Protesters have blocked at least two entrances to the Port of Oakland this morning as part of a planned all-day West Coast port blockade. 

As of 9 a.m., hundreds of protesters had blocked off the entrance to Berths 30-32, and Alameda County sheriff's deputies were keeping an eye on hundreds more who had gathered at the entrance to Berths 55-56. 

Dozens of trucks were lined up outside both entrances as drivers waited to get into the port.  

One truck driver, who declined to give his name, said he had come from Santa Rosa and had been waiting since 5 a.m. 

He said he anticipates that the port will be closed all day and is awaiting instructions on what to do with his cargo. 

Meanwhile, protesters milled about, chanting and playing music. Around 8:45 a.m., dozens of police officers in riot gear showed up at the entrance to Berths 30-32 but then left a few minutes later.  

Protester Shake Anderson, who said he has been involved in the Occupy Oakland movement since the beginning, said the demonstrators' strategy is to keep a large crowd at the port to make it difficult for police to make arrests.  

"It's all about numbers," he said.  

Oakland attorney Dan Siegel, Mayor Jean Quan's former legal adviser, was among those participating in the march to the port this morning.  

Siegel resigned as Quan's unpaid legal adviser on Nov. 14, the morning that police raided the Occupy Oakland encampment outside City Hall. He was leaving this morning's protest at about 7:20 a.m., heading to a client's court hearing.  

Protesters began marching from the West Oakland BART station shortly after 5:30 a.m.  

They plan to hold several other marches throughout the day to disrupt shipping, including a march at 4 p.m. from Frank Ogawa Plaza, and another from the West Oakland BART station at 5 p.m. 

Oakland police said this morning that they will attempt to keep the port open, but that traffic through Oakland may be disrupted as they facilitate marches through the city. 

Port of Oakland officials said around 7:15 a.m. that operations were continuing at the port with "sporadic disruptions" caused by the protests.  

Quan held a news conference this morning at which she called on protesters to "respect the rights of the 99 percent who are trying to work today."  

The blockade is part of a coordinated West Coast port shutdown involving Occupy movements from Anchorage, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, San Diego and other cities. 

"They performed a coordinated attack on the whole Occupy Wall Street because this is a threatening movement to the 1 percent," organizer Boots Riley, of the hip-hop group The Coup, said today. 

"This is a retaliation against that. We're causing a lot of profit loss to show it's not a feasible economic plan for them to attack us," Riley said. 

Riley said the action is also in solidarity with International Longshore and Warehouse Union members in a labor dispute with grain exporter EGT in Longview, Wash., and with truck drivers in Los Angeles who are classified as independent contractors and do not receive benefits. 

Port and city officials and ILWU leaders have criticized the plan, saying that the action will hurt port workers by costing them wages. 

ILWU leaders have said that while they support the broader goals of the Occupy movement, they have accused Occupy activists of trying to co-opt union struggles for a broader agenda.

Around 1,700 gallons of diesel fuel spilled from a tank in a University of California at Berkeley building Saturday evening, causing a spill that reached Strawberry Creek and San Francisco Bay. 

The spill was discovered around 7 p.m. Saturday, when a campus police officer noticed an odor coming from Strawberry Creek, which runs through the campus, university officials said.  

An investigation determined that diesel fuel tank at Stanley Hall, a large research and classroom building. The fuel, used to power an emergency generator for the building, had overflowed as it was being transferred to another storage tank.  

Emergency crews shut off the source of the leak and removed hundreds of gallons of diesel fuel from the building. The leak was contained by around 9 p.m. but crews today continue to lay down absorbent materials and vacuum up the fuel, officials said.  

Federal and state officials have been notified, and the area is being closely monitored for impacts on wildlife, said Mark Freiberg, director of the Office of Environment, Health and Safety. 

Stanley Hall remains closed, but should be open Monday. The cause of the leak remains under investigation. 

Members of the public who encounter pooled fuel from the spill, they are asked to avoid touching it, but to report it to (510) 664-4406.

Last night UCB spilled some kind of fuel oil or diesel into Strawberry Creek. When my son came home at 2 am, he noticed a pervasive smell of gasoline, which he had first noticed about 10 pm that evening. His home in on Strawberry Creek in the flats, and he investigated and found thick reddish brown oil in the creek. He flagged down a police officer who said that UC Berkeley had experienced a leak or spill but had "everything under control." Doubting that, he went out to the mouth of the creek at the Seabreeze cafe to see if UCB had put up containment to keep the fuel out of the bay... they had not. He then traced back up the creek, and found pools of fuel at various spots, and a large amount of fuel in the creek below the Undergraduate Library. No clean up crew was there...

When we went back there at 8:30 am Sunday morning, there was a cleanup crew pumping out the remains of the oil. What was the spill, why didn't UCB act to contain the spill before it left the creek and entered the bay? Why did it take so long to get a clean up crew out? 

What is UCB's protocol for environmental spills and is it adequate to protect the environment and the citizens? 

[Editor's Note: Also see this report in the San Francisco Chronicle.]

Emergency crews on Sunday, Dec. 11, removed hundreds of gallons of diesel fuel from a University of California, Berkeley, building where equipment failure caused a diesel tank to overflow. On Saturday evening, Dec. 10, about 1,700 gallons of fuel spilled within Stanley Hall, with some fuel reaching Strawberry Creek and a smaller amount making its way to San Francisco Bay. 

Crews continue to monitor the situation, are laying down materials to both contain and absorb the diesel, and are using special trucks and equipment to vacuum up the fuel. 

At 7 p.m. Saturday, a campus police officer noticed an off odor coming from Strawberry Creek, and employees from the campus's Office of Environment, Health and Safety (EH&S) and Physical Plant-Campus Services investigated. They discovered that a diesel fuel tank in Stanley Hall had overflowed as fuel was being transferred from a larger nearby storage tank. The fuel in the tank is used to power an emergency generator for the building. The exact cause of this equipment failure is not yet known. 

