WEATHER »

Gang Injunction Trial Slated for Cinco de Mayo

City Councilmembers Debate Property Values, More Cops


Thursday, February 13, 2014
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article

More than three years after it was unveiled, Santa Barbara’s gang injunction will be tried in Judge Colleen Sterne’s courtroom beginning, ironically, on Cinco de Mayo, a celebration of the day badly outnumbered Mexican troops defeated French occupation forces 160 years ago. As written, the injunction names 30 adult alleged gang members and would significantly limit their rights to assemble with other gang members, especially near public schools and park.

City Hall and the District Attorney’s Office have said the injunction is necessary to protect young teens from older gang recruiters, but defense attorneys have contended they have yet to be given all the necessary documentation to properly evaluate claims that their clients constitute “the baddest of the bad,” as they were initially described by Police Chief Cam Sanchez. Critics of the injunction showed up in court Monday to wage silent vigil against the measure, which they contend is unnecessary, counterproductive, and unconstitutional.

At a special council meeting on the budget held Monday, Councilmember Cathy Murillo took the opportunity to grill city budget experts on the negative impact they thought the injunction might have on property values. Murillo argued that real estate agents would be forced to disclose to potential buyers if the property in question was located in one of the city’s two safety zones. This, she said, would push property taxes down, leading to a loss of city revenue. Councilmember Frank Hotchkiss — who supports the proposed injunction as ardently as Murillo opposes it — said that as a practicing real estate agent, he thought other real estate agents would use the presence of the safety zones “in a positive way” to help them market properties. Murillo is hoping to enlist the real estate and tourism industries to oppose the injunction on the grounds that it’s bad for business.

Later in the meeting, Councilmember Dale Francisco said he believed that gang activity, coupled with the abiding presence of street people on State Street, required City Hall to authorize the hiring of more police officers. Murillo noted that even according to the police department’s own crime statistics, gang activity is down, not up. Limited city funds should be earmarked on youth programs to keep young people out of gangs, she argued, instead of hiring more officers. “We don’t need to fearmonger on that,” she said

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

I know that the gang injunction will stop the gang problem because once it becomes illegal to break the law, those gangbangers will get scared and stop being bad.

You know, just how anti-drug laws stop people from smoking pot.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 5:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What's worse for your property value-
Being within a gang injunction safety zone or having a stabbing on your sidewalk ?
Ask a Realtor!

garfish (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, I can see it now! All the Mexican flags flying & protest songs and speeches in Spanish as well as a heavy-handed appearance by PODER and PUEBLO all of the homies!
Since when did crime become about being of a certain race or ethnicity? It is about cCRIMINAL BEHAVIOR regardless of race or ethnicity.
This does NOT include selling pot, this is about harassment, intimidation, terrorization of communities with acts of assault, burglary, theft, robbery and murder.
It is about power and the control, something gang scum are always striving for in their quest to be bad.
So yeas, expect the worst from the unintelligent, it is the best they have to offer.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is hilarious, Murillo grasping at straws. Since when does she care about the property values of the landlords of the oppressed people she is trying to protect from the gang injunction...seriously?? Am I missing something? Hotchkiss spelled it out: If anything your property values will go up in the injunction zone and as a realtor, he ought to know.

How would that sales pitch go with prospective buyers/renters inside the zone: Well you are inside of a gang injunction zone which means that gang members cannot loiter, gather or pull any other shenanigans around your kids.

Same convo outside the zone: Well I am sorry, but you are just outside the gang injunction zone, so gang members can party at will. Gosh I hope your kids will be ok!

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Living in an area where there have been several stabbings, seen blood on the sidewalk, I think it would be helpful to market our house as being in a gang-free zone.

But I don't think real estate values should be the important factor: public safety is; alternatives for young people are. Perhaps there can be a combination, an injunction that targets only the worst of the bad AND an increased reach-out to youth with healthy (for them and for the city) options. For instance, there's a program in LA of working with teens and shelter dogs, teaching compassion. Another was shown on PBS last night, PAW (Pups and Wards) working with teenage probationers, former gang members, through the Orange County Probation Department.

It's not an either-or, at least not for many.

at_large (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

LMFAO!
Worrying about a criminal element affecting the housing market.
Oh boy :) got the giggles!

