Page One

City’s stealth redistricting 

Editor: 

Supporters of the gerrymandered redistricting plan that was recently approved by a 5–4 vote of the City Council seem determined to use fair means or foul to keep the plan a secret. They were a noisy and disruptive presence last Sunday afternoon at a Shattuck Avenue supermarket as they tried to interfere with a grass–roots effort to put the plan on the March ballot. In a desperate effort to keep the plan out of the hands of voters, they attempted to block access to the citizen volunteers who were circulating petitions for the ballot measure and to confuse the issue by berating the four council members who voted against the plan. 

From its conception, this redistricting plan has been kept away from the light of day. After two full public hearings on seven redistricting proposals that were submitted to the council, this plan was brought forth after the deadline for submitting proposals and only minutes before the final vote was taken. This is a plan that the public has never seen – it was not one of the proposals considered at either of the public hearings and it was not subjected to the pre–vote analysis that was applied to all other redistricting proposals. This is a plan that only three of the nine members of the City Council admit to having seen before its late appearance at the council – yet five voted in favor of it, allegedly sight-unseen!  

This stealth plan sets forth the rules by which we will vote in Berkeley for the next 10 years. We all deserve a chance to scrutinize this plan and vote it up or down. If its supporters truly believe it will serve Berkeley well, they have no reason to keep it hidden. I urge all Berkeley voters to sign a petition in the next few days to put the plan on the March ballot. 

Mim Hawley 

Council Member, District 5 

General Plan must include disaster planning 

Editor: 

Disaster planning should be a prime concern in the proposed General Plan. 

The Berkeley General Plan should require that all buildings open to the public have annual inspections by fully qualified and licensed building inspectors, with notations of any defects prominently and continuously posted in public view for all occupants and visitors.  

Safety laws on brick buildings, lift–slab and tilt–up buildings should be enforced consistently. Structures built in former wetlands areas with a high water table should be examined carefully. Any buildings which will not withstand a major earthquake should have an immediate deadline for demolition. 

Objects on city–owned property should be given particular attention.  

Tall trees in parking areas, public parks, and street medians should be examined for their ability to withstand a major earthquake. Any diseased tree should be removed within a limited period after notation of that disease. 

Trees on private property should be governed by a city–enforced Hazardous Tree Law, similar to that in Oakland. The sale of property should note the existence of a potentially hazardous tree along with the other problems that a property inspector has noticed. 

Utility poles in Berkeley should be inspected by the city, or ‘certified’ as safe during an earthquake by the utility. Any poles that fall over during a quake should have a mandatory penalty fee assessed by the city, recognizing that fallen trees, poles, and runaway cars that were improperly parked, will all be secondary emergencies after an earthquake. 

Self insurance by the city of Berkeley should be examined fully and publicly to determine whether it should be discontinued. Secret settlements should be abolished. Any city employee who has caused the city to lose a major lawsuit should be subject to termination. 

I suggest that the current draft of the new General Plan be rejected. 

Charles L. Smith 

Berkeley 

On patriotism and toilets 

Editor, 

Am I the only one who has noticed, or is at least upset by, BART’s recent announcement that they are closing their restrooms as a security precaution? There was no explanation given as to why terrorists would want to attack plumbing instead of trains, overheads or tunnels, and people, and I confess to being at a loss as to what the people at BART are thinking.  

I hadn’t realized that patriotism meant using the BART platform or station area as a toilet. (Relatively private areas already have been noticibly marked by those unwilling to hike the stairs to the restrooms, back in less troubled times.) Or perhaps we simply aren’t supposed to ride BART anymore. There would certainly be less security problems at BART if no one used it. Maybe we should shut all the toilets at the airports too. Heck, why stop there, let’s close all public toilets. A little hysteria after September 11 is understandable, but has BART thought to check with Public Health about the health and safety aspects of their decision? 

* * * 

On a completely unrelated topic, I wanted to note that Ms. Jenny Wenk (11/1/1) forgot to mention why it can be unsafe to get around by bicycle with a toddler of infant. It’s because of cars. Ms. Wenk is right that we need more parking – bike parking that is. Berkeley Bowl has an amazing amount of bike parking, but there have still been a couple of times when I have had to hunt for a spot. Downtown is much worse. Bike parking is especially bad if you have a trailer so that you can carry reasonably large items. My 15 year–old son hauls his French horn to school by trailer. We haul my 11 year–old daughter’s cello to school by trailer. Despite being in the demographic that Ms. Wenks asserts cannot be realistically expected to bike to the Berkeley Bowl, I have carried groceries, construction material, furniture, computers, and even cats to the vet; all by trailer. Don’t knock it if you haven’t tried it. 

Robert Clear 

Berkeley 

Shopping by bike  

Editor: 

I totally agree with Harry Siitomen’s comments about shopping with a bike instead of a car. I too am 75 years old, female, and frequently pump iron at the 24 Hour Fitness facility that Harry visits. The checkout personnel are familiar with my bike shopping and often caution me not to get too much. I fill two panniers most of the time. 

I have taught older women to ride, and am willing to teach others. I would like Jenny Wenk to call me and I’d be happy to accompany her on a very safe ride (the parking lot of Golden Gate Fields). I have a bike rack on my car (yes, I have a car for just such purposes) and can pick her up. There is no charge for these lessons. 

I often ride to my Kaiser appointments from North Berkeley much to the surprise of my doctor. In addition to the cardio–vascular workout, it is still a lot of fun to ride a bike. 

Lucienne Sanchez–Resnik 

Berkeley 

No negotiations with terrorists 

The Daily Planet received a copy of this letter addressed to the City Council: 

Don’t you get it. You can’t deal with the Taliban. They’re crazed, radical, ideologists that have no respect for law or human life or truth. How do you deal with a person or organization or government who could do or condone the things done on September 11? Have you not learned how they treat their own citizenry? Have you not heard their illogical ranting and ravings? What in the world makes you think negotiations are feasible with the like. The whole world recognizes this. Your position is not noble but questionable of common sense and good taste.  

The United States was attacked. An act of war occurred on our soil. Perhaps if we had not turned the other cheek so many times previously, this would not have happened.  

I am appalled at your position.  

Mack Kitchens 

Kansas City, Missouri  

Save, not destroy civilization 

Editor:  

John McCain (Chronicle, 11/4) has this fantasy, along with many others, that “Only the complete destruction of international terrorism .........will spare America from further attack.”  

As long as humans, even such world “leaders,” are willing to die for VENGEANCE, (which many seem to consider “protection” ) EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US is at great risk; even John McCain. It is obvious that we cannot destroy every one of our “enemies” in this new kind of war, where it has been proven that even one “terrorist” can create mass destruction.  

We can only hope that the distinct POSSIBILITY of the further use of chemical, germ, or nuclear weapons, can prove sobering enough to save our civilization, before we destroy it. 

Gerta Farber 

Oakland 

Thanks for sticking out your ‘political necks’ 

Editor: 

I don’t often send e–mails to those in government who represent me to thank them. I am far more likely to send an e–mail when I disagree – in order to effect change. I also don’t often send letters to the editor. 

Actually, this is my first. Today however, I wanted to take time out to thank the Berkeley City Council members who recently voted to ask for a de-escalation of war in the Middle East as soon as possible. I realize that it was only a small statement at the end of a long resolution, but I wanted to thank those that stuck their “political necks out” to take a stand for what is right, regardless of the consequences. Thank you. 

David S. Caruso–Radin 

Berkeley, CA