Features

MONSTROSITIES 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Whose idea, and to whose certain benefit, is it to build towering monstrosities on every existing open space and others opened by tear-downs in Berkeley? Whose privilege is it to decide? 

Certainly not the citizens of Berkeley, because the City Council never asked us, the ones who live here. It’s time we, the residents, took stock of what is happening and demanded a stop to the terminal desecration of our city. 

Dorothy V. Benson 

• 

TAKE DOWN THE PLASTIC 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It’s not as if there is excess space in our schoolyards. At the high school, the open spaces east of the H building have been fenced off since school began. First for construction, yet, while construction ended in October, the grass is still fenced off in orange plastic fencing. The grass is now getting leggy and needs mowing, and dandelions and other weeds have sprouted. 

Willard has suffered the same fate. Its grassy areas and large parts of its garden are also fenced off in orange plastic. The fence around the grass at Washington School came down quickly after a recent letter to the editor commented on it. 

Is the new BUSD policy “No child allowed on the grass”? Shouldn’t it be instead “Schoolyards are for students”? Please take those ugly orange plastic fences down! 

B. Schwartz 

• 

DIVERSIFY COVERAGE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As I’ve been reading the Planet ever since its inception, I’m delighted with its constant improvement. However, I must admit being tired of reading about the use and/or abuse of Berkeley’s land. For example, the first few pages of the Jan. 28-31 issue cover the same old stories —the West Berkeley Bowl, the San Pablo Casino, the Derby Street site, the Marin Avenue auto lanes, the law suit against the university, and Caltrans’ plan for the Caldecott Tunnel. These stories may be of interest to the people involved, but they are much too long and drawn out for most of us. A short summary of what happened in the last few days would be enough. 

I would rather see more space filled with human-interest stories—of entrepreneurs like the one on page seven about Rajen and Bijaya Thapa and their new “Taste of the Himalayas” restaurant. Or on page 13, Dorothy Bryant’s article about Lewis Suzuki’s paintings and the gallery he and his wife Mary run. Or Matthew Artz’s recent interview with Mark Tarses, the chocolate-making landlord. I love Susan Parker’s very personal column, especially when she talks about life with her disabled husband, Ralph. And, talking about disability, a story about courageous Dona Spring, our disabled city councilmember, would be most enlightening. 

Rose M. Green 

• 

INSIDE THE BUILDINGS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

There is something wrong with this picture. 

Almost daily we read reports that there is not enough money for teachers, supplies and resources for our public schools. Yet, in a 10-minute drive from my home, in central Berkeley, I can pass eight elementary, junior high and high schools which have either been demolished and rebuilt or completely renovated. Some are still in progress. These are multi-million dollar building projects. 

After the recent elections, the Berkeley Public Library system, even though it receives an equal amount as the schools from our property taxes, announced it was cutting back both hours and employees for lack of funds. But only last year a multi-million dollar project to completely renovate and build an addition to the main library was completed. 

It seem we are concentrating on the buildings instead of what goes on inside them. 

Norma Gray 

• 

MAINSTREAM PRESS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Just checking: 

Recently, reporting on the Davos Economic Summit, the BBC World Service had two interesting spots: 

1. Tony Blair saying clearly that if the U.S. expects the rest of the world to help on terrorism, the rest of the world can expect the U.S. to help on global warming (the acceleration of which mentioned in a set-up). 

2. Bill Clinton saying that with a fraction of the money going into the bottomless sink of Iraq, the U.S. could help all of Africa out of poverty and disease. 

Did these statements make it anywhere into the U.S. press, readers?  

Thank God for our little planetary paper! 

Senta Pugh Chamberlain 

• 

WEST BERKELEY BOWL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The development of new West Berkeley Bowl would be a great benefit to West Berkeley. The area considered for development is basically underdeveloped, mostly disused industrial space. The neighbors who supposedly are against this scale of development have a very limited view of Berkeley and reflect the view of a very small minority of people who basically against change of any kind. 

I live in West Berkeley, my business is in West Berkeley and my kids go to public school in West Berkeley. This is my back yard for most of my life. I’ve seen growth and new families moving in. It’s been a gradual, positive change and I think most folks living here by far look forward to these new developments. 