The leak was contained at about 9 p.m. Saturday. Campus crews shut off the source of the leak and immediately contacted federal, state, local and city authorities. If members of the public see fuel that may be pooling as a result of the spill, they are asked to avoid touching it, but should report it to (510) 664-4406. 

Campus officials continue to work closely with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Coast Guard and California Department of Fish and Game. 

Mark Freiberg, EH&S director, said that the coordinating agencies are closely monitoring the area for impacts to wildlife. 

Stanley Hall, a large research and classroom building, remains closed due to the clean-up efforts, but EH&S and campus crews are monitoring conditions to verify that the building is safe for reoccupancy on Monday.

Since 2010, the number of juvenile prostitution cases investigated by the Berkeley Police Department (BPD) throughout the City of Berkeley has fallen from seven in 2010 to four in 2011, a decline of over 40%. The population of Berkeley is approximately 112,000.  

In 2010, of the seven cases investigated by BPD’s Special Victims Unit, three involved Berkeley High School (BHS) students. So far this year, BPD has investigated four cases, and two of those cases involved BHS students. None of these investigations involved prostitution on the BHS campus.  

While the numbers appear to be low, even one case is too many and BPD and BHS work collaboratively to investigate criminal activity that may occur on campus as well as those that could affect the safety of the student community. Due to laws pertaining to the confidentiality rights of juvenile victims, not all investigative information can be shared between BHS and BPD. However, these investigations are taken very seriously and steps are taken to ensure that victims are safe and receive support.  

Sergeant Jennifer Louis, of the BPD Special Victims Unit credits the decline in statistics, “in great part to community efforts and collaboration surrounding the prosecution of those who exploit women, as well as the extensive referral and support systems in place for these young victims.” One such BPD collaboration is the HEAT (Human Exploitation and Trafficking) Watch program which is administered by Alameda County. HEAT Watch is a joint effort of several agencies to combat human trafficking and the commercial sexual exploitation of children. It includes law enforcement, non-government victim advocates, probation, social services, local businesses and other community agencies. More information regarding HEAT Watch as well as county wide statistics is available on the Alameda County District Attorney website.  

The Special Victims Unit receives approximately one to two reports a month regarding possible youth prostitution activity throughout the City. They come in a range of forms from a call from a community member who sees a young- looking woman they suspect may be engaged in criminal activity to Child Protective Services (CPS) referrals regarding children who may be endangered. Periodically, it may be a youth victim who reaches out. BPD reviews each of these circumstances and initiates a criminal investigation when appropriate.  

Inspired by the Nov. 2 shutdown of the Port of Oakland by Occupy Oakland protesters, Occupy movements across the country are seeking to disrupt port and shipping activities, particularly along the West Coast on Monday, including at the Port of Oakland. 

But the calls for shutting down ports comes without the support of leadership from the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, who have said that while they support the broader goals of the Occupy movement, they are not supportive of unilateral calls by third parties to shut down ports. 

A port shutdown was proposed by Occupy Oakland and Los Angeles groups mid-November. Calls for action throughout the West Coast brought support from other Occupy movements in the following days and weeks. 

Occupy Oakland organizers have said the action is partly intended to show solidarity with an ongoing labor dispute between ILWU members and grain exporter EGT in Longview, Wash.  

But in a letter to local chapters Wednesday, ILWU International President Robert McEllrath clarified that the union had not voted to support the actions, and accused Occupy groups of trying to co-opt their struggle to advance their own agenda. 

"Support is one thing, organization from outside groups attempting to co-opt our struggle in order to advance a broader agenda is quite another and one that is destructive to our democratic process and jeopardizes our over two-year struggle in Longview," McEllrath's letter stated. 

But McEllrath remained supportive of the broader goals of the Occupy movement -- including corporate influence on democracy, the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, and the failure of accountability for the financial crisis. 

"While there can be no doubt that the ILWU shares the Occupy movement's concerns about the future of the middle class and corporate abuses, we must be clear that our struggle against EGT is just that -- our struggle," he said. 

Port of Oakland officials pleaded with Occupy members not to shut down the port in an open letter to the community published as a full-page ad in several newspapers Sunday. 

"Shutting down the Port of Oakland is a bad idea. Another shutdown will only make things worse -- diverting cargo, tax revenue and jobs to other communities. It will hurt working people and harm our community," the letter stated. 

The Port's letter also stated that it is still feeling the impact of the Nov. 2 action, where thousands marched from downtown Oakland to the Port, shutting down operations overnight. The Port said that not only did the action cause lost profits, but lost wages for Port workers as well. 

ILWU spokesman Craig Merrilees confirmed that no Port workers who missed shifts on Nov. 2 were paid. Merrilees said that whether or not Port workers would be paid depends on negotiations between the employers and the union. 

"Typically this involves a dispute between the employers and the union over what's going to happen in a situation like this. Naturally the company doesn't want to pay and the union would like the pay and sometimes this requires adjudication and arbitration, and often there are appeals," he said. 

But the Nov. 2 action did have some support among union members, as 10 percent of Port workers scheduled to work that day individually elected to stay home from work, Merillees said.  

During that evening's march to the Port, among the thousands marching were contingents from several local unions including the Oakland Education Association, the Service Employees International Union, and the ILWU. 

Merillees also pointed out that most of the truck drivers at the Port do not belong to a union, and are paid by the container, not by the hour. He said that those workers would not be paid for the lost time regardless, and have no recourse. 

The plight of those truck drivers was scheduled to be one of the issues covered at a teach-in at 6 p.m. Thursday at Bay Area Christian Connection Church at 810 Clay St. in Oakland to discuss turning the Port of Oakland into a "People's Port." 

Port workers, community members and faith leaders were expected to discuss how an upcoming major expansion of the Port into the old Oakland Army Base could be an opportunity to place an emphasis on "people over profits," small businesses, and environmental regulations. 

Organizer Nikki Bas from the East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy said that helping Port truck drivers who she says are miscategorized as independent contractors is one of two key campaigns her organization is working on. 

