UC students paraded around campus for hours last night after the presidential election was called for Barack Obama. 

It was a historic night of celebration in Oakland, the like of which we have never seen in our lifetimes. 

On Broadway in downtown Oakland, cars began honking horns as soon as the news of the Obama victory was announced, cheered on by whooping pedestrians on the curb. By 9:30 p.m., huge crowds of Oakland’s typically diverse racial mix had gathered in front of the Marriott Obama campaign headquarters, spilling out into the street, stopping traffic. 

Inside the Marriott, Congressmember Barbara Lee finished a speech to the crowd just before Obama began his on the big screen televisions, and then walked through the lobby with a group of friends, grinning and stopping to do a little three-step dance in the hall before walking on. 

One African-American man stood on the corner of 14th and Broadway chanting “History. History.” Over and over, to no-one in particular, but to anyone who would listen. 

Across the street, an Asian-American man did giddy maneuvers on a skateboard. 

Three young white women danced in a druid circle near the 5th Street underpass singing “Ain’t no vict’ry like an election vic’try ‘cause an election vict’try don’t stop!” 

Peralta Community College District Trustee Linda Handy—not on the ballot this year—was seen walking up 14th Street with a companion near 8:30, waving a little wearily and saying she had just come from a full day’s work at the polls and was glad the long day was over. Told that the presidential race had been called and Obama had won she gave a little shriek, all weariness gone, and turned and ran upstairs to one of the many downtown celebrations. 

Walking down Broadway was like being out on the night of a hometown World Series back in the old days, when people followed such things. You could hear the entirety of President-elect Barack Obama’s speech, without missing a word, from the radios of passing cars of those coming out of the bars and restaurants along the way. People passed each other with grins and nods and fist-bumps as if they’d known each other for years, or shared some special secret. 

Oakland police went into sideshow mode, blocking off Broadway south at 5th Street, but otherwise letting the crowds and cars be. Overhead, a police helicopter hovered. 

At Everett & Jones Barbecue in the Jack London Square Area, 2nd Street was blocked off, a live band was playing on the stage, people had kicked away the chairs and were dancing in the street, and barbecue was being served free. Somewhere inside E&J, television monitors on several walls were continuing to broadcast reports and people were talking politics, but the restaurant was so crowded, you could not even get near either door. 

At the Marriott, a campaign worker for a local candidate tried to give a reporter a campaign button to wear. Reminded that the polls had already closed a half hour before and another button in the crowd probably wouldn’t do any good for his candidate, who was handily ahead in early returns, the worker looked a little sheepish, took back the button, and said, “I guess I’m still in the habit.” 

Earlier in the evening, at a packed celebration inside at Geoffrey’s Inner Circle, a center of Oakland’s African-American political life, Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums told the crowd a story of talking a few days before with U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson—an old Black radical compatriot from the ‘60s—and hearing Henderson tell him, “We never could have conceived this moment back in the ‘60s. We’ve lived to see this moment.”  

Dellums then told the story of asking his mother, one time, what her greatest dream was, and her telling him that it was to live in a country someday “where the highest public official looked like me.” 

“My mother passed away a few weeks ago,” the mayor said, “but you and I, we’ve lived to see that come about. This is a victory for all of humanity. Take joy in this moment.”  

The rest of Dellums remarks were drowned out in the roar of the crowd as the projected television monitor beside him announced that Barack Obama had been declared the winner of the 2008 presidential election. In a moment, people were dancing to old ‘60s and ‘70s civil rights-era standards, “Moving On Up” and “Ain’t No Stopping Us Now.” 

Outside, the celebration was spilling into the streets.  

It was a historic night of celebration in Oakland, the like of which we have never seen in our lifetimes. 

Bates Reelected; Arreguin Beats Doran in District 4 

Contest—# of Votes—percent of total 

Berkeley Mayor 

Total Precincts: 103 Precincts Reported: 103 Percent Reported: 100 

• Tom Bates 25,432 61.56 percent  

• Shirley Dean 14,656 35.47 percent 

• Write-in 1,226 2.97 percent  

City Council, District 2 

Total Precincts: 11 Precincts Reported: 11 Percent Reported: 100 

• Darryl Moore 3,227 81.84 percent  

• Jon Crowder 669 16.97 percent  

• Write-in 47 1.19 percent  

City Council, District 3 

Total Precincts: 11 Precincts Reported: 11 Percent Reported: 100 

• Max Anderson 3,377 96.16 percent  

• Write-in 135 3.84 percent 

City Council, District 4 

Total Precincts: 14 Precincts Reported: 14 Percent Reported: 100 

• Jesse Arreguin 2,250 49.47 percent  

• Terry Doran 1,642 36.10 percent 

• Asa Dodsworth 277 6.09 percent  

• L A Wood 267 5.87 percent  

• N’Dji “Jay” Jockin 85 1.87 percent  

• Write-in 27 0.59 percent  

City Council , District 5 

Total Precincts: 13 Precincts Reported: 13 Percent Reported: 100 

• Laurie Capitelli 3,199 52.88 percent  

• Sophie Hahn 2,841 46.96 percent  

• Write-in 10 0.17 percent  

City Council , District 6  

Total Precincts: 15 Precincts Reported: 15 Percent Reported: 100.00 

• Susan Wengraf 3,955 76.56 percent  

• Phoebe Anne Sorgen 1,186 22.96 percent  

• Write-in 25 0.48 percent  

Rent Stabilization Board Commissioners 

Top five vote getters win seats 

Total Precincts: 103 Precincts Reported: 103 Percent Reported: 100.00 

• Nicole Drake 18,077 18.16 percent  

• Igor Tregub 17,968 18.05 percent  

• Judy E. Shelton 17,480 17.56 percent  

• Jack Harrison 15,670 15.74 percent  

• Jesse Townley 13,264 13.33 percent  

• Clydis Ruth Rogers 10,874 10.92 percent  

• Taylor Kelly 5,642 5.67 percent  

• Write-in 563 0.57 percent  

Berkeley School Directors (Top two win seats) 

• Beatriz Leyva-cutler 19,366 37.15 percent  

• John T. Selawsky 16,069 30.82 percent  

• Priscilla Myrick 9,882 18.96 percent  

• Toya L. Groves 6,619 12.70 percent  

• Write-in 194 0.37 percent  

Berkeley Measures  

Total Precincts: 103 Precincts Reported: 103 Percent Reported: 100.00 

Measure FF 

Needed 2/3 majority Yes votes to pass 

• Bonds Yes 27,815 67.71 percent  

• Bonds No 13,263 32.29 percent  

Measure GG 

Needed 2/3 majority Yes votes to pass 

• Yes 29,805 71.69 percent  

• No 11,769 28.31 percent  

Measure HH 

• Yes 30,158 76.93 percent  

• No 9,043 23.07 percent 

Measure II 

• Yes 28,742 77.90 percent  

• No 8,155 22.10 percent 

Measure JJ  

• Yes 25,211 62.30 percent  

• No 15,257 37.70 percent 

Measure KK 

• No 29,991 76.52 percent  

• Yes 9,201 23.4 percent 

Measure LL  

• No 20,940 56.66 percent  

• Yes 16,015 43.34 percent 

Alameda County Races 

East Bay Regional Park District Director, Ward 1 (Alameda results)  

Total Precincts: 135 

• Norman La Force 21,699 50.32 percent  

• Whitney Dotson 21,052 48.82 percent  

• Write-in 372 0.86 percent 

East Bay Regional Park Director, Ward 1 (CoCo County results) 

Total precincts: 132 

• Norman La Force 15,271 35.80 percent 

• Whitney Dotson 27,101 63.53 percent 

• Write-in 287 0.67 percent 

Measure WW—East Bay Regional Park District 

Needs 2/3 majority Yes votes to pass 

Total Precincts: 972 Precincts Reported: 972 Percent Reported: 100 

• Bonds Yes 268,688 71.70 percent 

• Bonds No 106,073 28.30 percent 

El Cerrito City Council (Top three win seats)  

18 of 18 Precincts Reporting 

• Bill Jones (I) 4,553 24.23 percent 

• Greg Lyman 4,364 23.22 percent 

• Ann Cheng 4,852 25.82 percent 

• David Boisvert 2,477 13.18percent 

• Andrew W. Ting 2,514 13.38 percent 

• Write-in 33 0.18percent 

Richmond City Council (Top three win seats)  

59 of 59 Precincts Reporting 

• Jeff Ritterman 9,987 16.18 percent 

• Nathaniel ‘Nat’ Bates 9,556 15.48 percent 

• Tom Butt (I) 9,428 15.28 percent 

• Jovanka D. Beckles 9,002 14.59 percent 

• John E. Marquez (I) 7,929 12.85 percent 

• Courtland ‘Corky’ Booze 6,138 9.95 percent 

• Harpreet S. Sandhu (I) 4,665 7.56 percent 

• Rock Brown 2,156 3.49 percent 

• Chris Tallerico 1,491 2.42 percent 

• Navdeep K. Garcha 1,243 2.01 percent 

• Write-in 124 0.20 percent 

Turnout was heavy in South Berkeley Tuesday, with voters lined up outside the Black Repertory Theater on Adeline Street even before polls opened. 

