type organizations that have no real solutions and run our government at all levels. And wasn't there a government building nearby to hold this public meeting in?
In "My Town" we hold public meetings in environments that could be intimidating. Shameful.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The city council's disconnect with fiscal responsibility is now taking on an almost surreal level of mismanagement. Get ready for bankruptcy...
reality_check (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 7:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This a done deal? When was it on the City Council agenda?
Well at least we know which Councilmembers and candididates for election and re-election are supporting this use of $50K in redevelopment money that could building something useful instead, like housing for locals or a police station upgrade.
Somehow I predict that the unsavory fellow in the top photo here would be quite glad to lounge in the same bench regardless of the bench angle orientation to the street or sidewalk.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
January 14, 2011 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have so many problematic pics liked the one used in the story.
Complete irresponsibility on the part of the city. Plain/Simple.
Take the comments from here people and make your voice where it counts - at the council level!
BeachLivin (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I can remove those benches in a span of a couple of days on my own free time for the low, low price of FREE & I rarely go downtown to State Street!
Only problem is SEIU wants a piece of the pie, therefore they won't let me.
How many city employees does it take to remove a bench from State Street?
As many as $50,000 can afford & that'd be a crew of 4 workers which will comprise of the following staff arrangement:
2 journeymen to supervise (stand around & chat), 1 apprentice to do the leg work (go get the coffe for the numerous coffee breaks afforded by the SEIU's contract w/ the city) & 1 apprentice to do the actual work.
Thing is w/ the apprentice doing all the work, something is bound to be done wrong & then the 2 journeymen will have to fix it using overtime. This will then lead to an "extension on the project" & require more apprentices (on a lower pay scale) plus a couple more journeymen to keep them in line (buy more coffee & do the actual work).
Yeah, this is going to cost more than $50,000 by my union experience based analysis.
When they say "LIVE BETTER, WORK UNION!" they really mean it because the emphasis is definitely not on the "WORK" aspect of that slogan.
Well, @ this point I can't tell who's worse, the panhandlers, SB City Council or SEIU :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hank raises an interesting idea: could the panhandlers do a better job of running the city then the current council? And why are city meetings being held at the Canary Hotel? UFR!
reality_check (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 10:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The redevelopment agency is aggressive panhandling. You have to keep those 5 and six figure pensions embolden
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Capital S = stupid
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 14, 2011 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I walked by these existing benches in front of Fiesta Five theater tonight at around 7 pm, tonight a Friday before a holiday weekend. Of the 8 benches there in that half block, 2 of them had a homeless person sitting in bench occupancy, but one of them still had plenty of room for another person.
Of course, I have been at this spot countless times before as well and essentially observed the same mix of people, including buskers also blocking the sidewalks. Also of note, no crowd of "interesting" people were hanging out in front of Storke Placita, but instead seemed to have migrated to the wide sidewalk spaces in front of the now-closed former Borders Books and bank.
What is particularly striking at this exact location in front of Fiesta Five is how 2 of the benches, immediately in front of the theater, protrude into the usual sidewalk pathway and flow of pedestrian travel, unlike on most if not all State Street blocks. The feeling there often is a tight space between the planting bed and the crowd queued up in front of the theater. Add to that mix a ruffian panhandler, or an unsavory person holding up a sign asking for money, and the crowded, uncomfortable feeling indeed would magnify for pedestrians, theatergoers, and/or bistro patrons immediately nearby.
Why this story? This proposal to redesign and reinstall the benches, news racks, hitching posts, and maybe some of the planting beds at this exact spot in front of Fiesta Five theater seems to be an expensive solution looking for a problem. Accordingly, why not just spend $500 of City Redevelopment funds and relocate those 2 particular protruding benches further up State Street into a block that already has few benches already.
I am sure we can be smart about this in Santa Barbara, move just those 2 benches, and resolve most of the problem there for a mere 1% of the expected price of the taxpayers money.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
January 14, 2011 at 10:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
David, I know excatly which 2 benches you're talking about, could never figure out the architectiral/flow meaning/mechanics behind that arrangement myself. Have had a few "interesting" experiences @ that spot myself.