She said that because of their status as independent contractors, the drivers do not have the benefits of sick leave, access to health care, workers compensation and unemployment insurance that their unionized peers enjoy. 

Furthermore, the drivers are responsible for maintaining their own trucks and purchasing fuel, and that after these expenses, many will work 60 or more hours a week but take home as little as $25,000 per year. 

She said that while her group is not organizing for Monday's Port action, they are seeking to capitalize on the increased attention on the Port to bring attention to their own organizing efforts. 

"What's positive about this is people are starting to look a little bit more about what are the companies causing inequity in our society and particularly at the Port," Bas said. 

Meanwhile, Occupy Oakland is planning a wave of outreach this weekend, including a planned outreach event for Saturday at DeFremery Park in West Oakland, not far from the Port. Protesters are planning to go door-to-door in the neighborhood to raise support for the Port shutdown, followed by a 1 p.m. cookout at the park. 

For the Port shutdown, Oakland protesters are planning to gather early Monday morning, meeting at 5:30 a.m. at the West Oakland BART station for the first march to the Port of Oakland. 

Two afternoon marches are also planned. Protesters will rally at Frank Ogawa Plaza in downtown Oakland at 3 p.m. and march to the Port an hour later. Another group will meet at the West Oakland BART station again at 5 p.m. for a third march. 

Other port shutdowns are being planned all over the West Coast, including Los Angeles, San Diego, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle and Vancouver. 

The calls for action have even grown beyond the West Coast, as protesters in Houston plan to shut down the port there, and Occupy protesters in landlocked cities such as Denver and Salt Lake City are planning to disrupt Walmart distribution centers. 

While the ILWU may not officially endorse the port shutdowns, union leadership has been careful to maintain that they do support the broader goals of the Occupy movement.  

"We remain supportive of the general thrust of the Occupy movement which is to promote greater economic equality and social justice in this country. It's a new movement and there will be plenty of opportunities down the line to work on other strategies and actics to achieve that," Merillees said.

When I was a kid, I read "Ben and Me," a 1939 children's bio of Ben Franklin, purportedly written by Franklin's mouse, Amos. In this story, I am the mouse, and Micah M. White, credited by the New Yorker as a key founder of the Occupy movement, is Ben.

Micah is famous at the moment, and I, a mere mouse who roars at the Planet. We both live in Berkeley; me for 40 years, Micah since last year. 

Ben/Micah is a 29 year-old senior editor at Adbusters magazine, and self-styled "independent activist," who has contributed to the New York Times, Teen Magazine, the Guardian (U.K.), and recently, the Washington Post. He claims 100,000 readers. 

If I have a few thousand, I'd be lucky. 

When the New Yorker piece on Micah hit the newsstands (Nov. 28), my editor asked me to do a piece on him. She had read, in my Oct. 10 piece, that Occupy was "masterminded by Micah M. White, senior editor at Adbusters, Vancouver, B.C., an anti-consumerist magazine, founded in 1989," and a one-year resident of Berkeley. 

Talk about "How Berkeley can you be?" How Berkeley is it to start an international political movement--from Berkeley? 

What a story! 

But there is likely to be no story about Micah here, because, you see…Micah despises me! 

Here's why. At an OB general assembly in October, I approached his wife, a Cal faculty member, to write a story about her and her famous husband. 

To write such a piece I would have to correctly note her faculty rank (her rank is not given on her department website), while pursuing the local angle--what brought you and Micah here; your views on Berkeley, etc.? I used this excuse to approach her. 

I tried to take their pictures, separately, throughout the general assembly, which became a Paparazzi game of cat-and-mouse in which I felt more like a rat. 

Here's the short conversation I had with Micah's wife on night three of OB: 

Sidling up to her on a bench in Bank of America Civic Plaza, I identified myself, and asked her faculty title for the article I wanted to write. 

Her reaction threw me off. There was something unnerving in her look of scorn, derision, and extreme distaste when she said, "Why would you want to do that? {write about me]. I definitely had my mouth in my foot , when I snapped, "You ought to know the angle, you're a rhetorician." 

Wrong answer. 

Right answer (not delivered): "My editor says our readers would be interested." 

Micah was elsewhere, but he was soon in my face, demanding I apologize to his wife. He had barely finished the demand, when I said, curtly, "I apologize". To this he responded by moving back from me, as if to suggest I was in his space. "Stay away from me," he called as he left. 

I joked to allies at OB that two can play that game. "I'll get a bullhorn and interview Micah from across the street," I boasted. How far away is that? 

Micah was not through with me. 

He returned the following evening, denouncing me in the general assembly. " your reports are harmful to the movement and an insult to everyone here," he charged. 

Dear readers, have I ever insulted anyone? It's my style. 

He wasn't finished with me yet, though. He caught up to me on the fringe of the general assembly the next night, asking me whether I knew the difference between news and editorials, questioning my credentials (B.S. in Journalism, University of Illinois, Champagne-Urbana, 1961), and asking, "how long have you been doing this? 

"Your work is crap, complete crap; of all the pieces on Occupy I've read, yours are the absolute worst." He repeated the crap routine, shaking his head in disgust. 

I later joked that being worst was better than not being noticed, but I was hurt. 

In fact, my initial piece on OB, (Planet Oct. 10), in which I trace its origins back to People's Park and Mike Delacour (local angle) was overly complicated, if not muddled. 

Worse, the piece never examined Micah's role--considerable--in the first OB protest. 

I was too busy with the local angle (Delacour) to notice Micah, whom I didn't even know at the time. I had to be tipped off by a friend who was tipped off by a friend. 

Maybe all my stuff was crap, whatever that is. 

Micah's profile in the New Yorker says that he hangs at Doe Library on campus, where, devoid of electronic devices, he "digs out snippets of radical thought ," for his Adbusters pieces. 

I went to Doe Library looking for Micah Wednesday (not there), and will be stalking him there again. This time, I'll show him the respect he deserves. Remember, he's Ben Franklin, an innovator, and I, a lowly mouse. 

I can't wait to write one of my crappy stories about him. 

