Features

Letters to the Editor

Tuesday March 29, 2005

CORRECTION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thank you for the story on my appointment to the Berkeley Public Library Board of Trustees and for your coverage of the library in general. The Daily Planet has certainly tapped into a major concern for many people in Berkeley concerned about the welfare of the library following the failure of the tax measure this last November.  

I have a correction to make however. The Planet was correct in quoting me as saying that “I didn’t believe in tracking library checkouts,” but I did not say that I am opposed to the board’s decision to install RFID (radio frequency identification devices). When asked about the adoption of the system I said that I did not know enough about RFID and needed to learn more. There will be an opportunity for all of us to learn more about RFID as the board decided, at its March meeting, to hold a public forum on RFID; the date of that forum has yet to be decided. Please note that I was not yet a trustee of the library and therefore did not vote on the motion.  

Ying Lee 

 

• 

JUDICIAL NOMINEES 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

All judicial nominees are evaluated by the American Bar Association (ABA) that is composed of individuals of all political persuasions. Traditionally, those approved by this organization were virtually assured of being appointed. Things have now changed. Severe criticism of appointees has come from pressure groups despite overwhelming approval of the ABA! The criticism has been patently false on several occasions (claiming appointees were racist even though the black community testified against the charges)! And now the Senate minority is insisting on 60 votes for approval rather the traditional majority vote! Why use these obstructionist tactics? Does it mean that your cause is a weak one and therefore requires activities that deny American traditions of honesty and integrity? If your cause is just you should win, but, if not there will be an overwhelming backlash to these tactics! 

Charles L. Pifer 

Orinda 

 

• 

CREEKS TASK FORCE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I’d like to thank Matthew Artz for his intelligent Feb. 11 article on the Berkeley Creeks Task Force. Although I’ve been following this issue closely and consider myself well-informed, Mr. Artz’s article provided new and relevant information. He demonstrated a good grasp of the complexities of the issue, and I think he could make an important contribution to the community by closely following the work of the task force. I hope the Daily Planet makes this coverage a priority. Somehow I missed Mr. Artz’s article when it appeared, but I found it tonight when I visited the Neighbors on Urban Creeks website.  

Thanks again for this reporting.  

Joan Sprinson 

 

• 

DRAYAGE BUILDING 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I’m writing in response to Matthew Artz’s March 25 article “Eviction Reprieve For Drayage Tenants, But Fight Continues.” City officials were correct in granting a two week extension to the April 1 eviction deadline of all residential tenants who occupy the site, regardless of the political pressure that had to be imposed upon them to do so. However, that does not go far enough. The City Council should also add this issue as an agenda item to be discussed at the April 12 meeting when they receive a staff report on the property. 

One rogue Fire Chief such as Steve Orth should not be allowed by the city to play good cop/bad cop with the lives and livelihoods of over two dozen Drayage residents because he feels it’s for their own good. Chief Orth’s classification of the property as an extreme fire hazard and an imminent danger to its occupants appears to be an egregious attempt to quickly render vacant for development the last low-income, live-work space in West Berkeley. Is it not the responsibility of the Fire Chief to thoroughly inspect the entire building on an annual basis? Why were these violations just recently discovered upon the owner’s interest in selling the building? I find it very hard to believe that Fire Chief Orth had no prior knowledge of the history of the Drayage’s residential occupants before this recent inspection. 

West Berkeley has a long history of social and civic activism of neighbors, labor activists, business people, and artists committed to making the neighborhood a place where many different kinds of people can flourish. Ultimately, I believe that West Berkeley’s diversity of people and businesses is its greatest strengths. The City Council must incorporate multi use, affordable, warehouse space such as the Drayage into the future planning and development of the West Berkeley area in order to preserve the integrity and long standing diversity of such a unique neighborhood. 