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 10:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Agreed that the real estate market should not be the deciding factor on this one bit. Not even in the discussion as an excuse or a crutch.
Sadly that is what it has degraded to. Public safety and the future direction of our youth is what is should be about first and foremost.

Did anyone notice while the big SBIFF is going on, there are people chasing each other down the streets with baby strollers stabbing each other in the back? !@#$%@#??????

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Bimboteskie: "Did anyone notice while the big SBIFF is going on, there are people chasing each other down the streets with baby strollers stabbing each other in the back?"

No man, that event is usually run by The Canary and I hear it is a sanctioned event with cool prizes for the winners. Last I heard, they gave an all expenses paid stay at the Graybar Suites to the winning team!

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

(As a practicing real estate agent) I would be in opposition to any minority elements, and I would look at any violations of their civil rights in a positive way!
Uh-oh No$ale's back to the police state rhetoric....
(He's a Republican right?)

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What's so ironic about all this...
Most of these home buyers spend all their time worrying about street gang violence, only to wind up moving their kids next door to a Justin Beiber wanna be!
At least the poor Mexican kids will be there to blame when your kids start acting like hooligans themselves!

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 12:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Umm-
Justin Bieber minus Lamborghini=no threat.

garfish (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

SERIOUSLY..... I ask you this: When was the last time you, personally, were harassed, robbed, attacked, confronted, etc... By a "gang-member?" When was the last time you were affected by the population that will be profiled by this injunction? If you were to buy a house, would you feel safer knowing it was in a safety zone, or would it deter you knowing that your elected city officials were claiming it to be gang war zone. Would you still buy a house? Yes, we have some violence, but is it truly out of control like its being made out to be? I think not. "City Hall and the District Attorney’s Office have said the injunction is necessary to protect young teens from older gang recruiters." WRONG... What keeps them from being recruited is PROACTIVE IN SCHOOL AND AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS, MENTORS, COUNSELORS COACHES, AND PEOPLE THAT CARE! GET OUT FROM BEHIND YOUR COMPUTER AND STOP TALKING TRASH AND CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE BY VOLUNTEERING, GIVING BACK, BEING ACTIVE, SOMETHING!

BigTino (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Justin minus Lamborghini equals still another coked out drunk twenty year old loser from Canada.
Funny that's the same image I get when I think of Garfish!

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 1:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And with that, the REAL ESTATE PROPERTY VALUES DEBATE has begun!

Hotchkiss just admitted that these gang zones must be disclosed. He only is just groping to spin such disclosure in a warped way that does not pass the laugh test. Desperate is as Desperado does.

What happens in Santa Barbara when real estate property values and, more importantly, their sales commi$$ions are at stake?
The SBBOR becomes a member of PODER, that is what happens.

John_Adams (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"…I think it would be helpful to market our house as being in a gang-free zone…"

Except that it won't be a gang-free zone; it will only be an "alleged gang-free zone" because, as Nick Welsh rightly indicates in the article, the injunction is targeted at "alleged gang members."

But I agree with billclausen that surely "those gangbangers will get scared and stop being bad." If they don't, perhaps "alleged gang-free zone" signs should be put up all over town.
_____________

Related: recent news reports indicate that the alleged leader of the free world is deliberating whether to assassinate yet another US citizen, because he or she is alleged to be considering doing something not just bad, but very very bad [ http://wearechange.org/obama-administ... ].

This is the lunacy that allegedly passes for the rule of law in this country today, both nationally and locally.

JohnTieber (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Si Se Puede, Gnomos.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Honestly though, I forgot that Hotchkiss was a real estate agent. This whole time he was pushing for gang injunctions, I was under the impression that he was just being extraordinarily ignorant!
Things are making much more sense now....

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

how do gang leaders recruit if the injunction won't let them congregate.

Isn't that one of the main reasons for an injunction.

lawdy (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey tourista-
Do your homework before you go poppin off.Sturgeon like cold water,garfish can't handle it!

garfish (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 3:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gang leaders don't recruit, they use middle school students for that.

The injunction may lead to more recruitment efforts since some of the senior gang members who have been caught may have some aversion to participating in gang activities.

