web analytics

Venice Update

News of Venice, CA and Marina del Rey CA

“Services Not Sweeps” Demands Listed for Venice

A group demanding “Services Not Sweeps” stood on the corner of 3rd and Rose with bottled water, a bathing station, and a porta-potty. They shouted their demands to those who would listen.  They passed out a list of their demands.

The group is a citywide coalition called Services Not Sweeps. Who is behind it is not known. United Way is mentioned as one group.  Their opening paragraph states:

The City of Los Angeles, in response to community organizing, demands from
unhoused communities, County Public Health reports, and other input, has increased street cleaning and sanitation services in unhoused communities over the past three to five years. Unfortunately, however, the City has done so with an emphasis on criminalization, harassment, and removal of people and their belongings, instead of taking a health-based approach to ensuring safe and clean streets for all.

They are not trying to get rid of street cleaning as was first thought. However, they do want all police removed from the cleaning operation.

They want it to be scheduled within a 2- to 4-hour  time frame and notice to be given 48 to 72 hours prior.  Further it should be established as weekly, bi-weekly, monthly etc.  These notices should be published on the City’s website and other modes to make sure that those effected would be notified.  Posted notices should also include a map.

Before scheduled cleanups, they want dumpsters/trash bins, sharps disposable containers and other “health resources” be available 24 hours before scheduling.

They want all law enforcement officials removed from the street cleaning teams and efforts.

Outreach workers are to be present the day before the cleanup and 30 minutes before cleanup commences.

City is to provide accommodations for residents during extreme weather conditions.

Residents are to be allowed to use the City workers porta-pottys during street cleaning.

For large encampments, they want shower facilities, needle exhange, etc.

Read their complete set of demands below:

Comments (7)

  1. Steven Burns

    So, based on this dictionary definition, you are stating we have at least two vigilante groups active in Venice? Thats not a good thing in my opinion. I reiterate that taking LAPD out of the cleaning and sanitation process is a huge mistake.
    It was pointed out to me by a neighbor that if your property line runs to the street, and many do in Venice, you are legally permitted to put planters, plantings, etc. in the area the city calls the ‘parkway’. The city has a right of way for utilities, but you still own that land, as is true of the sidewalk, which may not be blocked by structures as the city owns the right of way for the public (the Jones decision apparently vacated the public right of way requirement to the sidewalk 9PM to 6AM). This was a hot debate topic last year as the city is going to hold property owners responsible for the maintenance of sidewalks eventually, and cited their ownership as the basis for this decision.
    I prefer open space to planters and junk like that, but that is a personal viewpoint. do you hold a legal opinion of this issue in our community class of law school on this thread?

  2. Law101


    Taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s own understanding of right and wrong; action taken by a voluntary association of persons who organize themselves for the purpose of protecting a common interest, such as liberty, property, or personal security; action taken by an individual or group to protest existing law; action taken by an individual or group to enforce a higher law than that enacted by society’s designated lawmaking institutions; private enforcement of legal norms in the absence of an established, reliable, and effective law enforcement body.

    Sorry but you lose. The definition of what vigilantism is or isn’t isn’t up for debate.

  3. Rick Swinger

    I saw Mark Horvath Mike Bonin’s Anti LAPD Photographer near 3rd a day before the protest offering socks to the homeless if they showed up to the protest. So Mike Bonin pays Mark Horvath $10,000. Mark aligns himself with” Services not Sweeps” which has an agenda against LAPD doing clean ups with LA Sanitation among many other anti-residents programs like the beautification planter boxes and they also want to get rid of 56.11 and 41.18. So Mike Bonin in effect is against his own men, women in uniform! Also the VCH was there at the protest. So one has to assume they too are against our men and women in uniform! On top of this the neighbors across the street that put up with most the shit on 3rd where then demeaned by Bull horns pointed at their homes and crimes were plotted against their properties after the protest on twitter.

    • Steve Burns

      Wow, I am concerned about that last sentence. Shouting at residents homes with bullhorns is bullying, conspiracy to conduct vandalism on homes and terrorize the people who live there is vigilantism. That never ends well and is very much an assault on our community.
      Taking away the peacekeepers, LAPD in this case, is the worst thing to do in this situation.

      • Law101

        There is defintely vigilantism going on in Venice but it isn’t the homeless doing it. It’s the residents. All of you who are part of any of these planters that are going up on the sidewalks around here are engaging in vigilantism. And the reasons that you’re giving for doing it are the dictionary definition of what vigilantism is. It is not your job to enforce laws that the city won’t. We elect a government for that. And your only recourse if you think that there are laws not being enforced by this elected government is to vote them out office and get a new government. And that is your only recourse. Anything else is vigilantism.