Nancy A. Whalen 

El Cerrito 

 

• 

VIOLENCE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As a Berkeley resident for over 25 years my personal experience and observation has proved to me that batterers, rapists and other violent criminals are treated with the utmost leniency in the City of Berkeley. So much so that friends of mine who are criminal defense lawyers, in other cities, are shocked to hear the kinds of violent crime that goes unpunished (or even acknowledged) in Berkeley. 

I would submit, respectfully, because I am not familiar with the work of Jane Litman or the Peace and Justice Commission, that the commission is “misguided and a waste of time” for its ineffectiveness and irrelevance. 

Berkeley has lost its way with regard to violence in its own city. 

In my opinion, the City of Berkeley has little right to voice its supposed moral superiority regarding the rest of the world. 

John Herbert 

 

• 

JEFFERSON SCHOOL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I do not, in any way, condone slavery. But I did go to Jefferson School, Garfield School, and I walked down Grove Street. I see little point in changing names. Named places make a city what it is. 

Instead of focusing all the energy on changing the names of school (tokenism) why not use the same energy in eliminating slavery where it still exists in this world today? 

Cultural norms change. In 350 years today’s do-gooders may be vilified for riding in combustion powered vehicles, consuming more than they produce, spending more for arms than education or allowing CEOs earn more than 1,000 times the minimum wage. 

It probably doesn’t matter, as those who think changing the names of schools is important won’t be remembered in 350 years. Before you vilify Jefferson, do something important yourself. 

Gary Herbertson 

 

• 

A NEW NAME 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding the re-naming of Jefferson Elementary School, how about George Orwell Elementary School? 

Phil Allen 

 

• 

RFID 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thank you for printing the letter by Don McKay about the Library Board of Trustees and the RFID system. I had been wondering about the way that the RFID decision was made. I knew of no publicity about the choice to use this expensive system, no publicity about the large amount of money that had to be borrowed. I think that this decision involved so much money and so much change for library users and staff that information should have been given out and citizen opinion asked for before any decision was finalized. 

I agree with Don McKay that making the RFID decision without publicity and without citizen input was like the action of an authoritarian government; it was not a democratic decision. 

I’ll be walking by the main library to see if I can find Gene Bernardi. 

Julia Craig 

 

• 

DICTATORSHIP 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The signs of a U.S. dictatorship are getting kind of hard to ignore. The head of the Democratic Congressional delegation, a liberal San Franciscan, goes to Iraq (eight hours isolated in the Green Zone) and proclaims that there is progress in the imperial war and we must continue the occupation (and Faluja-ization) in the name of U.S. democracy. Keep up the murder ‘n’ torture boys. That’s the opposition party. The Congress and president tell us that we should die on their terms (with a feeding tube in place or a Humvee on our back). They strip out laws to protect women’s right to abortion and eliminate laws to prosecute terrorist actions against women’s clinics. And a Court says that testosterone King Arnold can spend as much money as he wants to create a smokescreen special election to remove the democracy Californians hold dear. Call this democracy? That’s Orwellian. 

Marc Sapir 

 

• 

TEACHERS’ UNION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Becky O’Malley writes in her March 22 editorial that “there’s no easy answer to the question of whether a teachers’ union is good or bad for students,” pointing out that the all-time worst and two of the best Berkeley teachers she’s known were all high officials in the teachers’ union. 

But the main issue is not whether good teachers or bad teachers belong to teachers’ unions. Naturally, both do. The main issue is why the union goes to such great lengths to protect the job of the all-time worst teacher. 

Our teachers, most of whom are excellent, ought to ask themselves whether they would enjoy far more public support for higher pay and benefits if their union didn’t so stubbornly resist getting rid of the bad ones. 

Russ Mitchell 

 

• 

MORE ON RFID 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As a businesswoman and taxpayer, I am dismayed to learn that the Berkeley Public Library has invested $600,000 in a new RFID system which depends on proprietary hardware and software from Checkpoint Systems, Inc. I have to ask, will Checkpoint—or any other company—always be there in the future when the library may need new equipment, software upgrades, or even a new batch of tags to keep its RFID system up and running. 