Telegraph Avenue and Haste Street in Berkeley were both opened to vehicle and pedestrian traffic today, less than three weeks after a raging fire forced the demolition of a 39-unit apartment building at the intersection. 

Pedestrians can now use the sidewalks on the east and south sides of the Telegraph-Haste intersection to travel throughout the Telegraph business area. Vehicles can also return to normal northbound travel on Telegraph and westbound travel on Haste. 

The sidewalk and traffic lane immediately adjacent to the former mixed-use building will remain closed while debris is removed and the Telegraph-facing storefront is stabilized (the revised traffic plan is here). 

“We know that the fire and the closure of this intersection came at terrible time for Telegraph merchants,” said Economic Development Director Michael Caplan. “City staff and the property owner worked quickly and cooperatively to make the building safe and re-open the intersection. We encourage everyone to include Telegraph Avenue’s many unique stores in their holiday shopping plans.” 

The Telegraph Holiday Street Fair is also still scheduled for December 16, 17, 18, 22, and 24 from 11 am to 6 p.m. More than 200 artisans come every year to sell their handcrafted items on the Avenue. Shoppers are urged to use the Telegraph/Channing Garage, which has easy access from Channing Way and Durant Avenue. 

Fortunately, no one was reported injured in the fire, which occurred on Friday, November 18. More information about the fire and traffic is available on www.cityofberkeley.info.

Last Saturday the wrecking crew employed by Kenneth and Gregory Ent, owners of the Sequoia Apartments, began demolishing what remained of the mixed-use apartment building at the northwest corner of Haste and Telegraph,which was the subject of a fire on November 18 of still undetermined origin that left the building uninhabitable, and also necessitated the evacuation of the apartment building directly west on Haste. 

The crew left the first floor and clerestory windows on the Telegraph frontage intact, as their permit required, but when they began knocking down the entire Haste frontage, in violation of the permit condition requiring them to leave the entire first-floor façade intact, ex-building tenants monitoring the demolition phoned the city. Several city employees arrived rapidly and halted the demolition, but too late to save all but the easternmost 10 feet of the southern façade. 

When Berkeley Fire Marshal Bill Finch asked why they were exceeding their permit, the foreman said they had done it because they were confused. The fire marshal later in the day ruled it an accidental demolition. The city then changed the permit to make it appear that the excess demolition was actually originally permitted. 

Thus when I arrived at 4 pm on Saturday and asked the foreman, (first name Alfredo) why he had exceeded his permit, he wasn't technically misleading me when he told me that they had obtained a permit modification and were in full compliance. Maintaining the Haste frontage would have been much more problematic for the owner, because, unlike the stone Telegraph façade, it was composed of un-reinforced brick and would have needed careful buttressing.  

Berkeley City Councilmember Kriss Worthington, who represents the area, told the Planet that every day the street and sidewalk are blocked, the small businesses on Telegraph continue to suffer dramatically. He speculated that if the demolition crew had approached the site from the right direction, pedestrians would have less to fear. He said that Amoeba record store owner Marc Weinstein had suggested a metal canopy which would have shielded the sidewalk, but neither the city nor the building owner agreed to pay for that solution, 

The city has a long history of illegal excessive demolitions. The only one to my memory that has resulted in any penalty was on the lot holding what is now Futura, further up Telegraph at the southwest corner of Durant, which the owner tore down one Saturday 20 years ago (the city generally has poor response on weekends) without any permit, rather than continue fighting with the city over its preservation value, judging that the inevitable fine would be a reasonable price to pay to get his project underway. 

It is often confused with Occupy Cal, especially on-line, has launched no major actions, and has not distinguished itself from thousands of similar-sized Occupies—but it has something that other Occupies, (including O.C.) might envy—it has survived. 

Occupy Cal is on vacation, and a New York Times on-line header calls Occupy Cal, Occupy Berkeley. O.B. is a good half mile from Cal. 

But, hey, O.B. made Glen Beck's radio show Dec. 2. The controversial conservative talk-show host and TV personality for Fox News was "irritated" when he heard an interview with a camper at O.B., who was discussing alleged sexual offenses within the camp. 

It is now no secret that the burgeoning encampment is troubled. So much of the general assembly's time is spent with inter-camp squabbles that it can do little else. 

Still, O.B. has managed to hold a folk concert (David Rovics, Nov. 19, reviewed on SFGate) and stage a knit-in the following week that was publicized on KQED F.M. 

O.B. made nice with the Berkeley Farmers' Market 20th Annual Holiday Crafts Fair (an Ecology Center benefit), Saturday, and will be cooperating with them on future weekends, as they share the park, according to the key-person coordinating for O.B.. 

O.B. still enjoys the all-but sponsorship of the city of Berkeley. Last week, according to Larry Silver, a long time Berkeley activist, fire officials asked tent-dwellers to move their tents away from over-hanging limbs during the weekend's fierce winds. According to Silver, a two month O.B. camp veteran—campers mostly co-operated, and the firemen left without incident. 

Through thick and thin (and there has been lots of thin) O.B. has showed its scruffy ability to survive. However, O.B. is always a few steps from self-destruction, according to O.B.'s own print newspaper, the Occupy Berkeley Herald, which notes, "Over the last few days there has been a large influx of Oakland Folks into the camp. There has also been an increase in alcohol use and fights." 

When I visited the camp Monday afternoon, I was surprised at the size of the encampment, which has grown from 25 to 50 tents and dominates the grounds of Civic Center Park, a goodly chunk of the park's 2.77 acres. 

I talked to two groups of eight in the park on a cold, but clear and sunny afternoon Monday. One group was self-proclaimed high-school dropouts which said, resentfully, it was their park before the tent city moved in. 

The other group was campers gathered in an outdoor kitchen composed of a stove and pots of cooked food. A cooked chicken-in-a-pot looked good, and the campers were willing enough to share, although they were not happy with the kitchen wars between O.B.'s kitchen and theirs. 

Later, I was told by several O.B.ers that their kitchen was "stolen" by the other camp. 

