Public Comment

Letters to the Editor

Friday October 20, 2006

GOLDEN GATE FIELDS

Editors, Daily Planet:

Recently, Peter Tunney, president of Golden Gate Fields, wrote a letter to the citizens of Albany. I would like to reply.

Because the letter attacks two City Council candidates, I believe it constitutes an illegal corporate contribution to the other candidates.

Mr. Tunney asserts that Magna Corporation is not proposing a casino in Albany. While technically true, Magna has recently funded initiatives and pushed legislation to legalize racetrack-casinos in California, and has installed casinos in its racetracks where legal.

If the track is not closing, despite its long-term woes then we do not need replacement revenue to maintain our current city services.

The letter states that Golden Gate Fields has worked “for several years” to complete the Bay Trail. I see no Trail, and I must conclude that they are holding completion of the Bay Trail hostage to their commercial plans.

As I understand it, Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile speak of planning for the shoreline, a municipal zonings process, and do include input from the landowner. Whether Golden Gate Fields stays or not, the main issue is the possibility of massive development on the waterfront.

I urge the voters of Albany not to be taken in by half-truths promulgated by a corporation with mega-millions of dollars at stake.

Vote for Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile.

Sarita Mathiasen

Albany

•

CURL’S CLAIMS

Editors, Daily Planet:

In his Oct. 13 letter, John Curl decries Mayor Bates’ intent to “convert the west Ashby and Gilman corridors into Emeryville-style shopping centers” as if this were a bad idea. He seems to ignore the fact that Emeryville is rolling in money while Berkeley’s infrastucture is crumbling. He says this “would create disastrous traffic jams at the freeways, draw business from our other shopping centers, and damage our light industrial and arts and crafts community.” Emeryville demonstrates that by immediately diverting exiting traffic from Powell into the shopping areas through a modern traffic control system, no disastrous traffic jam is created. Berkeley has no “other shopping centers” in any real sense, but if he means Shattuck and Telegraph, business has already been drawn from them by—guess what?—Emeryville and El Cerrito! We can’t ignore them—we must compete. As for damage? Much of his cherished West Berkeley is an industrial blight—a little investment can hardly damage it.

Mr. Curl blames Bates for his “failure to maintain the health of our existing commercial centers, resulting in decreased tax revenues.” Nonsense! Whatever one may think of Bates’ political style, he’s not responsible for the fact that in recent years the entire nature of commerce has changed dramatically. People do not shop “downtown”—not downtown Berkeley, not downtown Oakland. If they know what they want, they order it online, and a big brown truck delivers it. If they really want to shop they go where there is ample free parking surrounded by dozens of stores—a shopping mall.

Mr. Curl asks what it means to be a Berkeley “progressive” today. My answer is that if he includes himself and his political cohorts in that group, they are not progressive at all, but stubbornly re-gressive, and their constant mantra is change nothing, build nothing, do nothing.

Jerry Landis

•

DISHONORABLE MAYOR

Editors, Daily Planet:

Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates personally stole 1,000 copies of a newspaper endorsing his opponent on the eve of his 2002 election. And he lied, for over a month denying any involvement with the crime, then his apology for his act was “on behalf of myself and my supporters.” And his apology was greatly insufficient; he had desecrated freedom of speech, but he faintly called it “inappropriate...I jumped offsides.”

The honorable thing would have been to acknowledge the full magnitude of his appalling wrong, and resign to enter a re-vote. He took the papers from kiosks on Sproul Plaza, home of the Free Speech Movement. I had been a big fan of his, but it’s bad enough what President Bush does to our freedoms, we don’t need to accept it on the left and in Berkeley.

Bill Kristy

•

BATES MOTEL

Editors, Daily Planet:

The big difference between Zelda Bronstein and Tom Bates is that Bronstein actually knows something about city planning. Unlike Bates, Bronstein is willing to listen to the people and preserve our neighborhoods, which would be a refreshing change in City Hall. Bronstein’s support of Measure J tells me that she envisions a habitable and environmentally friendly Berkeley in our future, and not developers feasting on a banquet of historic homes. When Bronstein says that she opposes government by fiat, she’s talking about how most of us feel when we go to the City Council and try to be heard. How often does the council reduce our heartfelt concerns to the hyperbole of mere citizens?

Nobody is fooled by Alan Tobey’s fairy tale that the council behaved democratically when it ignored the pleas of so many people not to replace our Landmarks Ordinance with one that gives developers free rein to buy opinions about which homes can be destroyed with impunity. What shall we call the edifice built when a historic home is destroyed? The Bates Motel? I bet it’ll be a chain.

Gus Lee

•

THE TRUTH

Editors, Daily Planet:

It’s too bad that Alan Tobey, author of the recent commentary, “Preservation and Democracy: the Case Against Measure J,” didn’t write the truth. Tobey would like you to believe that the mayor’s so-called “reforms” to our 32-year-old Landmarks Preservation Ordinance (LPO) are the result of six years of discussions and that these “reforms” were some sort of compromise. This is sheer spin to dress up a dangerous proposal that will make it easier for Tobey’s fellow Livable Berkeley board members to do their developer dance with the mayor and the City Council.

Tobey criticizes Measure J as never being available for community discussion. Hello Alan—you need to be reminded that Measure J is Berkeley’s 32-year-old LPO with only six minor changes suggested by the state Office of Historic Preservation. That’s a lot of experience compared to almost anything but particularly to the closed door sessions regarding “reforms” that the mayor held in his office with last minute proposals being distributed the same day as people were expected to vote or comment on them. Throughout all the discussions, Berkeley citizens raised multiple objections to the Mayor Bates/Councilmember Capitelli proposals. They were totally ignored. No one wanted to go to the ballot, but it became absolutely clear that there would be only two choices given to people: Either live with the significantly weakened Bates/Capitelli proposals or go to the ballot box to protect the LPO we already have. 3,000 residents signed up in about two weeks to put it on the ballot, the most democratic process in the world. Tobey blithely claims that the Landmarks Preservation Commission supports rejecting Measure J. He completely neglects to state that councilmembers had to make changes to their appointments in order to gain Commission approval of these bogus LPO “reforms.”

Don’t be fooled by the web woven by Mr. Tobey to entice you into rejecting a basic protection for every neighborhood in Berkeley or by the election mailers paid for by undisclosed developers that according to another article in the Planet are sure to follow. The Yes on Measure J campaign is a grassroots effort courageously standing toe-to-toe against big developer bucks.

Mickey Hayes

•

MORE ON GOLDEN GATE FIELDS

Editors, Daily Planet:

As an Albany resident for 34 years, I have seen three racetrack owners attempt to push massive development plans for the waterfront onto the citizens of Albany—first there was Santa Fe Railroad (renamed Catellus), then Ladbroke Racing, and now Magna Entertainment which is based in Toronto, Canada.

All these years, the majority of Albany residents have kept the vision of a park for this magnificent setting and have not been seduced by the lure of easy money through mega malls built by the racetrack owners.

Once again, the dominant issue in the election for city councilmembers this November is the waterfront and the amount of commercial development that may or may not be built there at some point in the future.

All of the candidates running for City Council this November are open to some commercial development on land owned by the track. The difference is “how much” development. Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile are the two candidates who firmly oppose a Caruso style mega mall and that is why I support them.

How much income-producing development does Albany need at the waterfront? Quality of life is not based on money alone. The desirability of our town would be greatly enhanced by a generously sized park at the waterfront with its world-class vistas of the Bay, San Francisco, and the Golden Gate Bridge. As population and congestion in the East Bay increase in the future, parkland and open space will become even more valuable and desirable.

We can’t be discouraged by the time it takes to achieve a result at the waterfront we all can be proud of. Recent newspaper articles about the East Shore State Park and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area inspire me. It took many, many decades and a determined citizenry for these parks to become a reality.

As always happens in city council campaigns, the rhetoric in “Dear Neighbor” letters and leaflets at our doorsteps is heating up. Let’s keep our eyes on the ball. Electing Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile this November will convey the message once again that we oppose a mega mall at the waterfront.