Glenn Yasuda’s plans will bring life to an area that sits dormant. It will bring a much needed additional grocery store to an area that has very limited shopping options and it will enhance the other businesses in the area. And, he’s not some big chain, he’s local and committed to Berkeley. What city wouldn’t die to have a Berkeley Bowl complex like this available to them? 

In response to the “riled neighbors” here’s what I’d say: 

• Size and traffic. The impact of this store and it’s site will have very limited impact. Just look at the new Target store in Albany. Contrary to my own fears that 200,000-square-foot store has not generated massive traffic jams. And the circulation around the West Berkeley Bowl site is even better. 

• Losing industry. Berkeley, as well as Oakland, Richmond, Emeryville and many other cities, is losing industry. It’s a 60-year historic trend. We need to face the fact that new locating industry, light or otherwise, is generally economically and environmentally impractical. Who wants giant trucks and a warehouse near by anyway? This is a fantasy by a group of folks in Berkeley. Not to mention the vast majority of remaining blue collar jobs in Berkeley go to people who do not live in Berkeley! 

• What about the new jobs the store will create by the way? And the positive impact on small stores and cafes in the area that will reap the benefit of new customers traveling through a once dead zone. 

• Artists losing out. Well I don’t know about this. Who can say whether artists should be located in one place over another? How do you “determine” the impact on artists? This is darn near impossible. And I bet lots of organically oriented artists are going to be buying food at the Bowl. 

Let’s not only accept this project let’s welcome the positive change to the neighborhood and the ability to bring more healthy food outlets to Berkeley. 

I say let’s move forward on this and keep in mind the majority of people, like me, who are looking forward to this great new store. 

Steven Donaldson 

• 

HURRAH FOR WEST BOWL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As a long time resident of West Berkeley, I had one response when I heard that Berkeley Bowl was planning to build a new store in my neighborhood: Hurrah! 

In my opinion, this is the highest use of this property; I can think of no other development which could bring so much good to so many people. Currently, the only full service grocery store we have is an Andronico’s on University, and bless ‘em for being in our neighborhood at all, it just isn’t the same. The idea that I wouldn’t have to use fossil fuels to go shopping on the other side of town is compelling, as well. And any business that brings decent citizens to my neighborhood instead of hookers and drug dealers is all right with me, too. 

Christine Staples 

• 

SLIM CHANCE FOR PEACE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Tell the truth, you invented the Avraham Sonenthal character (Letters, Daily Planet, Jan. 28-31). There could not be such a living human being. The Kach party is not virulently anti-Arab, but all Arabs must disappear from the State of Israel. You’re kidding, right? That statement is too ridiculous to be taken seriously.  Becky, you will have to do better if you want to be believed. 

The Sonenthal character flatly states that Arabs see the State of Israel as “erroneously” robbing him of his land. Of course, all historical research of any consequence bears out the fact that many Arabs were evicted from their land by the Israeli’s and/or the Israeli State. But never mind the facts. Any statement to arrive at a pre-ordained conclusion. It’s almost as if Karl Rove were directing the Kach propaganda machine. 

This is one American Jew (by Sonenthal’s definition) who is tired of all that shit. Kach is a collection of liars and madmen, quite similar to the Moslem extremists that think blowing up civilians is a cool kind of politics.   

Face facts: The until-recently-current Israeli government has committed stupid atrocities and over-reacted to Arab provocations. Israel has been less safe from the time Sharon took power then it ever was before. Recently, however, Sharon seems to have come to at least a part of his senses, brought Labor back into the government and started dealing with the Palestinian Authority in a realistic manner. 

Maybe, just maybe, there is finally a slim chance for peace. 

Mal Burnstein 

• 

MEASURE R 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I would like to thank you and Debby Goldsberry for last month’s commentary piece revisiting Measure R. As a disabled Berkeley resident and medical cannabis patient, I was disappointed that Measure R did not receive more support from voters, and equally disappointed at previous poor, misinformed judgments and lack of action by the mayor and city council which prompted this ballot measure. 

While the various election and counting procedures mentioned in the article were informative and noteworthy, in my opinion the recount efforts are somewhat futile since at least half the Berkeley voters voted against Measure R. Unfortunately, the ballot measure was hastily (and therefore perhaps poorly) written and received scant or no support from BCC, city officials, and neighborhood groups. My own picture was sent on a flyer to thousands of Berkeley voters without the time to include my own personally written reasons for supporting the measure. The campaign backers hoped Measure R would be passed as a simple referendum on medial cannabis. I disagreed with this strategy and would have preferred a more informative and upfront campaign. 