There are, according to Silver, no more than five overnight O.B. campers holding down the O.B. camp, vastly out-numbered by a huge tent-city. The two camps are split, and the new, beefed-up camp, while sympathetic with O.B. in principle, has its own agenda. 

At the general assembly, Monday evening, the history of the kitchen squabbles was aired in elaborate detail. The kitchen wasn't exactly "stolen," but rather, claimed, after O.B.ers, tired of being "bullied" by often-unruly adjoining campers—abandoned their kitchen. 

According to the bigger camp, when O.B. walked away from the kitchen, it was theirs for the taking, and they moved the O.B. kitchen into their camp. 

Later, a representative of the kitchen-rich camp spoke at GA, inviting O.B. to use its "stolen" kitchen under the auspices of the larger encampment. O.B. has been swallowed whole by the visiting encampment, but at least has a dinner invite. 

It is now no longer a matter of O.B. feeding the camp, as O.B. had hoped, but the camp feeding O.B.. 

Silvers says the kitchen, which he once helmed, was a "Dadaist work. Each day, we would build up the kitchen, but by the end of the day it would be destroyed [by the other camp]. The next day, we'd start all over again. They just wore us down, but it was really an art piece." 

Yet another fallout from the other camp is oppositional campers, who disrupt the GA, often, with invective and insults. Veteran facilitator, Miles Murray, a high school English teacher, who was in the process of defining, "persona non grata," was vilified by just such a non-grata person. 

Murray later explained that disruptions stem from a decision among facilitators to open the meetings to unrestricted discussion, a shift away from the goal oriented, proposal process, after some members of the GA had complained about restrictions. 

According to Murray, the ranks of facilitators are thinning, with many facilitators, suffering from what he called "burnout." 

Murray invited members of the GA to lead a GA. 

Drayco, who was allegedly "stabbed" in a tree in People's Park in January, when he confronted "Midnight" Matt Dodt in his tree during an ill-fated tree sit, blared threats from the edge of the GA. "I'm gonna rebar [a steel bar] the other camp tonight and take back your kitchen," he roared. 

Drayco, a full time avenger and self-styled fixer, apparently was fixing People's Park in January when he confronted the tree-sitter, whom Drayco reportedly believed was responsible for an increase in citations in People's Park. 

But, unappreciated, he has been repeatedly asked to leave GAs and to leave the camp as well, and he was reportedly denounced recently on IndyBay website, an activist bulletin board and radical news source. 

Drayco ended the People's Park protest, trying to reduce police presence. He could end this one by bringing police to the camp to stem mayhem. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

Southside reporter, Ted Friedman, made a point of using his kitchen Monday night, and he made sure he was alone. As his story shows, too many chefs spoil the kitchen.

The Occupy Wall Street encampment in downtown Berkeley is creating more issues now that it is growing in size but there still aren't any serious problems there, Berkeley City Councilman Jesse Arreguin said today.

The encampment in Civic Center Park, which began in early October, along with similar encampments around the country, initially had only 30 to 40 tents but now has reached about 100 tents. 

Arreguin, whose district includes the encampment and who can see it from his office in City Hall, said it has grown since authorities closed down the Occupy Oakland encampment last month and may grow some more if authorities in San Francisco disband the encampment in their city. 

Arreguin said there are concerns about sanitation and crime and city officials "will have to have a conversation" about what to do if the encampment continues to grow. 

However, he said "there's no sense of urgency for us to go in there and kick people out." 

Arreguin said if the encampment becomes too big for the park he would prefer to ask people to leave voluntarily rather than have police use force to get people to go. 

Referring to what he said was an excessive use of force by police officers at the Occupy Oakland encampment, Arreguin said, "We don't want an Oakland-type response" and said he was "outraged" by tactics used by police in Oakland and at the Occupy Cal encampment at the University of California at Berkeley. 

Arreguin said he supports the goals of the Occupy Wall Street protesters but wonders about the effectiveness of camping in a park as a political statement and if another strategy would be better, although he's not sure what that would be. 

Perhaps there should be "a focus on other ways of trying to advocate these important issues," which include corporate greed and the redistribution of wealth, he said. 

Principal Pasquale Scuderi of Berkeley High School, which is across the street from the encampment, is also concerned about its growing size. In a recent letter to parents, Scuderi said the situation at the encampment "has complicated our supervision of students in the park during the lunch hour and after school." 

He said, "Keeping an eye on our students is a bit more challenging in the park at present with administrators and safety staff having to visually identify students amongst increased numbers of adults, young adults, college students, teenaged non-students and almost 90 tents." 

Scuderi said, "As always, we will have two administrators monitoring the park during the lunch hour and we continue to offer plenty of supervised space on the campus for students to eat lunch." 

Scuderi told parents that the school hasn't had any negative interactions with campers so far and he doesn't want to cause "unnecessary anxiety" but he wants to inform them about "some logistical and supervisory concerns." 

Berkeley police spokeswoman Sgt. Mary Kusmiss said there has been "a slight increase" in reported crimes in the park in the past week. Police believe that some crimes aren't reported by Occupy Berkeley campers and victims of several recent batteries have refused to cooperate with authorities, she said. 

Kusmiss said one person at the park who was a suspect in a battery incident was detained on Sunday after a brief foot chase and is being held for allegedly violating his probation and resisting arrest. 

City of Berkeley spokeswoman Mary Kay Clunies-Ross said the city has accommodated the Occupy Berkeley protesters by adding some garbage cans to help with the increased waste at the park and by cleaning the portable toilets, which already were there, more often. 

Arreguin said, "We're monitoring and managing the situation as best as we can." 

Whither local government? In view of recent more-than-dire predictions about the burden of unfunded liabilities faced by cities like Berkeley, it’s a hard question to address, let alone answer. 

I dutifully attempted to watch the Berkeley City Council meeting on Tuesday. Not only that, I emailed a respectable list of people who sometimes go, sometimes watch online or on cable, and asked them to tell me if, in their opinion, anything happened that the Planet should bring to the attention of the public. 