Anne Foreman

Albany

•

NOT SMAART ENOUGH

Editors, Daily Planet:

BeSMaart, an organization that cannot even spell its name right, and the North East Berkeley Association (NEBA), an organization that is soon likely to have new leadership, can’t seem to make a coherent argument against Measure A.

Take the issue of class size. Yolanda Huang of BeSMAART, in a KitchenDemocracy.com debate in May/June of this year, stated: “BeSMaart advocates that 26:1 (elementary) and 28:1 (secondary) class sizes based upon a district wide average be the commitment to which BUSD is held. A district average standard provides enough flexibility at individual schools.” However, in her recent Daily Planet opinion piece she criticizes Measure A for using the average class size as a basis for class size limits: “The measure also does not contain any ceiling or limit on how large a class can be. It takes to achieve a result at the waterfront we all can be proud of. Recent newspaper articles about the East Shore State Park and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area inspire me. It took many, many decades and a determined citizenry for these parks to become a reality.

Anne Foreman

Albany

•

NOT SMAART ENOUGH

Editors, Daily Planet:

NEBA bests BeSMaart by managing to contradict itself in the same piece of literature. In a recent newsletter, NEBA “cannot support pursuing the single tactic to reduce the student teacher ratio...” Elsewhere, NEBA refuses “to support a measure requesting 200 million dollars that ‘may’ or may not be used for smaller classrooms.” From what I read, NEBA wants a guarantee for something they don’t even want.

Of course, these two organizations do make an important point in their concern for the priority of reducing academic achievement: Where’s the warm pool!?! It’s just disgraceful at how much harm the foot-dragging on this issue is causing our students! (Could the inclusion of this issue in all the anti-Measure A arguments have anything to do with one of the sponsors being the “president” of the “United Pool Council”?)

Elsewhere, within the complexities of the Measure A debate, Ms. Huang questions whether the superintendent of BUSD is qualified because she was trained as an art teacher. The arguments spiral down from there, reaching the bottom when NEBA states that a decently written measure would guarantee that there would be no “pretend guns in the classroom.” Even my Berkeley High School 11th grader had a laugh at that.

C. A. Gilbert

•

ELECTION THEFT

Editors, Daily Planet:

You can steal some elections all of the time, and all elections some of the time, but you can’t steal all of the elections all of the time.

Harry Gans

•

NO ON MEASURE A

Editors, Daily Planet:

I too am voting no on Measure A. I fully support the thoughts and comments of J. Haven’s Oct. 13 letter to the editor with respects to the Berkeley Unified School District’s mismanagement practices, their only high point is a chef, Ms. Ann Cooper who is paid from a “grant” and not from BUSD budget clearly demonstrates to me the (low) priorities this current administration has for children, and running said educational institution—they do not demonstrate to me that they really care about all these kids —but rather in their own narcissistic salaries. How many lunches would the salaries of administrators Mr. Neil Smith and Ms. Lisa Udell (= 134,931.00 x 2) pay for? How many pencils and crayons for the kids? How many tricycles and kick balls would it pay for? How many raises for those hard-working teachers would it provide? How much bleach for the custodians would it pay for? More than they have now. These afore-mentioned items directly affect the kids today—not some administrator sitting in some posh office downtown thinking about where the next state money will be coming from. Clearly BUSD does not know how to spend the money it has now—so why give them more. Vote no on Measure A.

Karl Jensen

•

MEASURE I

Editors, Daily Planet:

Can anyone shed some additional light on Measure I? Reading section 21.28.070 it is unclear how the property price is calculated. If the landlord is free to set any terms, s/he need only set the asking price at $1 billion to exclude the tenant from accepting (thereby saving 3 percent). If the property value is determined by the market, the tenant could match the top offer and immediately flip the property for 5 percent cash (rather than 2 percent). I’m also not clear who would bid on a unit against a -5 percent trump card.

John Vinopal

•

UNION-APPROVED?