And just down the block, at the corner of Adeline and Harmon street , another line was waiting to start making calls across the country from the Northern California headquarters of the Barack Obama campaign. 

“We’ve had a great big turnout,” said Lani Borgwardt, who was serving as inspector at one of the precincts voting in the Black Rep. “Everything’s been busier than in the past elections, and I see a lot of enthusiasm. People are excited,” she said. 

“I’ve been here since six o’clock,” said Darnell Johnson, a volunteer at the Obama headquarters. “It really got busy about 6:05,” he said. 

Ruby Reid, a site coordinator at the headquarters, said “We’ve had hundreds of volunteers at the site every day. Today we’re doing get out the vote calls.” 

Democratic Party volunteers have been making arrangements to bring voters to the polls. 

“You should have been here Saturday,” Borgwardt said. “The whole street was lined with people making calls on their cell phones.” 

For Sean Vaughn Scott, the Black Reps development director, Tuesday’s election holds a special resonance. 

High on a wall above the where precinct volunteers sat checking off voters and handing out ballots, is a black and white photo from 1972. 

The image features a 6-year-old Scott and his parents standing with Shirley Chisholm, who sought the Democratic nomination that year. George McGovern, the eventual victor, was handily defeated by incumbent Republican Richard Nixon. 

Grandson of the theater’s founders and son of the woman who founded the Black Studies at the University of San Francisco, Scott said this year’s election has a special meaning for him. 

While the Black Rep has hosted elections almost since its founding 44 years ago, “this year the turnout has been exponentially larger,” he said. “The beauty of it is that it’s really galvanized the community.”

Some community members are outraged that the City of Berkeley-run Addison Street Windows Gallery decided not to display posters from a national series of exhibitions called the Art of Democracy on the basis of curatorial judgment, and instead replaced them with pottery during election week. While supporters of free speech called the decision “censorship,” Carol Brighton -- the curator of the gallery -- and the city’s Civic Arts Coordinator Mary Ann Merker denied the allegations, explaining that it was not uncommon for public agencies to refrain from showing work which depicted violence or nudity. 

The posters were scheduled to go on display from Oct. 20 through election day, until Nov. 29, but never went up, Merker said, because the organizers decided to include work they had initially agreed not to. 

Organized by artists Art Hazelwood and Stephen Fredericks, the Art of Democracy is a national coalition of political art shows taking place this fall, leading up to the U.S. Presidential elections. 

It includes more than fifty shows all over the country, with fourteen exhibitions in Northern California, from Davis through the Bay Area and down to Santa Cruz and Monterey. 

“Berkeley has a censorship issue!” Hazelwood wrote in his email to various members of the Bay Area art community Sunday, explaining that four posters from the Art of Democracy series had been “censored” in Berkeley at the Addison Street Windows Gallery. 

“The curator invented guidelines which she attributed to the Berkeley City Arts Commission. No other venue among the fifty Art of Democracy exhibitions around the country have censored the show. Only in Berkeley, which ironically just erected a monument to free speech, has this show been censored.”  

Merker dismissed any role of censorship in Brighton’s decision-making process, saying that Brighton was under contract with the City of Berkeley to select artwork for the Addison Street Windows Gallery. 

“We pay her for her curatorial judgment,” she said. “I believe the curator [Brighton] made it very clear to Mr. Hazelwood that in her judgment she was not going to show any violence in the windows because of the site being on an open street across from children’s classrooms.” 

The windows of the Addison Street gallery face the Berkeley Repertory Theater and the Berkeley Jazzschool. 

“The windows are in the middle of an open downtown art district,” Merker said. “It’s not like having the artwork in a closed room where you can choose to go. I am willing to bet that the earlier locations displaying the posters are not on an open store across from a children’s school.” 

Merker said that Hazelwood agreed to Brighton’s guidelines last January, but when the time came to display the art he brought different work, including the four posters depicting guns, violence and weaponry which he had agreed not to show. 

In a telephone interview to the Planet Tuesday Hazelwood said that Merker’s claim was false. 

“The show did not exist when Carol Brighton agreed to host the show,” he said. “She knew that the posters were being made. I did not give any guidelines of censorship to the artists. The Art of Democracy asked artists to make political art and that art would be displayed in 50 venues around the country. The work was being made up to the last minute.” 

Hazelwood said Brighton had informed him that there were guidelines about no violence but that when he brought the finished work to the curator he had assumed she would look at the artwork and judge it on its merits instead of “some arbitrary rules that she created on her own.” 

“Just because the posters have guns doesn’t mean they are violent,” he said. “Following her decision to censor the show I asked the 40 artists involved what they wanted to do. It doesn’t matter what I wanted or didn't want. I was not going to censor for the curator. The artists agreed that they would only show as a group.”  

In a voicemail message to the Planet Monday afternoon, Brighton—who is herself a Berkeley-based artist -- defended her decision, calling it an “issue of curatorial judgment.” 

“Very much the same as all museum curators and gallery curators exercising curatorial judgment and it’s particularly sensitive to this site,” she said. 

“The use of censorship is simply mistaken. Every curator judges stuff out of a show.” 

Dave Blake, a member of the city’s Civic Art Commission, said that Merker had told the commission on several occasions that the commission had a rule barring the depiction of guns in works of art. 

“The curator’s position is it’s not censorship to tell people in advance that certain things are not allowed,” Blake said. “My position is that it is pre-censorship. It’s the job of a curator to assess the value of a piece of art and then decide if it’s offensive. To have a categorical rule is censorship.” 

Artists whose work Brighton objected to included Tony Bergquist, Anita Dillman, Doug Minkler and Jos Sances, all of whose posters had guns on them. 

Sances’ poster depicts the threat of violence and shows a Native American, a South East Asian, an African American slave and a Central American as victims of state terrorism, with guns pointed at their heads. 

“The poster is more than a gun being pointed at them,” Sances, who has served on Berkeley's Civic Arts Commission for six years, said. 

“It shows how things are being taken from them by an imperialistic oppressive state. I was very surprised by the city’s decision. My poster went up in 50 different places all over the country, including the Mission Cultural Center in San Francisco, which used it in their mailers and never had any problems. It’s peculiar that they would be censoring the poster in Berkeley, home of the free speech movement.”  

The poster by Dillman has a picture of the 2008 presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain with the words “Vote Issues Not Image” and has pictures of an impoverished mother and her child, a rifle presumably standing for violence and wind power among others. 

“She [Brighton] is basically banning guns,” Sances said. “I think the city wants to control what kind of images are up on the window. I think it should reflect the people of the city and honestly, most people in Berkeley would not be offended by these images. The city is afraid of censorship and wants everything to be nice and sweet. Unfortunately art doesn’t work that way. Art is often dirty and tough. Now I have a better understanding of why in the last few years the artwork on the Addison Street gallery has been so boring.” 

The city’s original press release for the exhibition draws attention to the fact that the posters include a wide range of commentary on the American political scene, with some posters encouraging voting and others discounting its value. 

It includes examples of a poster by Fredericks proclaiming, “Vote, like your life depends on it … because it does,” and another by Nicholas Lampert of Milwaukee which depicts a portrait of Emma Goldman with a quote from her: “If voting changed anything they’d make it illegal,” and notes that other images address issues such as immigration raids, police surveillance and lost liberty. 

The literature also acknowledges that historically artists' posters have played an important role in political and social movements. 

Following Brighton’s decision not to showcase the four posters, the exhibit’s organizers scheduled an alternate viewing for the entire series at the Pueblo Nuevo Art Center, 1828 San Pablo Ave., from Nov. 8 to Nov. 20. 

“I think people need to be open minded about what public art is,” said Ione Eliof, a member of the city’s Civic Arts Commission. 

“People have to be in conversation about political art and what it means. It’s difficult because people have different ideas about freedom of speech and these posters are tough. It’s particularly interesting because this is happening in Berkeley, a city which is founded on free speech.” 

The city’s original press release can be found here . Information on the City of Berkeley’s Guide to a Public Art Process can be found here . Copies of the guide book can be requested from Mary Ann Merker at (510) 981-7533 or mmerker@ci.berkeley.ca.us. 

For more information on the exhibition visit the Art of Democracy website . 

Whatever shape the new downtown plan takes before the city council signs off on the document next May, it’s certain to be a lot different from the draft prepared by the citizens they picked to draft it. 

Planning commissioners are now preparing their own revisions of the document crafted by the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC), the 21-member panel composed of two picks each from Berkeley’s nine city councilmembers plus three commissioners. 