There wasn’t much response… the only person who provided more than one item of interest was the reliable Jacquelyn McCormick, founder and mainstay of berkeleycouncilwatch.com, a valiant attempt to communicate to Berkeley citizens on a regular basis what the city council is up to. She goes to the council meetings almost every week—and sometimes she and the ever-faithful Merrilie Mitchell are the only representatives of the public in attendance. Sometimes she speaks in public comment time 

Jacquelyn mentioned four topics which sparked a bit of discussion: the dire state of Berkeley’s financial future, specifically regarding pension liabilities, which was the subject of a detailed workshop presentation by the city’s actuary, the conclusion of the city’s contract negotiations with Waste Management regarding disposal of construction and demolition materials, a city-sponsored grant proposal for studying a possible Center Street/Strawberry Creek public space development and a move to postpone action on redrawing council districts so that some students could have a better shot at getting control of a district near the UC Berkeley Campus. 

So I watched all four of these once again, looking for excerptable gems to give Planet readers a feel for the action—but really…not much there. The only bit which seemed worth highlighting for posterity was one student’s earnest plea that the council postpone the public hearing on redistricting, now scheduled for January 17, because it would be the first day of the new school term on the U.C. Berkeley campus and it might be hard for students to show up while they were busy getting settled. 

Come on, guys! That sounds entirely too much like “the dog ate my homework”. If students are sincere in their desire to be full-fledged participants in the city’s public process, they’re going to have do what everyone else does, and fit their public service in with their regular day job. 

Except, of course, that regular people with full time day jobs are rarer and rarer in city circles, now dominated mostly by retirees. A curious apathy seems to have settled over the body politic, where once vigorous and acrimonious dispute were the order of the day. Berkeley’s so-called (dread epithet) progressives, except for councilmembers Worthington and Arreguin, have morphed into complacent burghers. 

Several of the weary citizens who once devoted the better part of entire forty hour workweeks, on top of their real world responsibilities, to Plans both General and Downtown have been replaced on the Planning Commission by shills for the construction industry. Even those commissioners are losing interest, because there’s not much money for building around, even if they are able to shape plans and zoning to their clients’ specifications. 

Realistically, there’s not going to be much money around to do anything for a long time. The council finally did approve applying for a planning grant for the much discussed downtown improvements, but three councilmembers who don’t always agree on everything (Maio, Wengraf, Anderson) voiced doubts that the project would ever materialize because of the parlous state of city finances. One of my correspondents, a reliable progressive on most topics, shared their apprehension. 

Increasingly, no one in Berkeley seems to know what’s going on in their home town, and worse, it doesn’t seem to worry them. At holiday gatherings, I’ve been encountering numerous well-meaning people who are eager to tell me that they really miss the print Planet, but can’t seem to get around to reading it—or any other publication—online. 

Well, I ask them, maybe you could read Berkeleyside…or Berkeley Patch..or the occasional Berkeley stories from the Media News chain online? Nope—in fact most haven’t even heard of any of those. 

And print? Many proudly say they’ve long since cancelled their print Chronicle subscriptions, and they certainly don’t read the East Bay Express. 

These are intelligent educated people who do read the New York Times, who are very worried about the national and international economic crash, who care about Israel/Palestine, about climate change and a host of other Big Picture issues. Some can even be found weighing in on national blogs and op-ed pages on these topics. But they are oblivious to local manifestations of the same problems. They have no idea what’s going on in Berkeley, and frankly they don’t care. 

People living in the Berkeley hills who write whole books, internationally distributed, on locally sourced food don’t seem to notice or care that much of flatland Berkeley is being covered with big buildings which cast long shadows over most of the sunny potential garden space. People who worry in national media about climate change and corporate personhood seem blissfully unaware that the UC/BP alliance threatens to swallow West Berkeley. Pious environmentalists who never fail to renew their Sierra Club memberships don’t know that their state representatives have recently voted for bills which gut CEQA. 

The old saying is that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. (Or you might prefer the risqué version we giggled at in high school: You can lead a whore to culture but you can’t make her think.) 

We do wonder if anyone’s listening, or thinking. We have close to 1000 subscribers who get emails weekly with hot links to important stories, and we get new ones all the time. We have maybe 25,000 page views a week. 

Who are these people, and why do they visit the Berkeley Daily Planet site? Many seem to be former residents who now live elsewhere, but wonder what’s going on in Berkeley. Some are fans of our capable national and international commentators. Who are the local readers, and why? 

Supported by a small coterie of generous unpaid volunteer writers, the two of us here have been struggling for a couple of years to keep the Berkeley public at least semi-informed about what’s happening in our city. It’s a fair amount of work, a kind of stone soup: We supply the stone, and our writers bring the rest of the ingredients. 

It’s miraculous that anyone would do as much as they’ve done for so long with no pay. Some, understandably, have gotten tired of working for free (or just gotten tired) and dropped out, but others have stuck it out. 

We continually wonder if local citizens have simply given up caring—if they believe it’s increasingly unlikely that anything we citizens do can make a difference in what happens to Berkeley. 

Case in point: a new planning director will soon be chosen for Berkeley—applications close December 16. It should be an important hire. Will we get a fresh well-qualified person with new ideas? More likely, we’ll have yet another re-tread, a promotion from within, the kind of placeholder appointments we’ve gotten with recent city managers and city attorneys, and nothing will change for the better. Worst case, we might even get a revolving door appointment who’s spent some time in the development industry. 

But very likely whatever happens will not be noticed by the average Berkeleyan, whether or not the Planet or anyone else reports it. When a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound if no one’s there to hear it? 

As always, it would be interesting to hear what our readers, whoever they are, have to say about the public’s desire to know what’s going on in Berkeley. Your signed opinions are solicited, long or short: Send them to opinion@berkeleydailyplanet.com . 

And of course if you’re well informed and a good writer who would like to volunteer to add your ingredients to the soup, please let me know: news@berkeleydailyplanet.com. We could use your help. 