Editors, Daily Planet:

What’s up with the Berkeley Democratic Club?

One of the axioms of California politics has been that you can always tell when campaign literature comes from a Democrat by the union bug printed near the return address.

A typographical symbol, usually oval in shape, the bug is filled with tiny type that identifies the union local whose workers printed the mailer. But the Berkeley Democratic Club doesn’t have a bug, unlike almost all the other literature that’s been stuffing my mailbox these days.

What’s up? Did the club resort to a non-union shop? If so, pretty odd. I note that literature from candidates the club didn’t endorse—Dona Spring and Zelda Bronstein, for example—carries the bug, and even the candidates they do endorse, like Bates and Wozniak, have bugs on their mailers. Is the party forgetting its roots? They should remember that old song, “Look for the union label. . .”

Anne Wagley

•

FOR MIRIAM WALDEN

Editors, Daily Planet:

I am voting for incumbent Miriam Walden, and candidates Jamie Calloway and John Kindle for the Albany School Board. All three have impeccable records. All three have children in the schools, and have direct and extensive experience serving the Albany schools and community, consistently, tirelessly and effectively, giving of themselves to help make the Albany schools what they are today. All three firmly stand for equity and fairness as well as curricular vibrancy and financial solvency.

John Kindle carries his wisdom up his sleeves, readily rolling them up to dive in and help wherever it’s needed, with care, attention and knowledge. Jamie Calloway is a fearless visionary, devoting her life to learning and advocating for youth, especially youth at risk. And thanks to Miriam Walden’s vision, bold initiatives, hard work, and eloquent reasoning, the Albany School District is able to modernize its buildings, restore librarians and counselors, expand its programs (including the arts, sports, English Language Learners, and vocational training), begin the overhaul of school lunches, and give staff the salary increases they so deserve—all without going in the red. Their record is clear: voting for all three candidates to the school board puts Albany in the best of hands.

Nadine Ghammache

Member, Albany Board of Education

•

OUT-OF-DISTRICT STUDENTS

Editors, Daily Planet:

After all the recent letters and editorial comment about the effect out-of-district students may have on Berkeley’s public schools, I can recall no expression of concern about the reverse—i.e. the consequences our own policies may have on our neighbors. Knowledgeable insiders readily admit the obvious: that BUSD’s registration policies (as administered in practice) are a good deal more lax than those of our neighbors.

Oakland’s school district, now under state administration, needs all the help it can get. It certainly doesn’t receive any from Berkeley, if its caring parents, whose involvement in and support for the Oakland district is desperately needed, receive our encouragement to transfer their children here instead. Surely we owe our neighbors better than that.

Revan Tranter

•

FOR MEASURE A

Editors, Daily Planet:

This is to clarify that I support and endorse Measure A for Berkeley's children.

I want to inform the residents and voters of Berkeley that though my name is on the ballot argument against Measure A, the public school parcel tax here in Berkeley, it was initially misrepresented to me and upon further research and discussion, I have now rescinded my original position and in fact now both endorse and fully support Measure A.

It is unfortunate and troubling to me that there are people even here in Berkeley who will distort the facts to suit their own agendas.

I hope that this letter can do some benefit toward ensuring that Measure A passes on November 7, and that discussions take place based on the facts of the measure and the school district’s needs.

Please vote to support our public schools, vote YES on Measure A.

Johnnie Porter

Former president, Berkeley NAACP

•

MEASURE J

Editors, Daily Planet:

Measure J foe Alan Tobey has an odd conception of democracy. Over 3,000 people signed petitions to put Measure J on the ballot, many more than were needed. If Mr. Tobey doesn’t see that as a broad-based exercise in democracy, then he doesn’t understand government by the people, for the people. Berkeley residents want a voice in determining the future of their neighborhoods, which includes preserving the appealing vintage homes and small-scale apartment buildings that make Berkeley so unique. Many of us value our open space and small-town feel.