        • Steven Burns

          Putting up planters is not violence against others, threatening people’s homes and lives is. That’s vigilantism, and conspiracy with the twitter feeds to prove it. Community activism is a recourse available to residents and some apparently are doing so. They harm nobody.
          I am not a fan of those planters, for what its worth, but I understand how they got there.
          We will disagree on some points, but taking law enforcement out of the equation will only encourage dangerous behavior by persons on all sides, and that’s not good for anyone in our community: it is bad for everyone in our community.
          These things can spiral out of control, does anyone want that to happen? I sure don’t.

          • Law101

            Here is the dedfinition of vigilantism from the dictionary. Doing an en end run around a court order because you don’t agree with the ruling is vigilantism. It isn’t something that is up for opinion.

            Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Wikipedia.
            Taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s own understanding of right and wrong; action taken by a voluntary association of persons who organize themselves for the purpose of protecting a common interest, such as liberty, property, or personal security; action taken by an individual or group to protest existing law; action taken by an individual or group to enforce a higher law than that enacted by society’s designated lawmaking institutions; private enforcement of legal norms in the absence of an established, reliable, and effective law enforcement body.

            The foundation of the American legal system rests on the Rule of Law, a concept embodied in the notion that the United States is a nation of laws and not of men. Under the rule of law, laws are thought to exist independent of, and separate from, human will. Even when the human element factors into legal decision making, the decision maker is expected to be constrained by the law in making his or her decision. In other words, police officers, judges, and juries should act according to the law and not according to their personal preferences or private agendas.

            State and federal governments are given what amounts to a Monopoly over the use of force and violence to implement the law. Private citizens may use force and violence to defend their lives and their property, and in some instances the lives and property of others, but they must do so under the specific circumstances allowed by the law if they wish to avoid being prosecuted for a crime themselves. Private individuals may also make “citizen arrests,” but the circumstances in which the law authorizes them to do so are very narrow. Citizens are often limited to making arrests for felonies committed in their presence. By taking law into their own hands, vigilantes flout the rule of law, effectively becoming lawmaker, police officer, judge, jury, and appellate court for the cause they are pursuing.

            The history of vigilantism in the United States is as old as the country itself. In many ways, the history of the United States began with vigilantism. On December 16, 1773, American colonists, tired of British direct taxation, took part in what came to be known as the Boston Tea Party. As part of the resistance, they threw 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor.

            During the 1830s, so-called “vigilance committees” formed in the South to protect the institution of Slavery against encroachment by abolitionists, who were routinely assaulted, tarred and feathered, and otherwise terrorized by these committees with the Acquiescence of local law enforcement personnel. After slavery was abolished, southern vigilante groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan, sought to continue white dominance over freed blacks by using Lynching and other forms of intimidation that were prohibited by law. During the second half of the twentieth century, African-American vigilantes wantonly destroyed symbols of white authority and property associated with white society in retaliation for the injuries and indignities caused by racial Segregation and discrimination.

            Vigilantism continues to metamorphose. Private watch groups patrol their neighborhoods to guard against criminal activity. Antiabortion extremists commit deadly attacks against family health care clinics and family health care workers, often in the name of religion. Environmental activists inflict economic losses on companies by obstructing lawful business activities that they think will cause harm to the air, water, or land. Every day people use force and violence to exact revenge against someone whom they believe has done them wrong. In each case, vigilantes take it upon themselves to enact justice, rather than enlist police officers, lawyers, judges, and the rest of the established legal machinery to do the job. And, in each case, vigilantes risk starting a cycle of violence and lawlessness in which the victims of vigilantism take the law into their own hands to exact pay-back.

            The motivations underlying acts of vigilantism vary according to the individual vigilante. Some vigilantes seek to carry out personal agendas to protest existing law. Others seek to enforce existing law as they interpret, define, or understand it. Still others seek to implement or call attention to some kind of higher law that they feel overrules the norms established by society’s designated lawmaking institutions. Since no state or federal jurisdiction offers any kind of “vigilante defense” to criminal prosecution, vigilantes must rely on the moral rectitude of their cause to justify their acts. Yet the morality of most acts of vigilantism is relative to whether one is the perpetrator or victim of vigilantism, as the targets of vigilantism rarely agree that the acts were justified.

            The moral relativity associated with vigilantism is not as evident in less technological societies where vigilantism is simply equated with action taken by private residents to maintain security and order in the community, or to otherwise promote community welfare. For example, during much of the nineteenth century, local governments in the western United States were decentralized and loosely organized at best. As part of this often makeshift political order, certain individuals or groups of individuals took it upon themselves to provide summary justice for alleged victims of criminal activity. Some of the individuals accused of wrongdoing, and rounded up by this posse-style system of justice, were no doubt unhappy with the justice that was dispensed. However, these vigilante groups were prevalent in this particular region of the country, making them the norm and not the exception. As a result, such groups were typically more widely accepted than vigilante movements from other eras. https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vigilantism

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *