Features

UC Berkeley officials have issued a call for a consultant to lead the process that could end with major changes for the most hotly contested piece of real estate in Berkeley history, People’s Park. 

The university posted a Request for Qualifications on its website to conduct a study of the park, assess community needs and “provide concept planning for the park.” 

UCB Director of Community Relations Irene Hegarty said the recommendation came from the park’s Community Advisory Board in June and won approval from campus officials last month. 

The university posted a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) last week seeking a planning consultant to work with the community on a needs assessment and plan for the park. That document is posted at the UCB website at www.cp.berkeley.edu/RFQ.html. 

While the RFQ includes one phrase that should offer some comfort to park activists—“UC Berkeley’s 2020 Long Range Development Plan confirms the park’s continue use as recreational open space”—the following sentence offers a qualification: “Specific site functions, however, must take into account a wide range of stakeholders from both campus and community.”  

Hegarty said the proposal to hire the consultant came from an advisory board subcommittee that includes school board member John Selawsky, UCB faculty member Sam Davis, neighbor Joseph Halperin and UCB student Ionas Porges-Kiriakou. 

“It came as a recommendation to engage in a comprehensive needs assessment and community planning process to engage the wider community,” Hegarty said. 

The RFQ contains words that alarm long-time People’s Park activists, who see the university as an imperial force with malevolent designs on the last remaining symbol of Berkeley’s 1960’s activism. 

The university has owned the site since June 22, 1957. It has been the scene of dramatic confrontations between police and activists, including the May 15, 1969, shootings by Alameda County Sheriff’s deputies that left one bystander dead and another blinded. 

“People’s Park should be given to the people who have been taking care of it for the last 37 years,” said Danny McMullan, a veteran park activist. “It’s unique; it’s a landmark created by the Berkeley community. It’s the only open space in the entire area.” 

While McMullan and others say that say the main problem with the park is the university’s ongoing efforts to develop it, the RFQ states that the park “although, at times, successful as a recreational resource, is also plagued by urban problems. The Advisory Board’s goal is to mark the park safer and more widely used by a broad range of community members.” 

One member of the board that supports the RFQ is George Beier, who is running for the City Council seat that represents the district—a seat now held by Kriss Worthington, who is seeking re-election. 

Worthington and McMullan both declare that the park’s alleged lack of safety has a lot more to do with the university’s constant admonitions to students than with reality. 

McMullan insists the park is safe—“My kids play there, and I would never put them in harm’s way.” 

“I think it would be far more productive for the university to work with the city and the community and the park users, but that hasn’t been the pattern unfortunately,” said Worthington. 

The deadline for applications is Nov. 6, with the goal of creation of the study itself by next April 30. 

Hegarty isn’t saying how much the university plans to spend on the study, but when told Worthington had heard an estimate of $100,000, she acknowledged, “That would be the upper limit.”