Who’s really anti-democratic? We’ve heard that the Chamber of Commerce PAC will spend a lot of money to get neighborhoods to vote against their own interests. Therefore, a few might succeed in buying the means to influence the many. If the Chamber of Commerce PAC is so interested in democracy, why doesn’t it file a complete accounting with City Hall, as Measure J supporters have? Many Berkeley voters expect a barrage of negative ads at the last minute, when there is no time to respond to falsehoods. Maybe in Mr. Tobey’s eyes, that’s the best democracy that money can buy, but I’d rather have a law written for the benefit of our whole community.

Dan Silva

•

SCHOOL BOARD

Editors, Daily Planet:

John Selawsky’s letter criticizing the North East Berkeley Association is interesting, as an example of how the School Board broaches no criticism. I know because I am a former member of the school district’s Maintenance Oversight Committee. When the Oversight Committee (formed to review the expenditures from parcel tax Measure BB) became too vocal in its criticism over the district’s handling of the funds and the department, the School Board summarily dissolved that committee, and selected new acquiescent members who don’t raise a peep. Today, as a result of the School Board’s actions, more than six years since parcel tax Measure BB’'s passage, the school district’s maintenance department is a complete mess. The staff is demoralized, and the work isn’t getting done. That has been another $20 million-plus debacle.

The problem is that the School Board does not engage the community in honest discussion over the genuine issues that the schools are dealing with. Instead, BUSD tries to quash dissent, which is why the School Board doesn’t mention its maintenance department in public, nor the poor use of the funds from parcel tax measure BB.

As a former employee of the school district, I have seen first hand the waste, the inefficiency and the inadequate supervision provided by management. And having read the actual language of the Measure A, I’m inclined to vote no. The school district should rewrite the ballot measure so it is more specific on what the funds will be spent on, have no loop holes, and include performance evaluations for management.

Sally Reyes

•

MEASURE A

Editors, Daily Planet:

I realize that adherents of local tax measures are oft times motivated to name their opponents as deceitful, but as far as the local Berkeley school tax Measure A is concerned, the primary reason that I and so many of my neighbors will be casting a no vote is that it is a 10-year tax.

The fact that the dollars generated by this tax will be overseen by a Citizens Planning and Oversight Committee composed of parents/guardians, staff members, students, residents, or community members brings little confidence to this voter. Such a committee will obviously be the school district judging itself.

Bruce McMurray

•

TRUTH SQUAD

Editors, Daily Planet:

The mayor handed out a flier called “Strengthening the Landmarks Ordinance” at a recent candidates’ forum which contains so many falsehoods it could win a prize for imaginative fiction.

One would have to have slept through the last two years to avoid knowing that Tom Bates has spent his years as mayor trying desperately to weaken the Landmarks Ordinance, both by populating the Landmarks Preservation Commission and the city staff with anti-preservationist voices, and by trying to change an ordinance that is hailed nationwide as a standard for protecting the fragile remnants of our history.

Development doesn’t have to be hostile to preservation of historical buildings. The best, award-winning plans honor the history and respect the flavor of distinctively designed buildings, or buildings in which significant events occurred.

Developers, on the other hand, love a clean slate. The “careful reforms” promoted by the Tom Bates and sadly, albeit not unanimously, instituted by the commission and the council, are efforts to weaken, not strengthen, the Landmarks Ordinance.

Measure J is a grass-roots revolt against the mayor’s efforts to undermine the protection of our neighborhoods, our history, and our respect for public process. Measure J keeps the Landmarks Ordinance strong.

The deceptive hit piece handed out Tuesday, Oct. 17, at the Willard Neighborhood Association candidates forum will be the first of many efforts to fool people, well-meaning but busy people with little time to follow often tedious political issues.

Don’t be fooled. Berkeley doesn’t have to abandon its historical character to have development. “The process is too tedious” will always be the developers’ song. It is our job to make sure it doesn’t drown out the songs of our immigrants, our laborers, and our history.

Carol Denney

EDITOR’S NOTE: A copy of the flyer in question, which is unsigned in an apparent violation of campaign law, can be seen on our website: www.berkeleydailyplanet.com.