Mandated by the settlement of a city lawsuit challenging the impacts of the University of California's plans to add 800,000 square feet of new off-campus facilities in downtown Berkeley, the new plan will define the possible shape of the city's skyline through the end of the second decade of the 21st Century. 

“Possible” is the operative word, given the unknown depth and extent of the economic crisis now devastating region, nation and globe and its inevitable impacts on development in Berkeley—a reality Mayor Tom Bates acknowledged during Monday night’s Planet candidates' debate. 

Planning commissioners are working through the DAPAC’s draft chapters, making both wholesale and line-by-line, word-by-word revisions. 

One thing already clear is that the commission’s draft will be far friendlier to developers than DAPAC’s version, and is likely to prevail at the city council, regardless of the outcome of Tuesday’s election. 

DAPAC chair Will Travis presided over a divided committee, casting his votes with the development-friendly minority. He’s been sitting in on the Planning Commission in place of Susan Wengraf, who is busily campaigning to fill Betty Olds’ seat on the city council. 

On the commission, where he finds himself with a like-minded majority, Travis has occasionally openly disparaged decisions which were made by the majority of the committee he once chaired. During Wednesday night’s session, he called DAPAC’s vote to close Center Street between Shattuck Avenue and Oxford Street to create a public plaza “a strange procedure."  

"We never fully evaluated it," he said. 

Planning commissioners softened the language from “close” to “consider closing.” 

And Travis was clearly at odds with the majority over the number and height of high-rise structures which should be permissible under the new plan, and over the proposal to commission a study of the economic feasibility of high-rise buildings, which was rejected by DAPAC and then approved by the commission. The study ultimately reported that only the tallest high-rises are likely to be economically feasible. 

The two most thorough vetters of the plan revisions are former DAPAC members Roia Ferrazares and Gene Poschman. 

Both have given the revisions close scrutiny, often finding fault with obscure phrasings, somewhat to the dismay of Travis, who snapped at Poschman near the end of Wednesday’s session, “You’ve got one speed, and that is filibuster.” 

But even Planning Director Dan Marks, who has been guiding many of the commission’s sessions on the plans, has admitted on several occasions that Poschman has made some good catches. 

And when both Poschman and Ferrazares praised staff revisions to one section of the plan’s chapter on access, Marks responded first witha simple thanks, then added, “My God, we got compliments.” 

Larry Gurley, an invariable member of the developer-friendly majority, quipped during the same meeting, “It’s another of those times I agree with Gene, so I’ll have to go home.” He didn’t leave, and even found himself agreeing with Poschman a second time.  

The conflicts between the DAPAC’s vision and the commission’s in part reflect the reality of urban politics in the post-Proposition 13 world. The Jarvis-Gann amendment capped property tax increases to a maximum of two percent a year, well below the rate of inflation. 

The biggest pressure may come indirectly, because of the dwindling share of real estate revenues coming from corporate property holdings—the most valuable real estate of all, consisting of factory buildings, high-rises, and agricultural holdings—which are typically held for decades. 

Since Proposition 13 limited tax increases on existing factories, refineries, office high rises, apartment buildings and shopping malls , cities became more reliant for revenues on sales of homes—which typically turn over much faster than commercial buildings—along with new construction to make up for the ever-dwindling revenues from existing properties in the institutional sector. 

As voters became less willing to add new sums to their home property tax bills, governments have become even more dependent on new construction simply to remain afloat. 

In the brave new post-13 reality, even the most progressive of local governments now embraces the corporate sector both to fuel imperiled social programs and to fund threatened basic services. 

Terry Doran is finally seeing some of the dollars developer Ali Kashani asked his colleagues to give, though most of the latest influx stems from one company, Hudson McDonald. 

Of the $3,600 in new contributions reported Friday by Neighbors for Terry Doran, only $500 has no clear connections to people involved in the development and sale of property. 

Chris Hudson and Evan McDonald, who split off from Patrick Kennedy to start their own company, each came up with $250 for Doran, who hopes to capture the downtown council seat held by the late Dona Spring. Their firm is currently developing the Old Grove building—better known as the Trader Joe’s building—at the intersection of University Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Way. 

Also donating identical $250 amounts are their spouses: Cindy Chang, an UC Berkeley physician, who is not only Hudson’s spouse, but also head physician for the UC Berkeley football team, and Christine McDonald, - a self-employed photographer. 

Sean McKinley, a Hudson McDonald developer, also gave $250, as did his spouse, Jessica, a research scientist with Solidus Biosciences. Both are Oakland residents. 

Another Hudson McDonald employee, Aaron Villaroya, gave $250. 

Doran also received $250 from David Teece, a Haas business school professor and silent partner with Patrick Kennedy in many of his Panoramic Interests projects, though he is described in Doran’s campaign filings as a self-employed economist. Teece is also facing major tax problems with the IRS. 

Another donor, Jennifer Ruzek, is the director of the Garfield Innovation Center, a Kaiser Permanente think tank which teams architects with health care practitioners for the design of medical facilities.  

Ronald Egherman of the Marvin Gardens real estate brokerage gave $100, while the California Real Estate Political Action Committee gave $250. 

The non-development cash came in two $250 contributions, one from Nancy Skinner’s assembly campaign and the other from Mary Piamonte, identified as a UC Berkeley preschool teacher. 

Other races  

While Doran was the winner of the largest chunk of development cash in the latest round of campaign finance reports, Mayor Tom Bates came in second. 

Bates reported $850 in new support in late Friday filings, with $600 coming from the development sector: $100 from architect Burton Edwards and $250 each from Piedmont resident and Berkeley developer Patrick Kennedy and his spouse, Julie Matlof Kennedy. 

Challenger and former Mayor Shirley Dean had made no new filings in the same period. 

In the city’s 5th council district, incumbent Laurie Capitelli made two filings Monday, totaling $2,650, with only $350 coming from the development and real estate community, including $250 from the Berkeley Association of Realtors PAC for $250 and $100 from attorney Martin H. Dodd, who lists real estate law among his areas of practice. 

Most of the councilmember's donors in the latest filings listed their occupation as “retired.” 

Challenger Sophie Hahn reported $1,750 in recent contributions. Of that total, $200 came from donors with an interest in development issues, $100 each from real estate attorney Pamela Lakey and Mary Murtagh, executive director of nonprofit housing developer EAH. 

In the District 6 race, Susan Wengraf, aide to the retiring incumbent Betty Olds, reported no new contributions, while opponent Phoebe Anne Sorgen reported four in a Saturday filing. The four contributors donated $699. 

All the contributions in the council and local ballot measures races are available online at http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx 

The day after one of their own learns whether she’ll move up a notch in city government, Berkeley planning commissioners will gather Wednesday night to face a full agenda. 

Member Susan Wengraf has been busy running to replace Betty Olds on the City Council when the incumbent retires at the end of her current term. 

Wengraf has served as an aide to Olds, who also appointed her to the commission. 

Wednesday night’s agenda is freighted with heavy issues, ranging from amendments to city law governing placing of cell phone system antennae to a new ordinance that would allow churches to keep the ashes of parishioners on site. 

Also up for discussion is the proposed new housing element for the city’s General Plan and the completion of the commission’s review of the Downtown Area Plan chapter on access. 

The proposed new regulation for columbaria—repositories for human ashes—is only up for the purpose of setting a hearing on the proposed ordinance, which was sponsored by City Councilmember Laurie Capitelli at the request of Northbrae Community Church. The proposed revision would allow columbaria to be established as incidental to regular church uses. 

Campaign contributions are continuing to pour in as the election nears, though a plea for developer donations for one candidate hasn’t yet materialized. 

District Four 

Developer Ali Kashani sent an e-mail last week asking his colleagues to open their wallets for Terry Doran, the former school board member and current zoning adjustments board member. But there’s no evidence—as of Friday—of the hoped-for influx of builder bucks. 

Of the candidate’s 10 reported contributions this week, half come from individuals connected with the land use communities, including $100 each from architects Rebecca Hayden and David Trachtenberg with another $150 from architect Erick Mikiten. 

Harry Pollack, a land use attorney and city planning commissioner, gave $100 and Caleb Dardick, a public relations consultant who sometimes represents projects, gave another $100. 

The only other candidate in the District Four council race to report contributions this week was Jesse Arreguin. None of his contributions came from the development community. 

District Five 

Incumbent Laurie Capitelli reported four contributions this week. Loan processor Dawn Malatesta of MPR financial, a mortgage brokerage, gave $100, while real estate lawyer/planning commissioner Harry Pollack gave $150, while his partner, William Davis, gave $250. 

Challenger Sophie Hahn reported a dozen contributions, with one definitely from the development community—Nancy Hendrickson, an engineer with CH2M Hill, a global engineering and construction firm, who gave her $250. She also received $100 form Fatemeh Heidari, director of the Live Edge design studio. 

Jay Keasling, one of UC Berkeley’s biofuel researchers/entrepeneurs gave her $250, while preservationist Austene Hall gave her $250, making her the recipient of perhaps the most eclectic set of donations. 

