Features

THE LOOKING GLASS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In a Jan. 28 letter from through the looking glass, Robert C. Cheasty of Albany thanks Berkeley City Councilmembers for “courageously” ignoring their constituents’ wishes by voting to remove two lanes from Marin Avenue. He styles this a “vote for safety over convenience” and decries lobbying by “opponents from the hills...fearful they would be slowed on Marin.” 

Mr. Cheasty is wrong here on nearly all counts. The evidence for any safety improvements from such street narrowings ranges from very slim to nonexistent. Marin Avenue is already safer than other streets with similar traffic volumes, according to collision statistics. And the strongest objections came from residents of adjacent flatlands neighborhoods, who rightly fear traffic diversion onto their local streets. 

If this misguided lane removal produces any net benefit, it will overwhelmingly go to a relatively small number of Marin Avenue residents, who primarily live in Albany. These folks knew they were buying homes on a busy street—but they’ve just offloaded much of the traffic problem onto their neighbors. 

I don’t appreciate Albany residents, like the energetic and prolific Mr. Cheasty or his advertised four vulnerable children, telling Berkeley decisionmakers how to arrange our city. Perhaps we should return the favor? 

There’s plenty I don’t like about Albany. I intend to start testing the “courage” of Mr. Cheasty’s own City Councilmembers by challenging them to reconfigure Albany according to my own tastes. 

Marcia Lau 

• 

DERBY STREET 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Its a real shame that the Daily Planet doesn’t fact-check its articles. In his recent story on the Derby Street project, Mr. Allen-Taylor reports two untruths as fact: “some residents wanting Derby Street to remain open and the Farmers Market preserved, others pushing for the two properties to be combined and turned into a regulation baseball diamond for use by the high school team.” In truth, the School Board has been committed for almost five years to preserving the Farmer’s Market use of the site if Derby is closed; even the Ecology Center Board has said (in your paper!) the “Farmers’ Market might coexist with a baseball field on the site.” And closing Derby would create a larger multi-purpose field that would serve not just baseball but more than two dozen different sports, by the city’s calculation serving at least 200 more children than a smaller field that leaves Derby open. 

This kind of sloppy reporting is truly irresponsible in the context of a controversy like this, where it is likely to inflame passions and derail the important public debate over the real issues. If the Daily Planet wants to be taken seriously as a source of community information, you really need to be sure what you report as fact is true. 

Will Hirsch 

• 

THEATER OF THE ABSURD 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

At last, the curtain falls on the latest act in a sad drama. 

Every night for weeks we’ve seen carefully selected, professionally produced clips of pseudo-news stories with voice-over by non-inquisitive journalists subtly justifying the cost in lives and dollars that made it possible for the world’s mightiest military now occupying Iraq to force-feed democracy to its suspicious people. There’s never been an election campaign as absurd as the one Bush and his supporters have imposed on Iraq.  

Over a hundred political parties sprouted over night led by hundreds of rookie politicians who mostly dared not show their faces. Secret ballots had to be filed at secret polling places and those voters brave or foolhardy enough to run the gauntlet of violence stood a good chance of casting their first and last ballot. 

Pundits and panderers insist that the tremendous importance of the election lies not in the product but in the process. This means that no matter who gets elected the process is over and our troops can start allowing the Iraqis the same freedom we enjoy—the freedom to secure themselves and govern as best they can.  

Marvin Chachere  

San Pablo 

• 

PROPOSITION 71 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I do hope you believe in equal opportunities because that commentary by Barglow, Low and Schiffenbauer (“Proposition 71’s Medical Research Will Be in the Public Interest,” Daily Planet, Jan. 28-31) on the altruism of the Prop. 71 directorate needs a response.  

Of, course the ICOC is filled with those in the research and experiment fields who all hope to get a cut of the taxpayers money. The head of Cal Berkeley and the head of the Stanford Medical School were both hired in the middle of last year precisely to guide development of stem cell research on their campuses. 

Robert Klein funded most of the support for that ballot measure and now he’s the head of the committee. What is the meaning of “Independent?” 

C. Giglio 

Walnut Creek 

• 

BRENNAN’S 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Today I decided to go see Brennan’s Pub to discover what all the fuss was about. I’m here to tell you: This building is a piece of shit. Worthy of preservation? Historical landmark? Give me a break! Before arriving, I was hoping to find something worth looking at: some decorative elements, an interesting facade, perhaps a funky building that had grown by accretion, anything. What I saw was a nondescript, boxy, featureless and, frankly, unattractive structure with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. It occurred to me that the “Est. 1959” on the sign was about all there was to recommend this site for a reprieve from the bulldozer. 

If historical preservation in Berkeley has become so devalued that we’re now fighting over completely marginal buildings like Brennan’s, we’re in deep trouble. While neighbors raise a hue and cry to save this questionable site, there are dozens of other buildings with real historic preservation value that are in jeopardy. By crying wolf over Brennan’s, the danger of losing structures with merit—with the corresponding loss of historical and esthetic character—actually increases. 

What is up with Berkeley? Those who oppose the removal of structures like Brennan’s are often categorized as NIMBYs, but I don’t think that adequately describes it. If the mythical man from Mars were to land here and analyze the situation, he might conclude that it’s really a case of a mass neurosis, an advanced form of xenophobia, where some folks become upset when anything in their immediate surroundings changes. Doesn’t matter if the change is for better or worse—it’s protest time! 

On a more general note, let me ask a naive but pointed question: How did Berkeley come to have so many ugly buildings, anyway? As I explore the city, I’m continually astounded at the number of abominable structures, residences and businesses alike. Especially in a place like this, inhabited by lots of smart, well-traveled and well-informed people, many of whom care passionately about the environment, both local and global: how did this happen? (Of course, this blight is made all the more evident, by contrast, with the presence of hundreds of truly exquisite buildings.) 

Well, the question isn’t entirely naive: I’ll just pretend I’m less cynical than I really am and that I don’t have any well-founded suspicions. 

David Nebenzahl 

North Oakland 

• 

NOT WITH MY MONEY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I agree with what Ajit Indrajit wrote (Letters, Daily Planet, Jan. 28-31). I had a discussion with friends after Bush was re-elected. We were pondering as what should be done to stop the war and cope with four more years of Bush and his regime. Some suggested we keep sending e-mails, faxes, and letters to the Congress and senators. Some suggested to make movies and documentaries or write books to awaken the people. Some suggested to travel to the red states and talk to the folks there. Some suggested more demonstrations and holding signs. Armed revolution was even mentioned. Some suggested not to file taxes. I believe that this is the best and non-violent approach to stop the war. The US regime invaded Iraq with our tax money. More than 1,400 U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqi people are dead. All this with our tax money. Last week, Bush asked for $80 billion more to finance his war. A week before that, he spent $40 million for his inauguration. Who is paying for all this? Yes, we are paying for it— our tax money. I am not going to file taxes this year. Filing taxes is endorsing the Bush’s regime and the war. This is my motto now: not in my name; not with my money. 

Helena Bautin 

?