Law Limiting Use of Parks by Homeless Overturned : Courts: Santa Monica ordinance aimed at keeping large-scale feeding programs out of public areas is unconstitutional, judge rules. Concerns over freedom of speech are cited.

Santa Monica lost a bid Monday to keep feeding programs for homeless people from monopolizing city parks when a federal judge ruled a city law is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Lourdes Baird barred the city from enforcing the law by issuing a preliminary injunction sought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of two activists, one of them homeless.

The law, passed by the Santa Monica City Council in February, required groups of 35 or more to secure a permit from the city. In effect, it would have ended large handout programs because permits were limited to two per month at each park.

The law would have applied to any large group wishing to use the parks, from Girl Scout troops to family reunions.

In addition, the city set up meals programs at three indoor locations at which people had access to other social services.

In an effort to pass constitutional muster, a section was included in the law that mandates the city director of parks to issue permits for 1st Amendment activities such as rallies, and demonstrations.

But the judge concluded that this provision gave the director “unbridled discretion” to decide what is free speech activity and what is not, which constitutes “prior restraint” of the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution.

Baird rejected the argument of the city’s attorney Michael Jenkins that free speech activity would be self-evident to the person making the decision.

“How could it be self-evident?” asked the judge. “The courts have been struggling with what is protected speech and what is not for 200 years.”

Baird’s ruling was particularly welcomed by former Santa Monica City Atty. Robert M. Myers. Myers was fired in part for refusing to write the park permit law, which he has always maintained was unconstitutional.

“The court’s ruling reveals the hypocrisy of the City Council whose majority claims to be progressive,” Myers said. “It shouldn’t take a federal judge appointed by George Bush to tell the city to follow the Constitution. I tried to warn the City Council they were going down the wrong path and was fired for doing so.”

Santa Monica Mayor Judy Abdo declined comment on the ruling. She and others on the council have expressed dismay that the law has been construed as thwarting free speech.

Santa Monica, one of the most politically liberal cities in the nation, has for several years been struggling with how to cope with its estimated 1,500 to 2,000 homeless residents. Their dominance of public places had led to near mutiny by many residents who said they were afraid to use the parks and weary of panhandling and homeless-related crime.

Seeking peaceful coexistence, the City Council appointed a Task Force on Homelessness, whose members hammered out an approach that attempted to balance a crackdown on unacceptable behavior with provisions to help the homeless in the long run.

The council adopted the task force recommendations 1 1/2 years ago and has been slowly implementing them amid a continuing outcry that the new rules are unduly burdensome to people who are already down-and-out.

The council has the option of rewriting the law, appealing the judge’s issuing of the preliminary injunction or going to trial, Jenkins said. “We’re disappointed in the court’s decision. We have a disagreement as to what the law allows.”

ACLU attorney Carol Sobel said she hopes the city will work with her to find a mutually acceptable park permit law, rather than seeking to overturn the judge’s ruling. “We recognize the city has a right to regulate its parks,” Sobel said outside court.