And Robert Krumme, one-time mayoral candidate and self-employed “Promoter of Liberty,” gave her $200. 

District Six 

Only Susan Wengraf reported any contributions this week, and she received just one, $100 from architect Gordon Chong, 

Mayoral cash 

Two other candidates reported new contributions this week: Mayor Tom Bates and former mayor Shirley Dean, who hopes to recapture the position she lost to the incumbent six years ago. 

Bates remained solidly in the lead as the recipient of choice of the development industry. Among the latest contributions reported this week are: 

Three contributions of $250 each from members of the family of developer Bill Falik, who has already given a similar sum, for a total of $750; 

Sheet Metal Workers Local 104 Political Action Committee gave $250; 

Berkeley Bowl owner Diane Yasuda gave $250; 

West Berkeley developer Doug Herst gave $25O;  

Real estate investor Tony Kershaw provided $250; 

General contractors Michael McDowell and Karen Springer each gave $100; 

Brickworkers and Allied Craftsworkers Local 3 PAC gave $150; 

Dealer Steve Beinke and two employees of Berkeley Honda, which seeks to build a new dealership in West Berkeley, each gave $250. 

Of Shirley Dean’s recent contributors, only two appear to have ties to the land use sector. 

The most directly tied to the development industry is David Shiver, a $250 donor, who is principal of Bay Area Economics, a real estate economist/consultant. 

Donor Jana Olson does restoration lighting rather than new installations. She gave $150. 

The Planet proudly presents its first online news video, the mayoral candidates in action on Monday. 

Opening Statements 

Tom Bates 

Shirley Dean 

Kahlil Jacobs-Fantauzzi 

Zachary RunningWolf 

Closing Statements 

Hundreds of students and activists from all over the Bay Area marched from Ferry Park near the Embarcadero to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office in downtown San Francisco Friday to protest what they called atrocities committed against undocumented immigrants by code enforcement officials in sanctuary cities. 

Dressed up as ghouls, ghosts and goblins, the marchers said they were skipping Halloween festivities to show their solidarity toward all immigrants and they demanded that the ICE detention center in San Francisco—a sanctuary city—be shut down immediately. 

ICE raids on immigrant families, including one in Berkeley, were reported this past summer, leading to vehement protests from immigrant groups and advocates. 

“We are here as a coalition to take a stand against sanctuary cities not being respected,” said Aurora Castellanos, a freshman from UC Berkeley who was one of the organizers of the rally. 

“Elections are coming up. We want to make sure our next president is looking at immigration issues,” said Castellanos, a graduate of the Oakland Unified School District, who said she has organizing for causes related to justice and equality for the last three years. “We want to make sure our families are safe and that our lives are not being threatened. It’s really unfair, trying to scare high school students. We want to make sure sanctuary cities are respecting immigrants. It’s not about documents, it’s about being safe. We haven’t done anything wrong so far. The only thing we did wrong was contribute to the economy.” 

Rumors about ICE vans circulating outside Berkeley— also a sanctuary city—and Oakland public schools in June to pick up immigrant students were dismissed by ICE officials at that time, who said that immigration authorities were mindful of the sensitivity surrounding enforcement actions near educational institutions. 

Some demonstrators spoke of heightened raids in the past few weeks and told stories about people who had been picked up from their homes and were now facing charges for deportation in detention centers all over the state. 

Calls to ICE’s western regional communications department for comment were not returned Friday. 

Terrence Valen, director of the Filipino Community Center in San Francisco, said he was at the rally to show support for Filipinos, Latinos, Africans and Arabs who were being unfairly targeted by ICE police and separated from their families. 

“Just yesterday a father was picked up from his house in Pacifica and separated from his wife and two children,” he said. “They took him away to Yuba County which makes it all the more difficult for our attorneys to fight.” 

Valen added that authorities were gradually treating San Francisco less and less like a sanctuary city. 

“They are backing off from their promise,” he said. “We are pushing for municipal IDs in San Francisco, so that people have access to services in the city and can report crime without fear. It gives them an opportunity to be safe even if they don’t have documents.” 

Miguel Astudillo, who works with La Voz Latina, a housing project in the Tenderloin, said police officers were stopping immigrant families at traffic checkpoints for parking violations and demanding to see their paperwork. 

The march, which started from Drumm Street, snaked down Sansome Street, coming to a halt in front of the ICE headquarters at 630 Sansome St., which was being heavily guarded by officers from the San Francisco Police Department. 

Six Native American drummers from D-Q University—a tribal college in Davis—inaugurated the march with some tribal beats. 

“We are humans, not illegals—stop the raids,” the marchers chanted, as people came out of stores and offices to watch them. 

Ixel Chavez, an administrative assistant at UC Berkeley, said she had joined the march after learning that her friend’s mother and brother had been deported from Sacramento Thursday to Tijuana. 

“That’s one reason,” she said. “The other reason is this is just injustice. They need to look at the roots and causes of why so many people are crossing the border. Is it famine, poverty, war? U.S. foreign policy is causing people to make these choices. We didn’t cross the borders, the borders crossed us.” 

A group of students from Richmond High School stood watching as two Aztec dancers lit frankincense and performed a dance titled “mother tierra” in front of the ICE building. 

Norma Bautista, a junior at the school, said 30 students had walked out of their classrooms to fight for their families’ rights. 

“I have Latino parents who are undocumented,” she said. “And we are living in fear. We don’t know when they will be taken away. I was born here but my brother, my grandmother and my cousins are all from Mexico.” 

Bautista’s friend, Beatriz Dominguez, a first-generation Mexican-American, said she woke up one morning to find her father gone. 

“They took my dad away,” she said, blinking away her tears. “He just wasn’t there anymore. That’s why I am here today to make my voice heard..for my family and for all the students who couldn’t be here because they were afraid of ICE.” 

Tilden Burn Out of Control  

Three Berkeley fire fighting units rushed to Tilden Park early Thursday afternoon to battle a controlled burn turned uncontrolled by the invasion of a windy storm front. 

Deputy Fire Chief Gil Dong said no structures were damaged by the blaze, which began when winds whipped up the flames of a 30-acre intentionally set fire and sent flaming vegetation across the firebreaks and beyond the control of East Bay regional Parks District firefighters on hand for the exercise. 

Rainfall started during the fire fighting effort, but it wasn’t enough to offset the impact of the long summer drought, though if rains continue through the next week, the state might finally call an end to the fire season within the next week or two, said the deputy chief. 

“It was strange, because the clouds were blowing right through us,” he said. 

While the Berkeley firefighters arrived minutes after they were called at 12:44, it wasn’t until 6 p.m. when the last of the engines returned home. 

Fire fighters from Oakland and Moraga-Orinda also took part in the effort, said Deputy Chief Dong. 

The fire was confined to an area along Lomas Cantadas not far from Grizzly Peak Road. 

Duplex blaze 

October also brought flames that caused $100,000 in damages to a duplex at 1619 Prince St., a school trash can fire reported in last week’s paper, and a frat house television burnout. 

Berkeley firefighters were called to Prince street at 4:54 a.m. on Oct. 18, arriving to find flames pouring from the rear of a two-story wood-framed duplex then being remodeled. 

The residents had evacuated before the firefighters arrived, and the Red Cross helped one family find temporary quarters. 

Deputy Chief Dong said the cause of the fire was accidental. 

Further remodeling will be required. 

Tube toasted 

Firefighters rushed to a fraternity in the 2700 block of Durant Avenue at 9:30 on the morning of Oct. 2 to find a television still smoldering despite the best efforts of several initiates and their fire extinguishers. 

Only the television was totaled, and the cause of the blaze was determined to be the result of the room’s occupant leaving candles and incense burning atop the set when he left for class. 

A group of neighbors of the Alta Bates Summit Medical Center have always had a good relationship with the hospital’s workers, they say, until early Wednesday. 

When members of SEIU United Healthcare Workers West descended upon the hospital’s Ashby Avenue campus to protest what they called unfair labor practices by Sutter Healthcare, Alta Bates’ parent company, some Prince Street residents complained of being awakened from their sleep at 5:45 a.m. by chanting and screaming with bullhorns. 

Peter Shelton, an area resident, said the noise from the megaphones woke up his entire family, including his 5- and 7-year-old sons. 

Shelton said that when he approached Jonathan Mello, the union’s hospital division representative, to complain about the noise, Mello apologized for it and called the incident an “unintended, unfortunate consequence,” but refused to ask the strike leader to turn down the volume. 

“I was cursed, screamed at and touched inappropriately by a striker,” he said. “It is difficult for me to support them under these circumstances.” 

When reached by the Planet Thursday, Mello refused to comment. 

Another neighbor, Laurie Ann Doyle, wrote to City of Berkeley officials saying that the sound initially reminded her of a woman being abused. 

