Gang Injunction, What’s Your Function?

Pro-Youth Movement’s Fourth Meeting Focuses On Controversial Proposal

Thursday, October 24, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

The City of Santa Barbara’s proposed gang injunction was the topic du jour at the fourth meeting of the Pro-Youth Movement, an organization founded to seek alternatives to a punitive approach to juvenile crime. The meeting’s participants ​— ​a healthy mix of nonprofit representatives, activists, and concerned citizens numbering about 50 ​— ​discussed their questions about an order which, if approved by a judge, would limit the civil rights of Eastside and Westside gang members, namely their ability to associate with each other.

The city first filed for an injunction in March 2011. According to activist Nayra Pacheco, a public-records request revealed that the city had already spent $481,000 pursuing the legal apparatus as of August 2012, over a year ago. Meeting participants wondered if there would be more opportunity for community input, how the legal process will unfold, and how it is determined who a gang member is. Cathy Murillo, the only city councilmember who opposes the injunction and a cofounder of the Pro-Youth Movement, was unsure whether juveniles would be named on the final list. The matter is expected to be heard in Superior Court by Judge Colleen Sterne sometime after the new year.

According to Christy Haynes, a veteran youth worker specializing in violence prevention who is now the lead organizer of Pro-Youth Movement, the city administrator and city attorney were invited to the forum along with representatives of all the area law enforcement agencies (albeit without much advance notice), but nobody attended the forum to defend the injunction. ­


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Very interesting Opinion piece in the SB News-Press today by the Mayor expressly calling out Murillo for intentional misrepresentation of facts on this subject. Will be interesting to see if Murillo has a response.

sbreader (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Please do read the NewsPress article by Mayor Helene Schneider. (10/24/13)

Schneider gets my vote for just this one blunt, truth-telling article alone, but she does have other savvy virtues and being willing to call it like it is only one of them.

Murillo was just plain stupid to lie and pander to her self-proclaimed narrow group of "constituents", while rejecting truth and the rest of the city's public safety concerns at the same time. We don't need her brand of city politics polarizing this town.

Hang your head in shame Murillo, for this cheap stunt. Glad you finally got called out on this. And take your "task force" out with you and your progressive-pandering Mission & State website at the same time.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Finally Schneider grows a pair and stops worrying about the blue line etc... This is one of her best moves and it is simply an opinion column in the news press. Now if Sterne can move or get some movement, we may get somewhere. Murillo is a joke, hopefully SB will be bright enough not to re-elect such a special interest group hack.

Now I guess we will see if the News Press lets Andy Caldwell chime in how the gang injunction will hurt business.

And the beat goes on....

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mayor Helene Schneider knows better and is too smart for her own spin in her letter published in the News-Less today, as referenced above.

She knows that the terms and conditions of any gang injunction have not been defined and approved by the court, such as who can ride on the bus with another person on the gang list, or who can go to school or church with another on the list. And despite her contrary sad spin, the Mayor also knows that the funds spent on the police and city attorneys to pursue this fiscal black hole are funds that could or should be spent on other activities, such as zoning enforcement, traffic enforcement, or a hundred other city problems that get complaints from real voters.

And the Mayor especially already knows that any money to the city attorney or the police department is funds originating from the city general fund and truly could be spent on other city priorities, such as parks, fire, and/or traffic.

And despite the creative interpretation of the real crime stats by the police chief, gang crimes have been declining for years. This million-dollar, wannabe gang injunction is a solution in search of a real problem, as the desperation of political climbers attempting to look tough on crime regardless of how few criminals are affected nor how that million dollars could have been spent instead on other priorities.

The cabal of city council members who approved this debacle two years ago have dug their hole so deep they do not know how to get out of the black hole and save their fiscal faces.

John_Adams (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 9:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Has anybody checked Mayor Schneider's basement for a pod?

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 9:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Voters want the city to spend time and money on a gang injunction. Helene did the right thing. People are grateful she spoke up and supports the gang injunction.

The number one concerns all candidates admitted they hear from voters when when walking precincts: gangs and vagrants.

Go for it, Helene.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 10:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Question for all those who support the gang injunction: What were we doing as a society before the need for a gang injunction came to be and why don't we go back to that?

Madam Mayor?...members of the council?...bloggers?...

billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 10:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Per the meeting at La Casa de La Raza I just heard on KEYT'S news report "City leaders supporting the injunction were invited, but didn't show".

billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2013 at 11:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How do we "go back" to a time when society, societal mores/customs (for better sometimes, but also often for worse), the political climate, economic demographics etc. were tremendously different from those that exist now. There is no "simple" solution nor are there time machines. We have to deal with the here and now and what we have in SB (here and now) would seem to call for the injunction to be tried. Something needs to be done and anyone arguing for more "youth activities" or social programs as a solution would seems to be acting willfully obtuse at this point.

zappa (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2013 at 6:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The question is not for society to cure gangs; it is their role to eliminate them.

Gang members make the decisions to join gangs eagerly and voluntarily. Society condoning this voluntary membership is the fundamental error. Once in the gang, then the gang culture of violence and terror takes over any members free will

Wringing hands as if it was somehow society's fault these punks celebrate violence with a gang member collective indifference is society's fatal response to this clearly willing and eagerly embraced lawless conduct.

Nope, it is not a fault of society gangs exist. it is the fault of gangs. Get rid of them. They do not belong in Santa Barbara and they do not belong in America. They are first, last and always criminal enterprises.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2013 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Gangs: What is YOUR function?

Gang allow young men to collectively act out hormonal rages, resentments excesses without fear of consequence or responsibility. They reinforce bad decisions using the mob/group mentality and peer pressure. Gangs celebrate attacks on private property, public resources and human lives.

Then gang members grow up and move one, leaving a swath of damage, deaths and fatherless children in their wake as the next generation of hormonally-charged young males within the gang culture look for their generation's excuses to keep acting out irresponsibly as well.

And the cycle of impoverished values continues unabated until society steps in and gangs culture is eliminated once and for all. Society cannot afford gangs ever-renewing cycle of violence and human degradation.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2013 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Do nothing SantaBarbara about your gang problem, and watch your city go down like Oxnard and SantaMaria. If you can't see that this happening right now, than there is no hope for your city. Good luck.

zuma7 (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2013 at 11:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: