Quick Take
The City of Santa Cruz recently fenced off sidewalks along Coral Street near homeless services provider Housing Matters, blocking access to the area. Signs on the fences initially cited the wrong code — a city spokesperson said they should have referenced a state penal code. Homeless advocates question the legal grounds for this move, calling it a tool to discriminate against unhoused people who were already subjected to frequent sweeps in the area.
The City of Santa Cruz has fenced off a large portion of sidewalk along Coral Street, blocking an area long used by unhoused residents — and initially posted signs that cite a section of city code that doesn’t appear to apply.
The city now says the signs are wrong and should instead cite a state law governing when people can be ordered to leave private or restricted property. The fencing itself, meanwhile, has left homeless advocates asking what the legal basis for closing off the sidewalk actually is, and whether the move is meant to push unhoused people out of the area.
A few weeks ago, the city put up chain-link fencing along the majority of the sidewalk directly across the street from the homelessness nonprofit Housing Matters, as well as parts of the landscaping on the street down the block toward Costco.
The fence originally bore signage saying those who enter the area will be cited for violating Santa Cruz Municipal Code Section 13.04.011, which carries a $50 fine, according to the code.
That code section actually governs hours of operation for city parks, park roads, trails and other facilities under the Parks & Recreation department, and lets the parks & recreation director set hours for those areas. But city spokesperson Erika Smart told Lookout on Tuesday that the signage is incorrect, and should instead cite California Penal Code 602(o). That section applies to someone refusing to leave land, real property, or structures belonging to or lawfully occupied by another and not open to the general public. The law requires that the property be posted, or that the person be specifically asked to leave by the owner or agent.
“The city is currently working to remove and correct those signs,” Smart said via email, adding that the municipal code was cited in error. “At this time, there is not a specific end date for the fencing, but the city will continue to evaluate conditions and needs in the area.”
Smart said the fencing was installed to allow city crews to “safely clean, repair, and maintain the area while keeping sidewalks, nearby businesses and service providers accessible, including maintaining Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) access.” She added that it is part of a larger effort in the area to offer available shelter and other services, as well as to restore transit service in the area.
By Tuesday afternoon, the city had put up corrected signage.
At the most recent Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on Aug. 10, Parks and Recreation Director Tony Elliot told the commission that that morning, Coral Street was “closed and abated of probably 30 or 40 camps that have been on that street,” and that the Santa Cruz Police Department would prioritize “keeping Coral Street safe and clear of encampments” as Housing Matters’ new permanent supportive housing development, Harvey West Studios, moves closer to opening. He did not mention the fencing specifically.
Harvey West Studios has brought significant changes to the Coral Street area. Last October, Housing Matters announced it would close its day services in March 2026, shuttering the only public, drop-in day services facility in the county, cutting off access to showers, restrooms, mail service and basic amenities for an estimated 50 to 80 unhoused people who use the facility daily. They had been open during daytime hours and were also available to people who were not staying in a Housing Matters shelter. Although the city regularly cleared the area of tents and campers, the fencing appears to be a step up in deterring unhoused people from camping on the street.
Kirill Romanov, an advocate who works with the Homeless Union and the grassroots advocacy group Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom, told Lookout that he saw the decision to put parts of the city under the control of Parks & Recreation as “a tool for the purpose to discriminate against unhoused people.”
Hearing about the signage error on Tuesday didn’t change that feeling, and Romanov questioned the city’s legal grounds for citing the code. He added that the shift in focus toward permanent supportive housing at Housing Matters is the only explanation of the new fencing that makes sense to him. City Attorney Cassie Bronson did not respond to Lookout’s request for comment on the city’s legal justification for citing the penal code by publication time.
“I know the sweeps haven’t been particularly effective,” Romanov said, based on his observations while helping the unhoused people who are involved in the sweeps. “They do the sweep, everybody leaves, and then everybody comes back.”
Romanov said the recent opening of the 20-bed Live Oak Landing shelter was perhaps the only time he saw the population living on Coral Street noticeably decline, which tells him that providing ample shelter works.
“There are things that are effective at clearing the street, like providing actual housing, and things that are not, like the sweeps,” he said.
Romanov said he wants to raise awareness of the reality of the unhoused population’s situation. Shelters are often full or close to it, and many people do not like the living arrangements in them. Shelter residents have told Lookout in the past that they feel they give up personal freedoms and mobility when living in shelters and are also subject to searches when arriving at the shelter.
“It makes it a difficult choice for people to be on the streets, which is rough, but there they have community and freedom, or going to a shelter, which is run a bit like a prison with all these rules and restrictions,” he said.
Romanov also said that past camps have been self-managed well, and provided the unhoused population with a sense of community and responsibility. Regardless, they were broken up or prohibited.
“One of the most needed supplies was trash bags, and every week we handed out lots of trash bags. And this was on top of the city handing out trash bags during the sweeps and Housing Matters handing out trash bags, too,” he said.
“If you give people the option to be able to take care of themselves and do things in a responsible and acceptable way, they will,” Romanov said. “They just haven’t been given that option, and in fact, the options have been actively taken away.”
Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.