Historical evidence is not promising. RFID is a new technology, in use in only about 1 percent of America’s 13,000 public and academic libraries so far. It is usual for new technologies like RFID to attract lots of competing companies (as was the case for early cars, computers, and VCRs.) Over time, only a few of the companies survive, ones with the very best technologies to sell and the most money to outlast the competition. Companies that are financially weaker or can only offer inferior products disappear (as did Yugo cars, Commodore computers, and Betamax VCRs.) The unfortunate buyers of such failed technologies are left with total losses. 

Today there are about 100 companies developing RFID systems. Along with Checkpoint, they include such giants as IBM, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, 3M, Texas Instruments, SAP, and Sun Microsystems. Checkpoint’s primary business has been installing closed circuit televisions and other security devices in stores. They enter the RFID field as a relatively tiny competitor, with a research and development budget of just $16-million a year. By comparison, IBM alone is investing $250-million in its rival RFID system. Of course, these companies hope to use RFID for more than just libraries, but if they can develop systems that are more secure and reliable, easier to install, less expensive, and perhaps safer, there is no reason to think any of them would ignore such a potentially valuable and wide-open market as libraries. 

One way to reasonably estimate Checkpoint’s possibility of success against such formidable rivals in this market is to see how it has been doing as a business. Checkpoint’s working capital—a good measure of its ability to continue to finance research and competitive expansion—has declined 67 percent since 1996. And, where investors risk their own money, its stock price has declined over 50 percent in the same period. Checkpoint was in better financial shape and worth more as a company before it entered the RFID business. 

It could be Checkpoint will be in the RFID business five or ten years from now, but what if Checkpoint and its proprietary hardware and software are gone. What does a public library with Checkpoint’s RFID system do then? Will the library be left to buy an entirely new system? Is it prudent to assume that another company will step in with a compatible system? Having spent so much public money on Checkpoint’s system, one would have hoped that the Public Library had conducted not only a sophisticated risk analysis of the likelihood of Checkpoint’s failure, but would have also insured their RFID investment against just such a failure as well. Apparently, they did neither. 

Sylvia Maderos-Vasquez 

 

• 

POLICE STATE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I was in a long line in the post office on Monday. The man next to me told that he has had a post office box for more than 10 years. Now that he was renewing it, he had to prove his U.S. citizenship by showing his California driver’s license and his U.S. passport to the window clerk. He was furious that now the post office scrutinizes him for a little post box. Later, I found out that almost all post office box holders had received letters requiring that they had to prove their citizenship to receive mail. The letter was threatening box holders that failure to do so in five days would lead to termination of services by the post office. The clerk at the window told the man that the information collected by the post office will be entered in a central computer.  

I was thinking to myself that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Last month, the House of Representatives passed the Read ID ACT. This Act soon will become a law. Then, next time you are renewing your driving license, you have to prove your US citizenship and provide lots of other documents. Your information will be stored in a central database system. 

And people in Berkeley are worried about the RFID in the library books? Get this. Yesterday, it was in the news that biometric passports have started to get into circulation. Such passports have RFID tags on them. So, you will be on constant watch. Not long ago, people in occupied Europe would have been stopped by Gestapo to show their papers. We will be experiencing the same fate; except, it is now done electronically! 

Helena Bautin 

 

• 

DEFENDING TEACHERS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In his most recent diatribe against teachers, local political gadfly and teacher-hater Michael Larrick claims that teachers get one “free” period a day. He uses this canard and the notion that teachers do not work beyond their seven-hour duty day to extrapolate how teachers are overpaid compared to other workers. 

As a Berkeley teacher these past 15 years I can attest to the fact that this “free” period (commonly known as a prep period) is certainly not free from work. Indeed the prep period is used by teachers to grade papers, make photocopies, fill out forms and complete myriad other tasks. Larrick’s decision to view us through the prism of the seven-hour day is similarly misleading. Most teachers stay late to help students and, when he do get home, we have papers to grade. There are also phone calls to make, e-mails to answer, and sometimes research to be done. (As teachers work to contract—the seven- hour, 10-minute day—it is hoped that the Berkeley community will realize just how much we do above and beyond the call of duty.)  

Teachers are by necessity a reflective group. We are constantly reviewing our days, how classes went, assessing interactions with individual students, wrestling with how to handle an on-going discipline issue, preparing for a parent conference the next day, considering ideas for the betterment of the school to be brought to the next staff meeting, etc. It is impossible to measure the time spent tossing and turning over decisions made or to be made during our teaching day—our spouses and significant others can attest to the on-going work-related insomnia that plague many of us.  

Larrick is part of an American culture that not only fails to appreciate teachers and public education in general, but also denigrates us at every turn. While many of our high school and college classmates with comparable or even lesser academic achievements are raking in considerably more money, teachers have to make do with what then California Gov. Jerry Brown referred to as psychic income. We, as teachers, think so much of our community’s children and place such importance on nurturing and inspiring their souls and minds that we sacrifice the chance at a yacht or summer home in Cape Cod. 

And when we want a fairer share of the pie, guys like Larrick answer with a figurative slap in the face. 

Here is your conundrum Mr. Larrick: You obviously hold us in low regard. You want better class of people in the teaching profession? You’re going to have to pay them, pal. Meanwhile you’re stuck with us, and just because we’re altruistic doesn’t mean we’re suckers. 

Richard Hourula 

Teacher, Willard Middle School  

 

• 

SIERRA CLUB ELECTIONS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

For the second year in a row, those sleepy Sierra Club national elections have turned into a battleground. If you’re a Sierra Club member, you have either received or are about to receive a national club ballot. Please consider the following before you vote. 

Last year Sierra Club members voted in record numbers to defeat a hostile takeover attempt by outside groups trying to promote their anti-immigration agenda. Now they’re back—they’ve placed an anti-immigration measure on the 2005 ballot that would change the Sierra Club’s neutral position on immigration and force the club to advocate for more restrictions on immigration into the U.S.—a policy that will do nothing to protect the global environment but will distract, divert and divide the club. As Robert Redford has said, “It’s disheartening to see the board of directors and membership of one of our nation’s most powerful and influential groups, the Sierra Club, distracted and diverted by a struggle over immigration policy, of all things.” 

That’s why I and other concerned Sierra Club volunteers, along with Robert Kennedy Jr. and Carol Browner, are working to defend the Sierra Club by urging members to vote no on the ballot question on immigration. (For more information, go to www.groundswellsierra.org.) 

On the same ballot, I am asking you to vote for five of the following six experienced club leaders committed to the club’s core conservation agenda supporting parks and open space, clean air, clean water, and clean and efficient energy. (Note: Vote only for five; if you vote for six, your ballot will not be valid): 

Joni Bosh, Phoenix, AZ, former board member 

Jim Catlin, Salt Lake City, UT, current board member and wilderness advocate 

Jennifer Ferenstein, Missoula, MT, former club president 

Chuck McGrady, Tuxedo, NC, former club president 

Barbara Frank, La Crosse, WI, club leader or Jim Dougherty, club leader 

Helen Burke 

 

• 

SCOPING SESSION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The Lawrence Berkeley Lab is holding a scoping meeting for the public from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Thursday, March 31 at the North Berkeley Senior Center to present its plan to demolish the Bevatron and Building 51. The University of California will prepare the environmental impact report for this seven-year project.  

The dust and debris from the tens of thousands of tons of radioactive/hazardous waste produced from the smashing of the concrete shielding blocks and metals in these facilities will contain toxic materials (which may also be radioactive) such as asbestos, mercury, lead, PCBs, chlorinated VOCs, and aromatic hydrocarbons. Some of the radioactive materials include Cobalt 60, Cesium 137 and Europium 154. Radioactive energy from Cobalt 60 can be 59 times greater in intensity than that of an ordinary X-ray.  