At the end of the proverbial day, medical cannabis patients like myself attempting to grow their own medicine, are simply breaking the law in Berkeley. I know of several medical cannabis patients, disabled or otherwise, who are fearful for their job security and community standing due to their use of cannabis as a medicine because of Measure R’s defeat. To my way of thinking, in Berkeley now there is indeed a less compassionate and hostile climate toward medical cannabis fostered by misinformation and political inaction and reaction. Earlier last year when the mayor and BCC refused to heed recommendations from the Alliance of Berkeley Patients (dispensary owners) and other patient advocates like myself, signatures were gathered for the ballot measure. The mayor and BCC had expressed fears of large “grow warehouses” and “a parade of pot clubs.” Their reaction to Measure R getting on the ballot was after the summer recess limiting the number of Berkeley dispensaries to three. “The solution in search of a problem,” as Kriss Worthington so aptly quipped. 

Around half (and maybe more) the Berkeley voters supported Measure R. For this reason, I believe our elected officials, medical cannabis dispensary owners, and other knowledgeable patient advocates should begin a new dialogue this year. Why should the Berkeley Municipal Code be stricter on medical cannabis patients than Oakland, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Sonoma County? 

Charles Pappas 

• 

TOWN VS. GOWN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Which is more important: bridging a short-term budget gap, or resolving an increasingly expensive, long-term problem? Looked at in purely fiscal terms, the City Council is now facing that choice in deciding its response to the university’s 2020 Long Range Development Plan (LRDP). The city will probably file a lawsuit challenging the 2020 LRDP, but many fear that this may simply be a maneuver to get more money from UC in Mayor Bates’ backroom negotiations with the university. In a time of budget shortfall, people fear that a few million dollars from UC may appeal to the City Council. But “selling out” to UC would be a fiscal disaster. 

The city has identified UC’s ongoing annual cost to the city as over $11 million per year. That would add up to $161 million by 2020, although naturally the costs won’t stop then. Although the legitimacy and sustainability of this subsidy is questionable, let’s call this gift to our wealthy friend our “good neighbor” subsidy, because this figure only covers costs for normal city services and assumes that the university is a good citizen like everyone else and does no special damage to those around it.  

But the university damages its neighbors in ways that are not permitted for any other municipal citizen. The $11 million per year does not include any compensation for past, present, or future damage to Berkeley caused by UC expansion—even assuming that Berkeley citizens were in a mood to “sell” their quality of life and ultimately their city to the university for some additional sum. This part of the equation we can call the “bad neighbor” subsidy, and it appears in both reduced quality of life and fiscal impacts. It is totally different and distinct from the “good neighbor” subsidy, and even less justifiable. 

Loss of livability and long-term fiscal impacts are less direct, less quantifiable, and less observable than an immediate budget shortfall, but they diminish every budget, every service, every program, every goal, and every civic improvement Berkeley tries to provide, now and forever. Some effects will be obvious: the increasing traffic all over town and the damage to neighborhoods around the core campus, for example. But nobody will ever point to some youth program we couldn’t afford, or an unrealized improvement in south Berkeley, or the accumulating drab on University and Telegraph Avenues, or the decline of businesses and family housing, or a new fee on their tax bills, and say, “This is because of UC expansion.” But that is exactly where the costs appear, and over time they add up to hundreds of millions of dollars of increased expenses and lost opportunities. It’s simple math: When UC expands, city services for other citizens decline. 

That is why the only fiscally responsible approach is to address the university’s LRDP in a way that radically and forever changes UC’s behavior. It will be a very tough fight, but we must demand no less from our mayor and City Council. 

Doug Buckwald 

• 

PIONEERING EFFORTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Matthew Artz’s informative article on Berkeley’s “storied tradition as a national springboard for political innovation” (“Berkeley: The Left’s Test Lab,” Daily Planet, Feb. 4-7) inadvertently omitted several other significant city initiatives, some of which later served as models for U.S. cities nationwide. 

