Public Comment

I have been quite busy ever since three tree-sitters climbed into the trees at Memorial Oak Grove in the pre-dawn hours Saturday before the Big Game between Cal and Stanford. Our group, Save the Oaks at the Stadium, did not know of this plan in advance, but we support the tree-sitters fully in their endeavors and we will do everything we can to make sure that they are safe and have everything they need. It takes real courage to take such an action, and I believe that each one of our tree-sitters is a true hero. 

Even though there were many things to do at the grove, I took time off on the evening of Dec. 6 to attend the meeting of the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee, made up of city and university representatives. I have regularly attended meetings of this group because it is very important to me to offer public input into these decision-making processes. For this particular meeting, I had been invited by a member to offer specific information about my experience regarding UC Berkeley’s construction projects in the Southside, a topic with which I am quite familiar. 

I stood up and spoke during the public comment period, with the understanding that I would be able to respond to questions from committee. After all, I had seen public comment time extended in the past to allow for such questions. Instead, I was cut off abruptly after my three minutes were up. I had gotten through my general overview of UC’s construction impacts, but had not offered any specifics yet. None at all. 

I was very disappointed. I explained to the committee that I had come to speak even though I had been working so hard that I had gotten only four hours of sleep in the last three days, and that I had also taken time to prepare material for the meeting. I requested the courtesy of at least being allowed to read a very short paragraph from a planning textbook used at UC Berkeley. I had timed the passage before the meeting, and knew that it would take close to one minute to read. I was not asking for much. (For your information, the paragraph may be found in The Practice of Local Government Planning, 3rd Edition, ” 2000, published by the International City/County Management Association. It’s on page 425 in the section entitled “Traditional citizen participation: The trouble with public hearings.”) Would the chair be kind enough to allow me to read it? 

I was not allowed to read the brief passage. My request was flatly denied. And the reason given was rather ironic: if I read my one-minute passage, I would “inconvenience the 22 members of the committee who would get home later” because of it. Well, OK—I certainly don’t want to inconvenience people.  

The official explanation for the refusal, of course, was that my remarks were not listed on the agenda for the meeting. Not being on the agenda is an excuse for many civic sins in this town, and that is an issue for another day. But, getting back to the meeting: I was disappointed, sure—but beyond that I did not appreciate being treated so rudely. For pity sakes, I did not have to be there. I was there to offer my experience to a group that I thought would appreciate it. It appears that they have no interest at all in the facts about UC’s construction policies and practices. Lord help you if you are a business owner or resident in the downtown. 

Things are a bit different up at the oak grove. Please come and pay us a visit, chat with our brave tree-sitters, and sit for a while under the splendid canopy of these irreplaceable trees. You’re welcome any time—even if you’re not on the agenda. 

Doug Buckwald is a Berkeley activist.