“The female shouts were so loud and intelligible.” she wrote. “If they had started at 7 a.m., no problem. That would make more sense because that’s when night shift workers flood out the doors and visitors arrive. Strikers impinging on our rights while fighting for their own is only counterproductive.” 

Doyle said that when her husband asked the strikers to be quieter, he was asked to “find a new place to live.” 

“This is the same as management telling them to get another job,” she said. “The strikers could have had our support, if they had been considerate. History shows that community support can make or break a strike. It’s a sad day in Berkeley.” 

Fred Medrano, director of the city’s Health and Human Services Department, said that the union had violated their permit since they were not authorized to start the amplification that early in the morning. 

Medrano said that the city issued the union a special event permit for 8 p.m. to 5 p.m. and a sound permit for 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. 

“I understand their [the neighbors’] concern,” Medrano said. “If there was noise in front of my house I would feel the same way. We will make a note of the problem and if we get requests for a permit like this in the future we will have a discussion with the union about the conditions in the permit.” 

John Borsos, vice president of SEIU United Healthcare Workers West, said that the union was open to working with neighbors if a similar problem occurred in the future. 

“When healthcare workers strike it’s to call attention to a significant problem at the hospital,” he said. “We want to be sensitive to neighbors and patients. I am not aware that any of the residents or neighbors came over and asked the strikers not to make noise. It was a lack of communication.” 

Borsos added that the union wanted to maintain a good relationship with the hospital’s neighbors. 

“Alta Bates has a long history of being insensitive to the needs of neighbors and they are treating their caregivers the same way,” he said. “We have much more in common with the neighbors than we have with Alta Bates.” 

The strike, Borsos said, was scheduled to start all over the Bay Area at 6 a.m. 

“I am not sure that the amplification started at 6 a.m.,” he said. “There might be some noise when strikes start. We sent out notices to the hospital about it.” 

Debbie Pitts, Alta Bates’ manager of public affairs, told neighbors in an e-mail that the hospital had set out letters to area residents Tuesday alerting them about the strike. 

Shelton said that he had not received any notices and did not know of any neighbors who had.  

Calls to Pitts were not returned. 

“The biggest concern is nobody is taking responsibility for this,” Shelton said. 

The neighbors affected by Wednesday’s incident said that the beat officer on the scene provided them with inaccurate information, claiming that state law allowed strikers to use amplification at any point during a strike. 

In an e-mail to the neighbors, Berkeley Police Department Chief Doug Hambleton said that the police department was taking responsibility for its officers’ failure to handle the noise complaint appropriately. 

“When I learned of this situation late yesterday, I gave direction to officers that strikers and labor protesters are not exempt for the city's noise ordinance, in particular the requirement for permits for amplified sound,” he wrote. 

Hambleton added in another e-mail that the city’s Environmental Health Unit, not the police, was primarily responsible for enforcing the noise ordinance. 

“I do know they have been in touch with the strikers and the behavior the other morning will be factored into future decisions regarding their applications for sound permits as well as any required future enforcement,” he said. 

Councilmember Kriss Worthington—who represents the neighborhood—said, “I am a passionate pro-union activist but that doesn’t mean you can wake people up in the middle of the night. It’s illegal and irresponsible.” 

Worthington said he would be scheduling a meeting to discuss the neighbors’ concerns. 

Old-style politics is alive and well in Berkeley, where the PAC-man wields a big stick and an even bigger wallet. 

Two political action committees are stoking the fires of campaigns in the Nov. 4 election, one funded by a Minnesota company that distributes Belgian buses (the controversial Van Hool line) and the other backed by the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. 

One, the Coalition for Effective Government, is fighting a citizen-sponsored initiative that would force a public vote on an project that would create bus-only lanes on city streets—a measure aimed at AC transit’s proposal to reduce Telegraph Avenue to a single lane in either direction to accommodate a new Bus Rapid Transit system. 

The largest single donor to the opposition to the Coalition for Effective Government PAC the pro-BRT committee formed to oppose Measure KK is another PAC, the Committee to Safeguard AC Transit Measure VV, or VV PAC for short. 

VV, in turn, is a county-wide ballot proposal to impose a parcel tax that would allow the bus agency to buy more vehicles. 

According to Robert Gammon in the East Bay Express, VV’s major donor is the ABC Companies of Fairbault, Min., the company that distributes Van Hool buses in the United States. 

ABC has donated at least $250,000 to the VV PAC, which in turn donated $20,000 to the Coalition for Effective Government on Oct. 9. VV PAC also took in $40,000 from Cummins West, the company that makes the diesel engines for the Van Hool buses. 

Other donors to VV PAC include AC Transit executives and the agency’s Sacramento and Washington lobbyists, Gammon reports. 

In addition to the $20,000 from VV PAC, other donors to the Coalition for Effective Government include: $5,000 from an AC Transit union, AFSCME Local 3916; an equal sum from Cambridge Systematics, a Massachusetts-based consultant to the agency; $4,870 from bicycle activist and writer Hank Resnik, and $250 from AC Transit Deputy General Manager Jim Gleich. 

As of Oct. 18, the Coalition for Effective Government had received $40,997.65. 

By the same date, KK supporters Advocates for Voter Approved Transit had collected $5,180, most of it from neighborhood associations. 

The VV PAC also appears to be sending out campaign mailers in violation of a state law that requires PACs to include in all campaign literature their Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) registration numbers. 

Chamber PAC  

The second PAC has a longer name: Coalition for a Better Berkeley, Sponsored by the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce, or CBB for brevity’s sake. 

Unlike Business for Better Government, the chamber’s earlier PAC, CBB has been operating in the sunlight. 

“We’re doing everything the right way and on time,” said chamber CEO Ted Garrett. 

Created in 1998, BBG had made election filings with the city until 2001, when Mari E. Lee wrote then-City Clerk Sherry Kelly that she had become the PAC’s new treasurer: 

“I am writing to inform you that owing to an expanded committee agenda, I have filed an amended [campaign reporting form] 410 with the Secretary of State designating this committee as a COUNTY committee….PLEASE CHANGE YOUR RECORDS TO REFLECT THE FACT THAT THIS COMMITTEE WILL NO LONGER HAVE ANY REGULAR FILING OBLIGATIONS WITH THE CITY OF BERKELEY.” 

The PAC filed instead with Alameda County, where filings weren’t made available on-line—unlike those in Berkeley. 

BBG was forced to make belated filings with the city in compliance with a letter from state Fair Political Practices Commission General Counsel Scott Hallabrin, issued to the Berkeley city attorney’s office Aug. 15, 2007. 

A month later, Garrett, the chamber’s new executive director, told a reporter, “My feeling is that we’ve got to follow the law—and we will.” 

The chamber finally filed all its belated statements earlier this year, and in the last statement developer Patrick Kennedy chipped in $5,026.98 and real estate broker Miriam Ng gave $1,956.67 to settle the final bills, which included more than $3,400 in legal expenses. 

For this election, the chamber has made all the requisite filings, and they are available online. But VV PAC hasn’t been required to make electronic filings, so they’re only available to visitors in binders kept in the Alameda County Courthouse basement in Oakland. 

And, it turns out, the address listed with the single state filing for VV PAC belongs to the same Mari E. Lee who stopped filing BBG financial information with the city. 

One of the measures opposed by BBG was Measure J, an unsuccessful 2006 initiative establishing a Landmarks Preservation Ordinance very similar to the current ordinance, which was an attempt to head off the new council-passed ordinance now being challenged by referendum in Berkeley Measure LL. 

The new chamber PAC is funding the Yes on Measure LL campaign, and its literature includes the FPPC number. 

The biggest donations to Yes on LL came from Patrick Kennedy and Cadillac Associates LLC, each with $5,000, followed by the mayor’s spouse, Loni Hancock, who gave $2,000 from her state senate campaign fund; Meyer Sound owner Helen B. Meyer, with $1,500, and Eat /Work Development LP, associated with developer Michael Goldin, $750. 

Other $500 donors include developers Ali Kashani; Mark Rhoades, his partner, a former Berkeley Planning Department employee; West Berkeley developer Doug Herst; Pacific Steel Casting; Ruegg and Ells-worth; Abrams/Millikan, developers of the Fourth Street shopping district; Safeway’s corporate office; San Pablo Avenue 2747 LLC, and Kennedy’s Panoramic Interests. 

Donors offering $250 include land-use lawyer Rena Rickles; Landmarks Commissioner Fran Packard, $250; Aquatic Park Science Center LLC; and Marilyn Capitelli, wife of Councilmember Laurie Capitelli. 

If additional information on campaign contributions becomes available before election day, it will be posted on the Planet website.

When they first ran against each other in 2002, it was Berkeley’s epic political battle. Shirley Dean was the lightning-rod mayor and leader of the moderate-progressive political faction in a City Council and a city that were deeply divided along factional lines. Looking for a way to oust a political powerhouse, members of the opposing left-progressive faction recruited former state Assemblymember Tom Bates to run against Dean. 