These radioactive and hazardous wastes will be hauled by thousands of heavily loaded trucks down Hearst Avenue to Oxford, south on Oxford to University Avenue and down University to I-80. From there they will proceed to landfills in Altamount, the Nevada test site, and Clive, Utah. The lab anticipates this will take seven years.  

An alternative to demolition and removal would be the sound environmental practice of containment thus allowing the radioactivity to decay in place. This would also preserve the historic aspects of the Bevatron, as it is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places for the research in particle physics, which resulted in four Nobel prizes.  

If you don’t want Radioactive Asbestos Dust in your neighborhood, stores, or at bus stops, or in a truck next to your car on the street, come to the scoping session and express your concerns.  

James Cunningham 

Pamela Sihvola 

Committee to Minimize Toxic Waste  

 

• 

JEANNETTE RANKIN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In regard to the article on Jeannette Rankin: While I have nothing but respect for Jeannette Rankin in general, and understand that her vote against  

entering World War I was a reasonable and honorable position to take, agree with it or not, I do not understand her vote against entering World War II, except as an expression of rigid ideology. Without actual warning Pearl Harbor had just been bombed, several thousand Americans killed, much of the Pacific fleet destroyed, American soldiers and sailors in the Philippines were also attacked, and she still voted against entry into the war? 

We were at war, like it or not. If someone stabs you, kicks you and punches you, you are in a fight, whether or not you approve of fighting. 

And, as awful as war is, some wars have to be fought. The United States in 1941 was by our standards today, terribly sexist, racist, and homophobic. And, it was part of a great coalition that destroyed one of the worst menaces in human history, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi nightmare. Does anyone actually think that World War II settled nothing?  

Now, imagine if Hitler had won his war; imagine a Nazi empire stretching from the Atlantic coast of France or Britain to Siberia; imagine a vast dreadful empire of slavery, murder, and death protected by nuclear weapons, the latest technology, and the sickest ideology in human memory. Does anyone actually think that if Hitler had won his war the death camps would have stopped, or that he would have limited his victims to Europe’s Jews? (He had already killed millions of others in those camps) Had Hitler won his war, hundreds of millions of innocent victims of all ethnicities and religions whose only crime was that of being born, would certainly have been exterminated by the Nazi death factories. Think about it. 

And, imagine now, if Hitler’s close ally, Imperial militarist Japan had won its war in the Pacific. Nobody to this day knows how many Chinese died under Japanese occupation. Conservative estimates are in the millions. Ask the people of the Philippines, of Korea, of China, of Burma, how they would have felt about Japanese victory in Asia. 

Japan and Germany had to be defeated, their visions for the future of humanity had to be destroyed. And if the world that came from the war was imperfect, troubled, dangerous, unfair, racist, sometimes painfully blind, and if it nearly destroyed itself in nuclear fire during the Cold War, that also is the story of imperfect human beings, often doing their best, often making terrible mistakes... 

Its history...I know, I teach the stuff. (And yes, for the record, that fact that I teach the topic doesn’t make me always right!) 

Michael Steinberg 

 

• 

LIVING WILLS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

A profound growth process may occur when people embrace the pain of loss and death. The internal transformation toward awareness and compassion doesn’t occur in a heated political battle like the Schiavo case in Florida, or the Wendland case in California. A new documentary film by Nancee Sobonya, The Gifts of Grief, explores how seven remarkable people learn to live with their loss and now engage life on a higher level. 

A simple legal form called Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care (living will,, advanced directive) can help prevent an ugly public spectacle. Readily available from stationary stores, the California Medical Association, or Kaiser, a person declares how far they want health care providers to go in prolonging their life in the event of terminal illness, irreversible coma, or persistent vegetative state. One may also choose another to make health care decisions in the event one is unable to do so. 

Most people with living wills are affluent middle-aged people who have consulted pricey estate planning lawyers. However an affordable and accessible option is available. For the past five years I have guided hundreds of people through the process in evening classes at the Albany and Berkeley Adult Schools. Everyone should have a living will, especially young adults. 