It definitely creates a tight atmosphere for the patrons just trying to have a fun nite on the town.
Maybe it was a social experiment by the city to forcefully integrate/assimilate the panhandlers & regular city folk :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 15, 2011 at 8:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another breathtaking waste of taxpayer money. Use existing police to enforce existing law against vagrancy and aggressive panhandling.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
January 15, 2011 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hank/Henry: Those particular constricting benches might be a bit closer to the coffeeplace than the Fiesta Five, but the constriction is huge with the queues of people at the theater and the fenced-in sidewalk bistro at the coffeeplace.
I wonder (not really) why no one proposed moving the fence railing at the bistro to make room instead of moving the benches to widen up that sidewalk experience and pedestrian flow?
Either way, just move those constricting benches up to a higher block where fewer benches exist, and be done with it to save the City Redevelopment funds that $45,500.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
January 15, 2011 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Using $50k in redevelopment funds might not be an issue of Gov. Brown's proposed budget proposal flies. He wants to reallocate that money to other uses.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-...
anemonefish (anonymous profile)
January 15, 2011 at 12:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems like redevelopment funds have virtually no oversight. The local govs salivate at the availability of more pork; the state hands it out. Who determines what is worthwhile and what is not? The local govs? Ours has just displayed it's complete incompetence in this area.
And why not ask for volunteers to move the benches? Couldn't have something to do with union contracts could it? Or the belief by certain councilmembers that their first allegiance is to public employees (are ya listening, Helene?) instead of taxpayers?
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
January 15, 2011 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
who do you want to sit on the benches?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McGPwP...
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 16, 2011 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Moving the benches shifts the transient population into alleys and less frequented areas. This will encourage more violence between members of this hungry and desperate population in areas out of sight. The areas where they're forced to concentrate will become more threatening to the tourist and resident population of the city. By pushing the problem out of sight you increase its negative impact and the suffering. We need to keep an eye on this, continue our voluntary acts of compassion, not sweep the problem into the shadows-- or none of us will dare to walk in lonely places again.
buGM (anonymous profile)
January 16, 2011 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What are "our voluntary acts of compassion" ?
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
January 16, 2011 at 1:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As I have delt with 'Panhandlers' in the past, a word of, "move-over, please" often works, although one who tends to drink while take their Meds makes a mean PanHandler, resulting in a reply of "*&^% you, @#%#$"!
My next response falls somewhere around "Move or Die!", followed by a quick collar grab and throw to ground. This works more often than not and a clear-to-sit is my reward. Though, there have a few times when a knife or Pellet gun is drawn in my direction but it often becomes my property and a broken wrist is given in exchange.
Now I know most tourists are incapable of personal defence and many residences are passivists who would allow anyone to push them around but I am NOT one of them.
To this day, only one individual was successful in injuring me with his "Spyder Knife" but his end result was a lengthy time in our local jail. This of course was quite sometime ago and I guess the Homeless and Panhandlers are much more aggressive and violent but still, if a kind word of compliance to the rest of the population to allow sitting is NOT allowed, eveybody has a personal communication device (Crackberry, I-phone, cellphone with camera), call and send your situation to the local law with the promise to file your complaint, let the police either blow you off or respond to your complaint.
Charles.
dou4now (anonymous profile)
January 16, 2011 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wait a minute now---let's really nail this down:
1. Install pigeon spikes in the seats of all downtown city benches. This will insure short rest stops and decrease loitering.
2. Pressure-sensor solar powered shocking system would further deter perching mal-lingerers.
3. Pass out city-approved non-neon signs to all street panhandlers who must panhandle a fee to display one.
4. Ask everyone NOT to go downtown for a whole day and see if the street haranguers leave.
Just a few of many remedies I would hope are not impulsively curbed.
Draxor (anonymous profile)
January 17, 2011 at 11:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Charles, you're talking my language! :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 17, 2011 at 12:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charles and Hank have the most obedient wives in town.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
January 17, 2011 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pinatubo: "Charles & hank have the most obedient wives on town."