In the factional struggles of that time, Dean represented the moderate-progressive Berkeley Democratic Club (BDC), while Bates was the choice of the left-progressive Berkeley Citizens Action (BCA), with the BDC and the BCA opposing each other along largely ideological lines over a myriad of city issues. 

The 2002 mayoral campaign was a bruising, raucous, rousing affair befitting a city known as the home of political activism. A November 2002 article by reporters from the UC Berkeley School of Journalism summed up some of the differences of those times. 

“The real differences between the two candidates went beyond the election issues, said long-time political observers,” the 2002 article went on, quoting Bruce Cain, director of the Institute of Government Studies at UC Berkeley, as saying, “What makes a difference is the networks they’re tied in to. Bates is with Loni Hancock and some of the progressive circles that were in charge of the city before Dean came. Shirley Dean is tied to the police and fire departments, and the more conservative circles. … Dean has traditionally been more balanced between business and the environment. For Bates, it may be hard to convince long-time Berkeley residents that he is more to the middle, even if it is true.” 

People have pointed to the best example of the bitterness and intensity of the 2002 campaign as the now-infamous incident when Bates stole and trashed a bundle of Daily Cal newspapers after the paper endorsed Dean. But perhaps a better example was summed up in one of the 2002 J-School article’s quotations. After Bates unexpectedly swamped Dean 55 percent to 43 percent—the race had been considered close until election day—the article quoted a crowing Bates campaign treasurer, Mal Burnstein, as saying, “it’s a blowout. It’s over. She lost. We won. Goodbye, Shirley.” 

But while the candidates in the Bates-Dean rematch of 2008 are the same, Berkeley’s political landscape has changed considerably from 2002. For one thing, once elected, Bates moved to govern from the center, angering some of the more left-progressive people who had originally solicited him to run against Dean, but gaining new allies in the moderate-progressive camp who had been the previous mayor’s supporters. 

For another, the old BCA-BDC rivalry has withered at the same time as the two organizations lost their once-considerable influence over Berkeley politics. The result is that the 2008 mayoral race is much more of a traditional city campaign than the previous ideological one, with challenger Dean attacking the incumbent Bates from either the left or the right, depending on the opening provided, while Bates attempts to occupy and defend the political center. 

Those differences were evident during an Oct. 13 breakfast debate between the two candidates sponsored by the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. 

“Berkeley had a $21 million structural deficit when Dean left office,” Bates told the assembled business representatives. “It was painful and difficult, but we solved that. We’re in better shape than surrounding cities such as Oakland and San Jose, which are facing severe budget deficits.” 

The mayor argued that he has moved forward toward a traditionally progressive Berkeley goal—advancing a green economy—while at the same time satisfying business demands for development. 

Noting that the city has already reduced greenhouse gases by 9 percent—2 percent more than the 7 percent goal called for in the 2007 U.S. Conference of Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement—Bates said he hoped Berkeley “is going to be one of the greenest cities in the U.S.” 

But he touted his administration’s efforts to revitalize the city’s downtown business core. “We have less than a 5 percent vacancy rate downtown,” the mayor said, adding that with the addition of UC Berkeley’s proposed downtown hotel, conference center and museum complex, “We will see the kind of downtown renaissance we’ve never seen before.” 

Predictably—given their past positions on the issue—the relationship between the City of Berkeley and UC Berkeley drew the sharpest distinctions between the two candidates. 

Arguing against the controversial 2005 agreement between the university and the city over UC Berkeley’s downtown development plans, Dean called the university “the big bear in the living room. We cherish that bear. We love that bear. But the bear tends to break the crockery and not pay for it.” 

Arguing that Berkeley could have gotten more money out of the university, Dean added, “We need to renegotiate the deal with UC.” 

That position puts Dean squarely on the side of Berkeley’s left-progressive wing, which actively opposed the UC deal. The deal also drew the opposition of many of the city’s more moderate neighborhood activists. 

But Bates defended the UC deal, saying, “We got the best deal with UC than any other city in the state. It’s folly to think we could have gotten anything more.” Bates said that Berkeley provides $14 million in services to the university, while the university “did a study that says they generate $16 million in revenue back to us” through retail revenue and hotel receipts. “So we actually owe them $2 million,” Bates said, most likely as a joke. 

For her part, Dean spoke briefly about her accomplishments during her years as mayor—she noted that one of her proudest achievements was the establishment of the city’s arts and theater district—but spent most of her time criticizing Bates for what she said were failures during his years. 

Some of the criticisms were general, such as saying that “people throughout the city believe no one at City Hall is listening,” but some were more specific. 

“Downtown is dirty and unsanitary,” Dean said. “It needs a thorough cleanup.” She said that the city needs to “address the issue of street behavior and cleanliness” as well as “aggressively recruit retail for downtown. Berkeley can have more retail. I’ve done it. We need to reverse the image that Berkeley is anti-business.” 

Bates denied that the city is in as bad shape as Dean alleged, both in economic and sanitary terms, and took a shot of his own at Dean’s conduct while she was mayor. 

“When I came on the council [following his defeat of Dean in 2002], it was in chaos,” Bates said. “Civility was at an all-time low. We’ve changed that. Now we no longer have any ‘sides.’” 

Bates has certainly won the support of his fellow members of the City Council. Councilmembers Linda Maio, Darryl Moore, Max Anderson, Laurie Capitelli, and Gordon Wozniak have all endorsed the mayor. Councilmember Betty Olds, who is retiring from the Council at the end of this year, has dual-endorsed both Bates and Dean. 

Councilmember Kriss Worthington, who had bitter clashes with Dean during her tenure as mayor and was one of the leaders of the left-progressive group that urged Bates to run against her, has also differed with Bates during the last six years—though not quite so bitterly—and has endorsed no one in the current race. The late councilmember Dona Spring, another left-progressive, was frequently at odds with Bates during council meetings. 

But what has most changed in the six years between Dean-Bates 2002 and Bates-Dean 2008 is the tone of the campaign. Bates, the former UC Berkeley football player, has always been soft-spoken and low-key in demeanor, and the diminutive Dean (she jokes that she doesn’t have to stand up when she talks because it makes little difference in her height) remains as feisty as ever. In their public presentations during this year’s campaign, both claimed a passion for Berkeley, its traditions and its people, and a commitment to its future. 

What is missing this year so far is the angry, partisan edge between the candidates that marked their first contest, fueled by that earlier partisan divide. Though the two candidates still do not appear to like each other very much, each has refrained from the kind of personal attacks we have seen in other races, such as this year’s presidential campaign.

Berkeley’s four mayoral candidates, two of them seeking write-in votes, made their pitches to a packed house at the West Berkeley Senior Center Monday night. 

Sponsored by the Daily Planet and moderated by former Albany Mayor Robert Cheasty, the two-hour forum posed questions that ranged from concerns over rising violent crime to the politics of development. 

While incumbent Tom Bates and former mayor Shirley Dean were the two candidates originally scheduled to appear, when Zachary RunningWolf and Kahlil Jacobs-Fantauzzi arrived shortly before the session, they were granted their places on the platform and equal time in the debate that followed. 

After an introduction by Daily Planet Executive Editor Becky O’Malley, an explanation of the rules from Cheasty and a drawing of lots to determine the speaker order, Bates led off with a sharp criticism of Dean, his predecessor. 

Under Dean’s leadership, said Bates, meetings “were more like a food fight than a city council.” 

“We brought civility,” he said, leading to a council where “we don’t have sides anymore.” 

The mayor also said he plans to continue with his goal to make Berkeley “one of the greenest cities in America.” 

Bates cited the endorsements of all but one of the current councilmembers, the Sierra Club, the Democratic Party and Rep. Barbara Lee, among others. 

Dean responded with a defense of her administration—which ran from 1994 through 2002—which she said produced eight balanced city budgets, maintained the city’s high bond rating and oversaw creation of the city’s arts and theater district. 

She said that while Bates had claimed credit for resolving the city’s financial problems, Berkeley’s structural deficit “is still there and will hit again in two years” regardless of who sits at the head of the council table. 

Dean faulted Bates for making the processes of government less accessible to public oversight, and vowed to push through an open government ordinance, implement a community involved policing program, revitalize the downtown through creation of an arts and crafts street market and by aggressively seeking new retail business while preserving the character of Berkeley neighborhoods. 

Write-ins 

“I actually am a young person,” said Jacobs-Fantauzzi, who said he was running as the Green Party candidate. “I was pushed to run because of the double homicide on Derby Street in my block. I have lived there for 14 years,” he said. 

The victims, a 26-year-old Berkeley man and a 45-year-old Oakland man, were gunned down Sept. 18. Just 22 hours later, a 42-year-old Berkeley woman was shot and seriously injured as she stepped outside her home across the street from the murder scene. 

The candidate, who said he had been beaten and arrested by Berkeley police in 1999 during a protest outside KPFA, said charges were dropped after the intervention of the late Councilmember Dona Spring—Berkeley’s only elected Green. 