You may inadvertently end up lowering the age of gang members without reducing the numbers at all.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Big Tino: "SERIOUSLY..... I ask you this: When was the last time you, personally, were harassed, robbed, attacked, confronted, etc... By a "gang-member?"

Just last week in Goleta of all places! A little gang gnome tried to make off w/ my bike, I tackled him, threw down a few punches and sent him on his way like the coward he and his friends are.
Funny thing was his homies watched from a safe distance as he got the spanking daddy should've given him. COWARDS!

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 4:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hershey: "Si Se Puede, Gnomos."

Gnomos? Is that a new gang in town or a set of one of the currently existing gangs? Do they wear gnome hats and boots? Must be an Irish thing.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 4:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Do your homework before you go poppin off.Sturgeon like cold water,garfish can't handle it!

garfish (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 3:33 p.m

That's right, garfish, sturgeon, dolphins, we all have to stick 2GETHER. We have to back EACH OTHER.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 6:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Gnomos" means "Gnome" in Spanish but Herschel is part of a secret Mexican-Irish plot to have gnomes run the world.

George Harrison was fond of gnomes, (http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6157/62...) his second wife was Olvia Arias, who was (and still is) Mexican, (http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=O...) and Harrison was of Irish descent so the stage has been set for the world to be ruled by gangs of feisty gnomes with headquarters in Belfast, and Mexico city.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 6:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Moreover, the name "Greenspan". Green spanning the world. Ireland is the Emerald Isle, emerald is green, green is the color of money, and Alan Greenspan was the head of the Federal Reserve so in conclusion, green gnomes will rule the world. Now it's time for me to take my medication.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 6:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No Blah, the Gnomos are your "gang".

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 7:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Got your back dolph.

garfish (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2014 at 8:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So...when these particular gang members go from place to place, can we call them "gnomadic"?

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 2:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry hersheyboy, no affiliation to any illegal organization here. You however, are in THE worst gang of all: GANG SCUM APOLOGISTS, or so it seems.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 8:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey jackass, Gnomos means trolls in Spanish.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oye hershey estupido, no hay palabras en Espanol que tienen un empezar con "gn" como tu dices. Aprende a hablar Espanol si quieres saber lo que estas diciendo. Al momento estas hablando BASURA!

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

despite the name-calling (blah's the master!), back to topic. It doesn't seem likely that the gang injunction will do what its supporters promise, and in my humble view it's illegal, violates the First Amendment to our Constitution...let's spend all the lawyer monies on this sh!t on better and more teen centers on the east and westside.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 1:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Look at the positive results of having a police presence at the Franklin Community Center. For a fraction of the cost of the useless gang injunction the SBPD could establish a number of police substations in high crime areas. Btw Blah, there are Spanish words that start with "gn". For example: gnostico, gneisico, gnu, and of course gnomo.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It seems adding one more cop to the streets was just what was needed for me and the other homeless people to throw our hands up in the air and say "We give up!"

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well since we are injunction-happy, we should also do an injunction for the homeless (who commit more crimes than the gangs), UCSB students (who also commit as many crimes as gang members), and Jehovah Witnesses who harass and condemn people to hell almost every week.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As dolphinpod pointed out, "gnomos" is Spanish for gnome so I don't gnow why you (Blah) are attacking Herschel after that fact was pointed out.

Aparte de esto, te felicito por tu dominio del idioma Espanol.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

absolutely right HG, and for years I've been wanking about the REMOVAL of the Westside sub-station [just off the corner of San Andres and Micheltorena; there's a barbershop there now]...and if it wasn't a "substation" then it was a spot for our bicycle cops -- which our incompetent PD Chief Sanchez removed. It's like in the teaching profession: put more quality individuals IN THE TRENCHES. On the streets on bikes, or in the classrooms with students...face to face justice, face to face teaching. These grandiose "injunctions" are expensive, misleading, illegal, and ill-conceived.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 5:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hershey: "Btw Blah, there are Spanish words that start with "gn". For example: gnostico, gneisico, gnu, and of course gnomo."