Lynn Sherrell 

 

• 

UC CONTRIBUTIONS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I read with interest Steve Finacom’s March 18 commentary (“University Contributes Much to Public Projects”). If his list is complete, it serves to reinforce my long-standing impression that the university’s material contributions to the city over the past century have been rather paltry. 

In particular, I would like to take issue with Steve’s statement that “in May of 2004 the Northside Neighborhood Association wrote to city officials applauding this project and stating ‘this is a great example of how the city, the university and the community working together can achieve positive solutions for the challenges that we face.’” 

The letter was not from the Northside Neighborhood Association but from a handful of individuals who represent only themselves and not the neighborhood at large. 

Far from applauding the university for agreeing to pay 50 percent of the cost of improving the Hearst/Le Conte/Arch intersection, we think that the traffic at that intersection is at least 50 percent UC-related, and UC should pay to mitigate it. 

Furthermore, we believe that helping to improve one intersection is a patently inadequate mitigation for the cumulative negative impacts heaped on the Northside neighborhood by UC’s Northeast Quadrant building boom. 

The author of the letter cited by Steve shares this opinion. 

Daniella Thompson 

 

• 

RIDER-UNFRIENDLY BUSES 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As a regular rider of the new fleet of AC Transit buses, I concur with the complaints of Dorothy Bryant and others, published previously in the Berkeley Daily Planet. Ideally the ghoulish Van Hools could be gutted and their interiors restored to the design of the rider-friendly older buses. 

These new vehicles, borrowing technology from the old, address the needs of wheelchair-bound passengers. But many other members of the community who need to use public transit have significant vulnerabilities that put them at risk in the Van Hool models. 

For example, a passenger with low bone density could sustain a nasty spill if, while her foot was planted in the narrow low trench of an aisle, she attempted to bend up into the (gripless) high seat above while the bus—invariably in motion at such a juncture—lurched to a sudden stop. Bruises and broken ribs could be a painful result of this bad aisle/seat geometry. A spiral fracture of her lower leg could be a serious and actionable result. 

Public funds may not be forthcoming to correct design dangers in these hundreds of buses: the train has, so to speak, left the station. But couldn’t the incumbents of the AC Transit District Board, several of whom approved this hideous design, insist that their drivers always wait until a passenger is fully seated before they hit the accelerator? 

Anne Richardson 

Albany 

 

• 

SPECIAL ELECTION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Gov. Schwarzenegger’s call for a special election in November is ill conceived and self-serving. We don’t need an election which will cost up to $70 million, when a regularly scheduled election will take place only six months later. What’s the rush? Arnold is trying to make an end run around election laws by bringing his agenda before the voters in 2005. In that way, he can continue to raise funds from his base of millionaire supporters, something he would not be able to do once he declares his candidacy for re-election in 2006. Equally important is the fact that in 2006, California law will require a voter verified paper trail. A special election in 2005 will have no paper trail and no way to validate the results if they are questioned. We don’t want what happened in Ohio to happen in California. 

Michael Marchant  

Albany 

 

• 

STOP THE MONEY MACHINE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Are you as sick of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s corporate fund-raising as I am? Ever since he got into office, Schwarzenegger has broken records for campaign cash and sold off social policy to the highest bidder. The most egregious examples include his slashing the education budget and cutting the ratio of nurses to patients in hospitals, all for the good of his big-bucks buddies. 

Let’s do something about it. 

On April 5, the California Nurses Association, as well as a wide variety of labor, education, and other progressive groups, are going to mobilize 10,000 people into the streets outside a major corporate fund-raiser that the governor is holding in San Francisco. It will be at 6 p.m., Tuesday, April 5 in front of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel at the corner of Stockton and California Streets. Please join us. To learn more, write Allies@CalNurses.org, visit www.CalNurses.org, or call 273-2240. 

Of course, if you have $89,000 you can just buy a seat at the table. If so…please ask the governor to do right by patients and students. 

Mary Orisich