. 

\ 

Richard Brenneman's blog this week spotlights a remarkable report: that the UC Police Department trained with the Alameda County Sheriff's Department on campus to shut down Occupy camps, and "even more astounding: The exercise was part of a national training exercise that included elements of Israeli border police." 

And he has another startling story about the strange ex-general Steven Chu, now Energy Secretary, brought to Berkeley a couple of years ago, along with some Wikileaks cables he found about the general.

Dan O'Neill

Editor's Note: The latest issue of the Pepper Spray Times is now available. 

You can view it absolutely free of charge by clicking here . You can print it out to give to your friends. 

Grace Underpressure has been producing it for many years now, even before the Berkeley Daily Planet started distributing it, most of the time without being paid, and now we'd like you to show your appreciation by using the button below to send her money.  

This is a Very Good Deal. Go for it! 

Are you fed up with Millionaires not paying their fair share of federal taxes and not paying their fair share of state taxes? If so, would you be interested in knowing the City of Berkeley has an item on their agenda to provide city tax breaks for local well heeled people? 

My name is Paul Schwartz. I am a resident and taxpayer in the City of Berkeley. I am also an attorney with my practice in the City of Berkeley. I was appointed in March of this year to the Landmark Preservation Commission. I was quite surprised to discover there is a mechanism that gives very large property tax breaks to owners of landmarked properties for maintenance and upkeep. Most if not all of these property owners do not need these tax breaks to maintain their properties. I find this particularly galling when the City is suffering from a significant deficit and is in need of all the revenue it receives from property taxes. 

I am one of 9 commissioners on the Landmark Preservation Commission in Berkeley, California. I was appointed to the commission by my councilperson Susan Wengraf. I want to be clear I am not speaking for the Landmark Preservation Commission nor for my councilperson. This is solely my opinion. 

At the September and October meeting of our commission (we meet monthly), we were presented with four Mills Act applications. According to our chair we do not vote to approve or disapprove Mills Act applications, we merely vote whether the properties are eligible for consideration by the City Council and to forward the applications to the City Council. Mills Act contracts give tax breaks to property owners who own landmarked buildings.  

To date there are 300 landmarked properties in the City of Berkeley and 23 of these properties have been Mills acted. I calculate the revenue loss to the city from already enacted Mills Act contracts to be approximately $6,000 per year per property for a total yearly revenue loss of $138,000 

There are currently four applications pending before the City of Berkeley,(see item 17 on the consent calendar of the agenda for the Dec. 6, 2011 meeting) which would result in significant additional tax loss to the City of Berkeley, the School District, the special districts and the County of Alameda, of close to an additional $120,000 per year. The following is the link to the Dec. 6, 2011 City of Berkeley council meeting. http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=63006 . 

The analysis of the planning department recommending approval of these Mills Act contracts (see the above link) is flawed in at least two ways. One, it states our commission unanimously approved these applications. This is not accurate. We voted to forward them to the City Council. We were told we are required to vote to forward them to the city council and it is up to the city council to approve or disapprove the applications. Two, the amount of tax loss is grossly understated. It fails to properly calculate the amount of tax reduction for each property and it fails to include the tax loss to the school district, the special districts and the county. All these entities suffer from property tax reductions. 

The Mills act is a California statute passed by the legislature in the 1970s. It gives cities discretion whether or not to grant property tax breaks to owners of landmarked properties. The idea behind the act was to help property owners maintain their historic or "landmarked" properties by giving them property tax breaks. The property owners are required to use their tax savings for the upkeep of their properties. The tax breaks per property are significant, amounting to between a 70% to 80% reduction in the property tax bill. 

Who loses revenue when a city approves a Mills Act contract? Property tax bill revenue is disbursed as follow: 33% of your property taxes go to the City of Berkeley. 43% of your property taxes go to the School Dstrict. The remaining 24% is divided between "special districts" (e.g. mosquito abatement) and the County of Alameda (for their countywide services). 

The four properties on the City Council agenda are as follows: 

The First of the applications is for a property on Roble Road. The property was purchased for $2.3 million dollars, and is currently undergoing remodeling and improvements totaling close to $2 million dollars. With its purchase price, remodeling cost (which will be added to the assessment) and its square footage, Mills Acting this property will represent a significant tax loss to the residents of Berkeley and Alameda County. 

A very interesting property, it was recently landmarked. I was pleased the property was recently purchased and is being improved, as I believed it would bring in close to $80,000 a year in property taxes, an amount the city of Berkeley sorely needs for its budget. If the property is successfully Mills acted (a new verb), it would bring in significantly less, I estimate between $15,000 to $20,000 per year, a loss of $60,000-$65,000 per year. I know there is no means test for a property to be eligible for a Mills Act property tax reduction, but I think there should be a means test. I am strongly opposed to any, let alone, significant tax breaks for wealthy individuals, especially when most cities are having trouble raising revenue and facing deficits. Owners of upscale homes are able to maintain them without significant tax reduction incentives.  

The second property is located on Benvenue Avenue. This is a beautiful large home. I estimate it to be worth between $2-4mil. Sorry, I can't be more accurate. I am not a realtor. It has been owned for a long period of time and consequently due to prop 13 has taxes well below its current value. Mills acting this property will likely result in a tax loss of between $6-8,000 per year. The tax loss to the City would not be as significant with this home because it is assessed under proposition 13 and already pays relatively low taxes in relation to its value. There are two problems with Mills acting this property. One is the yearly revenue loss, and two is the Mills Act runs with the property, meaning it will continue on to the next owner. If and when it has a new owner, the city will not be the beneficiary of significant property tax increase revenue. A Mills Act contract is for 10 years and automatically renews each year. It stays with the property and can go on in perpetuity.  

The third property was recently purchased. It is on Arch Street and according to the County records was purchased for $2,150,000. Its property tax bill should be a welcome addition to city, school district and county needs, unless it is given a Mills Act contract by the City of Berkeley. I believe the total property tax loss could be close to $40,000 per year on this property alone. 