Oye idiota, ponle una "a" alente de esas palabras y ENTONCES van a ser correctas. Dejame ayudarte, ejemplo: Agnostico, Agneisio y de claro Agnomo. Tipico huero, se cree que esta, como dicen? ""own with the brother man." Aprende a hablar Espanol antes de parecer como un retrasado.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Also, mein Herr BC, sollen wir auch schreiben nur in einem fremden Sprache?? Dann niemand kann uns verstehen! Und Ich verstehe etwas Espanol, aber nicht so viel. Blah kannst mich! Gnomon, Gnaeus Pompeius.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Not sure how your "wanking" is going to help matters, DrDan, but let's keep the TMI stuff in check, okay?

pecanpie (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 6:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blah I simply opened up a Spanish dictionary. Agnostico and gnostico are two different words with quite different definitions. Keep your obtuse comments coming. The more you try to defend your ignorance, the more I laugh.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, you guys are good at using Google translator.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
February 14, 2014 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blah, why are you being such a mean and nasty one today?

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 12:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No Google translator here, whatever mistakes I make are my own, not from any machine.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 1:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's all learn Esperanto and do a group hug.

I hate to say it, but dolphinpod is more logical than some of the people I've seen blogging lately.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 2:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

no Google translator here; same as BC, all my own errors. And answer Dolphin, blah!

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 4:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The court will decide against the injunction. Hopefully then the city will drop this bad idea and go back to solutions that work like community based policing. In a perfect world we would hire a new chief.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There is no place for gangs in Santa Barbara. None. If you choose to live in Santa Barbara, this is our community standard. You are welcome.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hershey, fixed it for you:

The court will decide IN FAVOR OF the injunction. Hopefully then the city will ADOPT this AWESOME idea and go IMPLEMENT MORE solutions that work like EFFECTIVE ANTI GANG policing. In a perfect world we TELL THE chief that he's allowed to enforce anti gang laws.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Blah, words in all caps do not make your point better. They make you look like a fool.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry DrDan, I did mean to include you with me per the google translator post, but I was so tired when I posted I simply forgot but beileve me, I know enough German to know that your German is excellent, and as far as I can see, there were no errors.

As for the injunction, it won't solve anything. Whether one is pro-harsh punishment, or takes a more liberal approach, a simple comparison to gun laws or drug laws will make that clear, and I DO see a great potentian for abuses of 1st Amendment.

I'm no apologist for gangs, but as long as the powers-that-be refuse to look at the causes, (and doing so would offend people on both sides of this issue) the problem will only get worse.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 15, 2014 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Limited city funds should be earmarked on youth programs to keep young people out of gangs, she argued, instead of hiring more officers."

I agree that adding more officers is unlikely to solve anything, but it is past time to enforce existing ordinances, and, yes, giving the injunction a try may be worthwhile at this point. There seem to be plenty of "youth programs" already for those who _choose_ to be involved in them.

Regarding the sidebar issue of using/not using Google Translate, I'd have to side with the deniers here. As unreliable as it is, I think it would have caught the more glaring errors and corrected, for example, to:
* in einer Fremdsprache
(feminine gender/dative case/compound noun etc.)
While these sorts of systems (what Google calls "statistical machine translation") have improved and can be useful for converting basic text, getting a "sense" of meaning in most cases, I'm not sure they'll ever be 100% accurate especially for discerning any sort of linguistic nuance or grammatical complexity especially with highly inflected languages or when attempting translations from widely divergent language families. My apologies to those not interested in this secondary subject on the thread.

zappa (anonymous profile)
February 16, 2014 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There are already so many youth activity alternative in this town, all wonderfully supported both publicly and privately. Any one claiming we need to spend even more money on what we are doing well already shows they don't understand gangs or what causes a small group of thugs to join them.

The gang issue in this town is currently intractable because those who chose this live of violence and criminal enterprise have zero interest in these other more life-affirming choices. They are bad boys looking only for bad things to do. Period.

Gangs thrive on intimidation and the overcharged hormonal dysfunction of young men who have no intention sitting around and doing crafts classes or playing organized sports.

Eliminate gangs like you would any other fatal infectious disease. Gangs and association with gang members have no place in this community. Zero tolerance, and I mean zero.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
February 16, 2014 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"and I mean zero" gol darn it!

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 16, 2014 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hershey, saying things like "The court will decide against the injunction. Hopefully then the city will drop this bad idea and go back to solutions that work like community based policing. In a perfect world we would hire a new chief." show that you are, in fact, a fool.

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 18, 2014 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: