New Sleeping Ban Reawakens Dispute : Homeless: Activists say a Santa Barbara law restricting use of many public places is discriminatory. The city says it is being unfairly singled out by critics.

SANTA BARBARA —  Homeless activists Thursday protested a new city law that prohibits sleeping in many public areas, the latest in a series of disputes between city officials and homeless activists that date from the mid-1980s.

The law, which went into effect Thursday, discriminates against the homeless, activists said.

Other cities have similar laws and Santa Barbara has again been unfairly singled out for criticism, city officials said.

During the 1980s, the city was vilified by activists throughout the country for its treatment of the homeless. It was even lampooned by Garry Trudeau in the comic strip “Doonesbury.”

City officials complained then that Santa Barbara was targeted because of its proximity to President Ronald Reagan’s ranch and the attendant publicity value.

On Thursday, the argument began anew as a few dozen homeless people and supporters, including a contingent from Los Angeles, picketed City Hall and camped out in front of the mayor’s office.

“This law is not only ridiculous, it’s downright unconstitutional,” said Willard Hastings, director of the local Legal Defense Center. “You can’t tell a segment of the population that it’s illegal to fall asleep.”

Mayor Sheila Lodge said Santa Barbara is being criticized because of its “unfair” reputation as a wealthy beach community.

In fact, Carpinteria, a beach town 12 miles south of Santa Barbara, has an ordinance prohibiting sleeping in public that is even more stringent than Santa Barbara’s.

Santa Barbara’s law still allows people to sleep on city property that has not been developed, such as a 1 1/2-acre parcel near the beach called the “jungle,” where many homeless people spend the night.

“It’s simply not true to say we’re preventing the homeless from sleeping in Santa Barbara. . . . We’re just saying you can’t sleep on the streets or in areas that will cause problems for people,” Lodge said. “There are other areas to sleep, including the jungle . . . and this is a beach area where people pay $100 a night to stay . . . so it couldn’t be too bad.”

While Santa Barbara has the reputation as a community with an income level comparable to Malibu or La Jolla, the comparisons really are more applicable to neighboring communities such as Montecito and Hope Ranch. The median household income in Santa Barbara is below the state average, according to the last census, and more than half the residents are renters.

City officials and local homeless activists agree that Santa Barbara has more social services for the homeless than most communities of 85,000. There are four homeless shelters in the city--a fifth during winter--and more than 2,000 units of subsidized housing.

“We don’t have a complaint with the city’s social services . . . we object to this law that targets the homeless,” Hastings said. “You couldn’t get away with a law that said it was illegal for blacks or women to sleep in public.”

Santa Barbara’s reputation as a community hostile to the homeless began in the mid-1980s when a transient was found shot to death near downtown. A few weeks later, leaflets appeared at a popular gathering spot for the homeless warning: “You . . . are low-life scum and will not endure.” Eight months later, a transient was murdered by a cadet from a Santa Barbara military school.

The city received further adverse publicity when a proposal--which was rejected--was brought before the City Council to outlaw removal of food from garbage cans.

Another city ordinance banning sleeping in public also generated controversy several years ago, but it was repealed when Mitch Snyder, a nationally known homeless activist, threatened to lead thousands of marchers from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara to defy the anti-sleeping ban.

The controversy resurfaced early this year when a Santa Barbara Superior Court judge redefined camping in public areas, which was banned by the city, as temporarily living out of doors. Homeless activists complained that this ruling made sleeping in public, once again, illegal. City officials disagreed with the judge’s ruling, and the city attorney issued a memo explaining the distinction between camping and sleeping outdoors.

The homeless wanted the city to change the law, and the city refused. Last spring, a number of homeless people began camping out in front of City Hall in protest. Last month, the city relented and rewrote the ordinance so that people sleeping on bedrolls or in sleeping bags could not be arrested for camping. The protest in front of City Hall was called off.

At the same time, the city passed another ordinance banning sleeping in many public areas. Those found violating the law will receive a citation “like a traffic ticket,” and could be fined up to $100, a city police spokesman said.

This ordinance was passed, city officials said, because many of the City Hall protesters had urinated in public, accosted female city employees and openly used drugs. They wanted to prevent this from happening in the future, Lodge said.

“I think the issue really comes down to the city trying to get rid of homeless people,” said Mike Neely, of the Homeless Outreach Program in Los Angeles, who was protesting at City Hall. “One way to do that is arrest them for sleeping.”