He also called for more programs aimed at the young, including the diversion of graffiti artists into programs to create community murals. 

If “young” and “Green” were Jacobs-Fantauzzi’s buzzwords, “Native American” and “UC Berkeley” were RunningWolf’s. 

Raised in Berkeley, RunningWolf has been an ongoing critic of the university and its policies, taking his action to new heights—literally—when he launched the ultimately doomed tree-sit to try and stop construction of a high tech gym complex at the site of a grove of oaks and other trees west of Memorial Stadium. 

An ardent opponent of the automobile—he was once arrested for adding spray-painted “driving” beneath the STOP in stop signs—the self-described “Nnative American elder and leader” is a harsh critic of the university’s plans for building in Strawberry Canyon and a foe of its $500 million BP-funded biofuel program, which, he said, will destroy the Amazon rain forest to power America’s cars. 

He also opposes high density housing. 

“We are already overbuilding,” said Dean, adding that one major project, a condo building at 2700 San Pablo Avenue, is already in foreclosure. With Berkeley already cited as the state’s third-densest city and the 10th densest in the country, Dean said, “We are destroying our neighborhoods.” 

“How fast we forget,” Bates replied, noting that the Acton Courtyard building on University Avenue, the Gaia Building and the Fine Arts Building had been approved during her tenure. “I think they were needed,” he said. “Now she is criticizing me when I try to do something similar.” 

Jacobs-Fantauzzi turned the development topic back to his home turf. “For me the issue is that there is no lighting on Derby street. . .We need to improve the city for everyday people.” 

RunningWolf used his response to attack AC Transit’s Bus Rapid Transit proposal, which, he said, “is a scam for his (Bates’) developer buddies” to seize property through eminent domain. 

Artful answers 

Asked what they would do for the arts, the candidates offered a variety of responses. 

RunningWolf used the question to critique the incumbent for sponsoring the Public Commons for Everyone law, “which basically makes it illegal to be homeless in Berkeley.” Instead, said the candidate, he would work to repeal the law and close Telegraph Avenue for a crafts fair. 

The arts, Bates said, “are one of the major focuses of my administration,” adding that he had helped Freight and Salvage Co. win $1.9 million in state funding to move to downtown Berkeley, and promising to keep artists in West Berkeley as the city’s last industrial neighborhood adds new buildings and businesses. 

Dean pointed to her role in creating the city’s arts and theater district and promised to continue her support for a program she said she started in 2002 for West Berkeley artists while working to implement “sweat equity” programs to help them stay in the area by rehabilitating and retrofitting their housing. 

Once the lines were drawn, the candidates stayed true to course, with the mayor and former mayor citing their own accomplishing while critiquing the actions of the other—with both offering occasional praise for their write-in opponents. 

Oh say can UC? 

When the questions honed in on UC Berkeley, the differences became stark. 

Jacobs-Fantauzzi turned the question back to Derby Street, saying that many youths in the neighborhood had never visited the campus, calling on the university to set asides a certain portion of its enrollment for students from South and West Berkeley as mitigation for the institution’s impacts on the community. 

“A major point of my administration will be to stand up and recognize the elephant in the cage, UC,” said Dean, declaring that as a result of a compact signed with the university by the mayor, “the downtown is going to be given away to the university for the next 15 years. I’d immediately take steps to rescind the agreement.”  

Dean said plans to expand the university’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in the Berkeley hills “will scare the living daylights out of you ... We need to stop having a mayor who sides with the University of California.” 

“UC is not subject to any of our regulations, any of our zoning, any of our laws. Period. Full stop,” said Bates, who said he had organized, with his counterpart in Riverside, a committee of all towns with campuses of both the UC and state university systems. 

Bates said the group was working with state legislators to create regulations that will “do what is needed” to make the campuses be good neighbors. 

Dean responded that she and others are working on a program called the Phoenix Project, which would democratize the university’s board of regents and take away the university’s powers that “allow them to do anything they want.” 

Bates responded by declaring that during Dean’s 23 years on the council and 8 as mayor, the city had received $50,000 a year in mitigation payments. “We got $1.7 million, you got $50,000,” he said. 

“You might want to ask your wife why she only got $50,000,” Dean said, referring to the agreements originally made by her predecessor in the mayor’s chair, Loni Hancock, now a state assemblymember and probable state senator-elect after Tuesday as well as the mayoral mate, who was in the audience. 

BRT 

Bruce Kaplan, until recently a Telegraph Avenue merchant, asked the candidates whether they favored narrowing Telegraph Avenue to a single lane in each direction to accommodate BRT buses. 

“I am in favor of public transportation but against BRT,” said RunningWolf. 

Bates first took aim at Berkeley ballot measure KK, which would subject any lane eliminations to a public vote. “I am totally opposed to KK,” he said. “If it passes, it means the death of BRT.” 

“KK does not stop BRT,” said Dean. “It submits it to a vote of the people,” she said, a form of direct democracy. 

“The reality is that homeless people on Telegraph Avenue are being treated like criminals,” said Jacobs-Fantauzzi, while what is needed are programs to give them places to sleep. 

When it came to the subject of crime and policing, RunningWolf said that while “there are plenty of police,” they should be more community-oriented. 

“I would reorganize the Police Department and relieve Chief Hambleton.” 

Bates said he had no problems with the chief and was introducing measures to get more officers onto bikes and into the neighborhoods. The mayor said that crime rates were down—with the exception of assaults and robberies. “We have one of the best police forces in the U.S.” 

“We’ve had 10 murders so far this year, and assaults are up—and that doesn’t even include UC,” Dean said. She said the city needed a greater emphasis on community involved policing, and said she would end a policy that allows officers to transfer beats after three months because it doesn’t give them time to know their neighborhoods. 

Jacobs-Fantauzzi said Berkeley has a problem with police brutality and said he would implement a training program for officers. 

Most of the standing room crowd stayed for the full debate. Whether or not any changed their minds is another question altogether—though many did get their first glimpse of the two write-in candidates.

Development-related contributions continue to pour into the coffers of candidates for next week’s Berkeley City Council election, with Mayor Tom Bates in the lead both in total and sector-related contributions. 

MAYORAL RACE 

Tom Bates 

Mayor Tom Bates continues to corral the lion’s share of development dollars, clocking up at least $9,249 in new contributions from builders, their clients, consultants, their representatives and officials who make land use decisions. 

That total amounts to 40.9 percent of contributions reported since Oct. 1, a figure that dwarfs the comparable numbers for his competitors in a campaign rife with arguments about the future shape of the city. 

The $22,621.95 in contributions he received in cash between Oct. 1 and Oct. 18, plus $500 in non-monetary contributions and the $5,250 he had loaned himself earlier, brought the mayor’s total campaign chest to $72,718.75. 

Adding the $13,650 in earlier development-related contributions to the new figures yields a total of $22,899—or 31.5 percent of his campaign chest.  

Current period development-related gifts include: 

• Don Medley, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory director of government and community affairs, $250; 

• Would-be Richmond Point Molate casino developer James D. Levine, $250; 

• Steven Oliver, Oliver and Company Construction, $250; 

• Dion Aroner, AJE Partners, community relations for developers, $250; 

• Dena Belzer, Strategic Economics, development consultants, $250; 

• Yuval Bobrovitch, real estate investor, SB Pacific Group, $250; 

• Barbara Ellis, AJE Partners, community relations for developers, $150; 

• Dave Fogarty, city economic development staff, $250; 

• Igad Safraty, real estate investor, SB Pacific Group, $250; 

• Dorothy Walker, retired UC Berkeley development executive, $100; 

• Raudel Wilson, Mechanics Bank and former DAPAC member, $50; 

• Christopher Barlow, Wareham Developers partner, $250; 

• Judith Briggs Marsh, real estate appraisals, Marsh and Associates, $250; 

• Denis Clifford, trusts and estates attorney, $200; 

• Caleb Dardick, public who represents development projects, $350; 

• Richard Friedman, president, Carpenter and Company, hotel developers, $250; 

• Cassandra Gaenger, Wareham Developers, $250; 

• James Goddard, Wareham Developers, partner, $250; 

• Thomas Gram, attorney, real estate law, $100; 

• Fred Harvey, real estate lawyer, $50; 

• Dan Kataoka, Berkeley Bowl general manager, $250; 

• Isaac Kos-Read, Townsend Public Affairs (clients include developers), Oakland, $250; 

• Roy Nee, developer, $250; 

• Ryan Ripstein, developer; $250; 

• Nancy Robbins, Mill Valley, wife of Wareham development partner, $250;  

• Geoffrey Sears, Wareham Development partner, $250; 

• Eric Zell, lobbyist whose clients include Wareham, Chevron, and Alta Bates, $100; 

• Mark Rhoades, Berkeley city planning official turned developer, $250; 

• Don Solem, Solem and Associates, publicist with development clients, $250; 

• Walter Armer, SNK Development, $250; 

• Carolyn Herst, wife of Douglas Herst, West Berkeley developer, $250; 

• Ali Kashani, developer, partner of Mark Rhoades, $250; 

• Jonathan Kaufman, Solem and Associates, publicist with development clients, $100; 

• Donald Peterson, SNK Development, $250; 

• Toby Taylor, Emeryville developer, $99; 

• Felicia Woytak, real estate investor, $250; 

• Denny Abrams, developer of Fourth Street, $250; 

• Glenn Yasuda, owner, Berkeley Bowl, $250; 

• Jack Gardner, John Stewart Company president, $250; 

• Barclay Simpson, a building supplies manufacturer who is also the namesake and major donor for the UC Berkeley gym now under construction west of Memorial Stadium, $250; 

• International Union of Painters and Allied Trades PAC, $250; 

• Teamsters Joint Council No. 7 PAC, $250; 

• Bruce Riordan, transportation planning consultant, $100. 