The fourth property, on San Antonio Road was the carriage house for the Spring Mansion. I don't know what it recently sold for, I estimate approximately $700,000. It is currently assessed as a school and according to the county tax records has not yet been reassessed. If it is Mills acted by the City of Berkeley, it will represent yet another drain on our revenue. 

Since the Mills Act is a 10 year contract, which renews each year in an ongoing manner, the tax losses to the City are significant. The above four properties could represent a loss to the City of Berkeley of approximately $1,000,000 (without interest) over a ten year period. 

I have been informed that the City of Los Angeles has worried about the loss of revenue and has capped the # of properties it is willing to Mills Act. I have also been told the City of Beverly Hills was thinking of limiting their Mills Act properties to those worth more than $10,000,000. It makes you want to laugh. 

I am in favor of the Mills Act, but I think it should not be used by any city unless that city is running a significant surplus. Why the taxpayers of a city should subsidize anybody, let alone wealthy residents of the city for repairs and maintenance to their properties is beyond me.  

If a city enters into a Mills Act contract with a property owner, I strongly believe the city should have a clause in the Mills Act contract that either party may withdraw from the contract upon one years notice terminating the contract and any tax breaks at that time. That way a city would not be locked into a 10 year decrease in property tax revenues. 

If a city wants a property maintained and the property owners cannot afford to maintain the property, I believe the city should receive a lien on the property in the amount of any tax savings received by the property owner. That way, when the owner dies or transfers the property, the city would receive its delayed property taxes. This would allow individuals who have insufficient income to maintain landmarked property the opportunity to maintain the property by in essence receiving a city loan, not a city tax break. . 

The city should have a Mills Act unit within its planning department, a unit that in conjunction with their city attorney has the ability to monitor Mills Act compliance and the ability to enforce compliance. I don't believe the city of Berkeley has such a unit in place and it clearly presents a problem. 

Do the property owners comply and use their property tax savings for the upkeep of their homes? We do not know. We have no enforcement mechanism in force through either the Panning Department and or the City Attorney's office to follow through and monitor these properties. We basically rely on these property owners to honor their commitments under their Mills Act contracts. Compliance needs to be effectively monitored. 

Drafting of the Mills Act contract with the property owner must be carefully done in a detailed and careful manner clearly outlining all obligations of the parties, penalties and enforcement mechanisms. A well drafted contract will protect both parties and more likely prevent litigation in the future which would be an additional expense to the city. I believe under the Mills Act, cities can draft the contracts to fit their needs.  

To sum up, I believe the City of Berkeley should put in place a moratorium. It should not Mills Act any more properties until the City budget is no longer in deficit territory. It should invite these Mills Act applicants to reapply when our City budget is running a healthy surplus. We can ill afford to give upscale property owners property tax breaks. 

The City of Berkeley has a strong Landmark Preservation Ordinance. That alone should provide the necessary protection to maintain historic properties. Owners of historic properties should maintain them at their own expense as a public service and not receive subsidies from their fellow taxpayers.

This evening, the Berkeley City Council will be considering a framework for revisions to the ordinances governing the demolition and elimination of housing units. I believe that the language in the framework is a huge improvement over previous language that has been shared with me, as it includes provisions for tenant protections.

However, there are two gaping problems with it:

1) Although tenants of the demolished building have the right of first refusal to return to new construction that replaces it, there are almost no provisions that these new units will be at anything other than market rate. Thus, a situation similar to Park Merced in San Francisco could arise, in which low-income tenants are would be unable to move back into the new units. 

2) There is a provision that demolition would not be allowed if there have been verified cases of tenant harassment or illegal evictions in the prior 12 months. This appears to be too short of a timeline, and the Berkeley Condominium Conversion Ordinance has one that is considerably longer. 

You can take action in two ways: 

1) Submit an email encouraging the Mayor and City Council to strengthen tenant protections in the Demolition Ordinance by 4pm today: 

2) Attend tonight's City Council in person at 2134 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. This is Item 40 on the agenda, and is expected to be heard after 8:30pm. 

The death penalty should be abolished in the United States because life without parole is more humane, less discriminatory, and a less costly alternative – and it avoids the risk of executing an innocent person. 

Thirty-four states impose the death penalty, including California and there are 41 Federal capital crimes for which the death penalty can be applied. Each state has its own list of capital crimes. For example, in 1977 California reinstated the death penalty for first degree murder under special circumstances, including murder for financial gain, murder by a person previously convicted of murder, murder of multiple victims, murder with torture, murder of a peace officer, and murder of a witness to prevent testimony. 

From 1976 through November 18, 2011, there have been 1,277 state executions in the United States with Texas leading with 477 and California with 13. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1988, 58 federal defendants have been executed. As of January 1, 2011, 3,251 prisoners are on death row awaiting execution. 

The death penalty is widely used because, supposedly, it acts as a deterrent. As this argument goes, people will think twice about committing a capital crime which may result in the death penalty. Yet, the murder rate in the sixteen non-death penalty states is consistently lower than death penalty states, and the gap has widened since 1990. During the 17th century, when the public hanging of pickpockets drew crowds to English cities, pockets in the crowd were being picked as the trap door was being sprung. So much for the death penalty being a deterrent! 

Imposing the death penalty is much more expensive than imposing a sentence of life without parole. Why? Because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for death penalty cases. This process is needed to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit. Even with these protections, the risk of executing an innocent person cannot be completely eliminated. 

According to a number of surveys, it is less expensive to imprison killers for life than to execute them. For example, California has spent $4 billion since 1978 to execute 13 people, or about $308 million for each death penalty case. And a study by Judge Arthur L. Alarcón and Paula M. Mitchell

Race also plays a significant role in the disproportionate application of the death penalty and for this reason it is considered discriminatory. For example, since 1976, while African Americans comprise just 12.1 percent of the US population, 35 percent of all death penalty sentences were handed down to African Americans . By comparison, 56 percent of death penalty defendants since 1976 were White, 7 percent Latino.