Page One

Before the Le Conte Neighborhood Association’s Thursday evening candidates night, secretary Jerry Miller was undecided about whom he’d pick for mayor. But after listening to the three candidates—incumbent Mayor Tom Bates, former Planning Chair Zelda Bronstein and community activist Zachary Running Wolf, Miller told the Daily Planet: “I could really see the difference between the candidates. I don’t think I’m unclear now.”  

Some 60 people came to the LNA forum at the LeConte School auditorium. Earlier in the week, about 80 people had attended the Willard Neighborhood Association evening in which mayoral and District 7 and District 8 City Council candidates spoke and fielded questions. (Candidate Christian Pecaut did not attend either event.)  

Questions from residents in the two nearby neighborhoods reflected similar concerns: housing, homelessness, the impact of the university and preservation of neighborhoods. 

Development 

“What is the need for all this development? What is in it for the citizens of Berkeley?” one Le Conte area resident asked the candidates. 

Bates responded that allowing high-rise buildings to abut residences is a problem created by the city’s faulty zoning laws. “We need to respect the neighborhoods,” he said. 

There is need for more development to reverse Berkeley’s shrinking population, Bates said. Development at transit hubs can provide housing, while keeping people out of their cars. The housing created must be “workforce” housing—condominiums and apartments. “People who work here can’t live here. People in our police department, fire department, nurses and teachers don’t live here,” he said. 

But Bronstein argued that people “are not going to move into the little Calcutta-size apartments that are being built on the thoroughfares in Berkeley. They want yards for their children to play in.” 

Furthermore, she argued that when Bates talks about “workforce housing,” he lumps together firefighters, police and UC clericals. “Excuse me,” Bronstein said, “the police in this city are averaging $124,000 per year.”  

Most of the housing being built is not available to working people, she said, adding that the city needs to make housing genuinely affordable. 

But Bates, who claimed that 500 “workforce” housing units and 300 low-income units were built in the city during his term in office, argued the city needs to take a regional perspective when looking at developing low-income housing. 

“We need a broader vision for affordable housing,” he said. It can be in one of the neighboring cities and not necessarily in Berkeley, he said.  

Bronstein further criticized Bates for proposing housing at Ashby BART, arguing that the city applied for a planning grant without first proposing the project to the City Council. The grant was denied, yet, “Mayor Bates continues to ram this project through South Berkeley,” she said, pointing to $40,000 funded through the city’s general fund to support a task force on the project. 

Bates responded that prior City Councils have said there should be housing at the Ashby station. “Ashby BART is a planning grant, you guys,” he said. 

While the original grant proposed 300 units, the project is not yet defined, Bates argued. “This is not a fait accompli,” he said. 

Ellin McGovern, who lives near UC Storage at Shattuck Avenue and Ward Street, opposes the cell-phone antennae which owner Patrick Kennedy wants to install there. She and her neighbors appealed the zoning board’s approval, which the council has remanded to the zoning board for further discussion. McGovern asked the candidates how they would approach the problem. 

Bates declined to discuss specifics because, as mayor, he may have to vote on the question. Instead, he pointed to state and federal legislation which makes it difficult for municipalities to have control over locating antennae. “We have to fight back against this,” he said. 

Bronstein responded that the zoning board approval was a good example of the mayor and City Council not giving the Planning Department good direction. She acknowledged, however, that federal law does not allow people to bring health issues into play when considering the placement of antennae. The city should do whatever it can to protect the neighborhood, she added. 

UC-city agreement 

At the LNA event, Bates accused Willard neighborhood resident Doug Buckwald of repeating his questions about a UC-city settlement agreement at various candidates’ nights. 

“You’ve asked this question at three different forums,” Bates said, then added, “Nice to see you again, by the way.”  

The city sued the university over its development plans and over the fees it pays for various city services. In July 2005 the city settled the suit—that settlement was the basis of Buckwald’s questions. 

“The mayor has been telling people that the city has control of planning as a result of this agreement,” Buckwald said at the Willard candidates’ night. “That is not true. In fact the city gave up its control over planning in downtown as the agreement states.”  

He further argued that when the mayor says he’s gotten the university to pay the city $22 million, “what he doesn’t say is that’s $22 million over 15 years.” 

As mayor, Bronstein said, she would rescind the agreement. By approving the settlement “the mayor and the City Council majority voted to give up the rights that the city had,” she said. The agreement forces the city to get university approval on whatever is planned downtown, she said.  

But Bates objected. “If we don’t like what they plan, we can go our own way,” he said, noting that would mean that the city would simply lose $100,000 of the $1.2 million the university is paying in annual fees for city services. 

Further, he said, Berkeley “got the best deal any city in California has ever gotten with any public university (given that) the university is a sovereign body not subject to our laws.”  

Buckwald also challenged Bates on having settled the lawsuit behind closed doors. Bronstein added that the confidentiality agreement was signed even though the mayor had promised to make the terms of the agreement public before a council vote. “I do not believe that every settlement involves a confidentiality agreement,” she said. 

But Bates argued: “Any lawyers will tell you that when you get a settlement agreement, you end up having a confidentiality statement where you can’t talk about what goes on in the settlement agreement.” 

Running Wolf’s challenge 

Community activist Running Wolf has not solicited endorsements or campaign contributions, but has debated Bronstein and Bates at numerous neighborhood forums. Like Bronstein, Running Wolf says he will rescind the UC-city agreement if elected. “On Nov. 7, we’ll decide if this is Berkeley or UC Berkeley,” he said. 

He opposes criminalization of the homeless, and the anti-sleeping and lying ordinances that both the mayor and Bronstein support. “We’re slipping down a slippery slope, with too much policing,” he said, promising to address homelessness by getting people into job training and housing them in unused buildings.  

On creating new parking slots, he said one student asked him what he is going to do about parking. He said he answered,” Absolutely nothing,” and called on young people to give up their cars and ride bicycles, as he does. 

Explaining that his culture considers seven generations when making planning decisions, Running Wolf addressed the antenna question saying, “I wouldn’t allow cell-phone antennas at all.”  

The end 

While the candidates presented themselves and fielded questions at Willard for just under an hour, sandwiched in between the District 7 and District 8 candidates, the closure of the Le Conte event was somewhat controversial. 

At 8:30 p.m. the chair said that there had been an agreement that closing statements would be made at 8:30 p.m., but Bronstein argued that the event should be extended. “It seems like there’s been hardly any questions,” she said. 

After the three candidates gave closing statements, Bates and most the audience left; Bronstein and Running Wolf stayed to field additional questions.