HAHAHAHA! Actually, mine calls the shots in our humble abode. Besides, they ain't panhandlers :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 18, 2011 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
everyone's on edge, most people are just getting by, and more and more people are out on the streets for a number of reasons besides the economy. Alcohol and drugs are a big problem and symptomatic with depression and other issues. Add to that an affluent city that sells utopia and paves the sidewalks with red bricks and you get these situations. i don't go downtown because of the homeless panhandlers, i don't go down there because the City and Downtown Association have driven out the local businesses with high rents that only the corporate stores can justify. It's a tourist destination for LA day trippers, of which brings in all kinds of wacko's.
Let SIMA and Radius pay, they've driven this bus too long.
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 19, 2011 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
EP, I believe you hit on an intersting topic: Sima & Radius. If there's a reason for empty storefronts where the panhadlers congregate, they're it! High rents = lost business :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 19, 2011 at 12:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hank, get with it. Panhandlers are everywhere. Calle Real comes to mind, Trader Joes. everywhere. people are hungry. State St is a side show, or microcosm of our society.
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 19, 2011 at 10:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EP, yeah, I'm w/ it, been w/ it for quite some time now & yes, panhandlers, they are everywhere, as the incident on Storke & Hollister proves, as well as my many run ins w/ them in IV where I live.
Thing is this: If you have an abandoned storefront where there's no store or people occupying it, who is going to complain to the authorities about the panhandlers? In a nutshell: NOBODY.
Most of the complaints filed or lodged against aggressive panhandling come from business owners or employees of businesses along State Street.
The only complaining by the average John/Jane Q Public is done on blogs such as this (for the most part), unless they've had a particularly bad encounter w/ an aggressive panhandler.
My PERSONAL OPINION here, but I think the empty storefront syndrome goes in line w/ the "broken windows" theory of sociology: If you leave a broken window on a building, when you return there'll be 2, then 4, then 8 & so forth, maybe not in that particular numerical arrangement, but you get the picture.
You leave storefronts empty, you make great places for congregating w/ no resistance. :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 20, 2011 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hank - thanks for hanging in on this, but maybe the stores the stores are empty for the similar reasons people are homeless.
easternpacific (anonymous profile)
January 20, 2011 at 8:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EP, that's what we're BOTH saying! Just slightly different takes on it, but a similar message :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
January 21, 2011 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Another waste of OUR money.
We have become a city of enablers - let's spend money so we don't offend the bums/panhandlers/criminals. The problem is the people panhandling, bothering the citizens and tourists, and ruining our town.
I know one of those people who panhandle every day. That person has parents who own homes in Santa Barbara. That person chooses not to work and keeps committing crimes (stealing, drinking in public...) because the parents continuously bail that person out. Those parents failed. And we - the citizens of Santa Barbara - are continuously paying for it.
Fix the problem - which is go after the people causing the problems. Use the $50,000 for increased police patrol, ticket the bums, make the parents pay for their tickets, and maybe they'll stop being enablers.
BTW - yes, there are also the severely mentally challenged - and that needs action. Fix the problem. Its disgusting that the city allows that lives next to (former) Borders store?
sbmale (anonymous profile)
February 1, 2011 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have an idea: On every block of State Street we could bolt down some attractively designed but sturdy steel lockers. Inside each locker would be found a reflector vest, a helmet, various brooms, dustpans, shovels and so-forth, everything needed to maintain a clean street. Conspicuously affixed to each locker would be a pay-box. If a homeless guy or gal wanted to make another run at life, or if they were sick-and-tired of being broke, or if it was just in his or her nature to work for a living, they could apply to work one of those tool sheds. If they were diligent and kept their side of the street clean who knows how much they could make? Take that simple scenario and apply it all over the city, especially on the Milpas corridor and who can possibly predict what might happen? This program would also separate the wheat from the chaff in the sense that "non-participants", individuals able but not willing to work, would be frowned upon by the "working homeless" and their presence discouraged. A sort of self-policing might occur. I think it's time we use a little imagination, have a little faith, enable people to the good. The same society that packs dozens of bars into one city-block and a liquor-store on every corner hardly has room to complain about drunks wandering it's streets. It would serve us all to forego the negative rhetoric and hate-mongering for some constructive brain-storming.
shibboleth (Wayne Gilbert Myers)
February 1, 2011 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)