Perhaps one of Berkeley’s most important and pioneering policy initiatives was the city’s role in establishing—in conduction with the Ecology Center—the nation’s first curbside recycling program. Today, curbside recycling is a standard program in nearly every major U.S. city. 

In 2002, Berkeley established the nation’s first 24-hour, universal emergency wheelchair repair program to serve the city’s disabled community. 

Also, Berkeley is one of the few cities of its population size (120,000 or less) to establish its own city Health Department with a network of health clinics to serve the city’s low income citizens on a sliding scale basis. 

These city programs reflect the deep generosity of Berkeley’s residents, and the city’s strong social democratic/justice tradition. 

Hopefully, at some point in the near future, Berkeley voters will pass a “clean money” election campaign reform measure removing special interest/corporate money from city elections. Given that Maine and Arizona have already passed and implemented similar clean money measures, Berkeley, unfortunately, won’t be able to claim a pioneering role.  

Chris Kavanagh 

• 

DERBY STREET FIELD 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am writing to ask the people who are pushing a construction of a hardball field at the East Campus Site on Derby Street to pick another spot. My neighborhood is already heavily occupied. We have Berkeley Bowl, Iceland, the Farmers’ Market, King CDC, and Berkeley Alternative High to name a few. There have been numerous occasions where I could not concentrate on my schoolwork or fall asleep because of the noise level in our neighborhood. A huge baseball stadium complete with lights, night games, and cheering crowds would ensure that I, a Berkeley High student, wouldn’t get any level of peace and quiet.  

Let’s take an example of a residential baseball field in which the planners were disrespectful of neighborhood concerns: the San Pablo Park ballfield. I know of neighbors living adjacent to San Pablo Park who have had to leave their house because of the absence of peace and quiet in their neighborhood. Hardball fields in residential neighborhoods don’t mix. 

Supporters of the Derby Street ballfield contend that the neighbors are anti-youth and out of touch with Berkeley community. Well, I am a neighbor and I go to Berkeley High, but I know that a hardball field doesn’t belong in a residential neighborhood. 

I agree that the demolition of the East Campus buildings has been long overdue, but to build a regulation-size baseball stadium is nothing of a compromise. Perhaps they should leave it how it is until think of a plan that is more agreeable. 

Rio Bauce 

• 

DAVID BROWER CENTER 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thank you for writing about the David Brower Center. Based upon the plans presented, I think that the Brower Center will be a nationally-recognized facility that will be a model for others throughout the country. The proposal is creative, and builds upon many of Berkeley’s greatest strengths. David Brower was a man of unusual wisdom and vision. A state-of-the-art green building at the edge of the campus would be a profound monument to Berkeley’s long-time resident and one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century.  

Michael Green 

• 

CITY BUDGET CRISIS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

City of Berkeley employees earn two weeks of vacation annually and three weeks of vacations starting the fourth year. In addition, they receive 13 regular paid holidays, three floating holidays and 12 days of sick leave annually.  

City employees are allowed to carry over 320 vacation hours to next year. For hours in excess of the 320 hour limit, the city pays its employees at their current salary rate. Therefore, many employees receive thousands of dollars at each year-end due to this unusual policy. 

In contrast, employees at federal agencies, UC Berkeley and the City of San Francisco do not get paid for their excess vacation leave. Their excess leave is use-or-lose.  

If City of Berkeley also adopts a use-or-lose vacation leave policy, it will definitely help solve city’s budget crisis. 

Janet Fricker 

• 

CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Many people should understand that Conservative Christians had been and still are racist reactionaries who use their faith to promote their racist agendas. For example, 40 years ago, these people who claim to be people of faith, were against sharing the water fountain with African Americans in the South. They also didn’t want African Americans into both their swimming pool and beaches. 

Plus, Conservative Christians lynched black men who either dated or married their daughters. They were and still are against the civil rights movement. They are pushing for George W. Bush’s conservative judges to fill future vacant seats on the Supreme Court. These judges will roll back American Indian sovereignty, environmental and civil rights laws. 

Finally, Conservative Christians might pick African American and Latinos as allies in their fight against gay marriage but these same Conservative Christians don’t want these African American men to either date or marry their daughters. In conclusion, many people should beware of the racist agendas that Conservative Christians are promoting, in the name of their faith. 

Billy Trice, Jr. 

Oakland?