The $500 of non-monetary contributions came in the form of food. An employee of Berkeley’s largest developer, the University of California, Office of the President Manager Nancy Stevenson and spouse Ronald were the donors. 

Shirley Dean 

By contrast, former Mayor Shirley Dean, in her run to recapture the seat she lost to Bates six years ago, has attracted little money related to developing or managing property. 

Her total campaign intake had reached $35,368 by Oct. 18, including a $5,000 loan. Her total share from the land-use-related sector, including $1,700 received in the latest filing period, comes to $2,748, or 7.8 percent. 

During the previous 17 days, she has taken in donations of $11,514, with the land-use sector including: 

• Marilyn Braiger, property manager for Howe Street Apartments, $50; 

• Michael Drew, Drew Properties manager, $250; 

• Dan Kataoka, Berkeley Bowl, $250 (matching his gift to Bates); 

• John Koenigshofer, Elmwood Realty, $250; 

• Marley Lyman, CSM Properties owner/manager, $250; 

• Grubb Company real estate broker Bebe McRae, $250; 

• Mary Oram, ERI Property Management, $50; 

• James Peterson, development consultant, Villa View Properties Development, $250; 

• Mori Wei, apartment manager, $100. 

Other candidates  

Kahlil Jacobs-Fantauzzi, a third mayoral candidate, listed no contributions when he filed papers of organization for the Kahlil 4 Mayor campaign on Oct. 23. 

Write-in candidate Zachary Running Wolf had filed no statements, though he has posted signs.  

DISTRICT 4 

The other race where developer dollars may play a key role is the race for the City Council’s 4th District, representing the heart of downtown. 

Terry Doran 

By Oct. 18, current Zoning Adjustments Board and former Berkeley School Board member Terry Doran had received $15,194 in contributions, $3,655 coming in the prior 17 days. 

Of that sum, only $5,100 came from the land use sector—though developer Ali Kashani told fellow developers last week that Doran had urged them to hold off with their cash to avoid bad publicity, until he changed his mind because of the publicity generated by this paper for his leading opponent, Jesse Arreguin, whom the executive editor has endorsed. 

While Doran denied Kashani’s account, developers came to a Sunday party for the candidate, and those donations had not been reported as of this writing. 

Before the party, only 17.5 percent of his cash had come from the land-use sector, including $1,000 received five days before the party, in the form of four $250 donations from developer John DeClerq, private sector urban planner Joe DeStefano of Calthorpe Associates, and matching checks from West Berkeley project developer Douglas Herst and spouse Caroline. 

Two days before the party, Doran received $100 in donations from two architects, David Trachtenberg and Rebecca Hayden, for a total of $200; 

Other sector contributions reported during the Oct. 1-18 filing period in-clude: 

• Development planning consultant David C. Early, who is also the founder of the Livable Berkeley “smart growth” lobbying group, $100; 

• Construction finance planning consultant David Cobb, of Davis Langdon LLP, $150; 

• Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 PAC, $250; 

• Chamber of Commerce CEO Ted Garrett, $250. 

In preceding periods, Doran had received contributions from: 

• Oakland city planner Michael Bradley, $250; 

• Retired UC Berkeley development executive, Livable Berkeley activists and DAPAC member Dorothy Walker, $100; 

• UC Berkeley planning professor Frederick Collignon, $100; 

• Barbara Hendrickson, Red Oak Realty, $250; 

• Real estate syndicator Maxim Schrogin, $100; 

• Mortgage broker Samuel Fishman, $100; 

• Albert Nahman, Nahman Plumbing and Heating, $100; 

Among the officials donating who are involved in land-use decisions are: 

• Mayor Tom Bates, $250; 

• City economic development planner Dave Fogarty, $250; 

• City Councilmember Gordon Wozniak, $250; 

• City Councilmember Darryl Moore, $250; 

• City Councilmember and real estate broker Laurie Capitelli, $250; 

• City Councilmember Max Anderson, $50; 

• Planning Commissioner and council candidate Susan Wengraf, $100; 

• Planning Commission Chair and retired architect James Samuels, $50. 

• Will Travis, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and former chair of the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC), $200; 

• Planning Commissioner David Stoloff, $250; 

• ZAB member and architect Bob Allen, $250. 

Jesse Arreguin 

Opponent Jesse Arreguin, the leading fundraiser among Doran’s opponents, had raised $13,424. In the most recent 18-day filing period, Arreguin received from people identifiable as involved in land-use issues:  

• Environmental planning consultant Juliet Lamont, $250; 

• Real estate attorney Maryland Cleveland, $150;  

• Donald Jelinek, an attorney who has handled real estate cases, $100; 

• Timothy Hansen, a project manager for Goldstone Management, $250; 

• Architect Kris Eggene, $100; 

• Rash Ghosh, who is currently in a legal battle with the city after his building was seized by the city in a nuisance action, $50. 

He also received contributions from city officials making land-use decisions: 

• City councilmember Kriss Worthington, $250; 

• Planning commissioner Gene Poschman, $250; 

• Zoning Adjustments Board member Sara Shumer, $250; 

• Transportation Commissioner Rob Wrenn and spouse Mary each gave $75, for a total of $150;  

• Transportation Commissioner Wendy Alfsen, $100; 

• Landmarks Preservation Commissioner Anne Wagley, also a Daily Planet editor, $250; 

• Landmarks Preservation Commissioner and Design Review Committee member Carrie Olson, $200. 

LA Wood 

LA Wood, a community activist and videographer, has taken in $3,467.99, including a $250 loan from himself. 

One development-related contribution came from Polly Quick, a project manager for ICF International, which does some transportation planning, and a second came from Mark McDonald, a welder and mechanic for Skylight & Sun, who gave $50. 

DISTRICT 6 

Susan Wengraf 

Susan Wengraf reported only two development-related donations in the current filing period, accounting for only $300 of the $2,224 received between Oct. 1 and 18. They are: 

• Maria Jarvis, Urban Land Institute (motto: “connecting the global real estate industry”), $50; 

• Timothy Sarre, Sema Construction engineer, $250. 

Her total contributions had reached $29,294 by Oct. 18, with $4,050 coming from the land-use sector, or 13.8 percent. 

Phoebe Anne Sorgen 

Wengraf’s opponent, Phoebe Anne Sorgen, received $1,499 in the same period, bringing her total to $13,370, which includes an earlier $10,350 loan from herself. 

Her only donor with involvement in land-use issues is Anna De Leon, who fought a long and ultimately successful legal battle with the city and developer Patrick Kennedy over the Gaia Building, winning a ruling that the City Council had wrongly voted to implement standards governing use of the city’s cultural bonus at the Gaia Building. 

De Leon’s contribution of $100 amounts to 3.3 percent of Sorgen’s total contributions, much less if her loan is included. 

DISTRICT 5 

Laurie Capitelli 

In a district where the incumbent is real estate broker Laurie Capitelli, it’s not surprising that he has received the heftiest hunk of property-related donations, including many from members of his own firm, Red Oak Realty. 

He reports $6,030 in contributions for the current reporting period, including these from Red Oak’s staff: 

• Peter Campbell, $100; 

• Patrick Leaper, $250; 

• Mark Lederer, $250; 

• Schuyler Oliver, $250, and 

• Marsha Quick, $100. 

Other development sector contributors include: 

• Private sector planner Michael Fajans, $100; 

• Electrician Scott Bannister, $250; 

• Real estate lawyer Frederic Harvey Jr., $100; 

• David Clahan, Caldecott Construction, $250; 

• MPR Financial mortgage underwriter Tjendrawati Karwita, $100; 

• Marisita Jarvis, a consultant whose activities include teaching real estate industry figures to teach planning as volunteers in public schools, $50. 

Capitelli also received a $5,000 loan from another real estate industry figure, himself. 

Capitelli’s total contributions thus far had reached $29,120 (including his loan), with a development-related total of $8,125—not including his loan to himself—or 27.9 percent. 

Sophie Hahn 

By contrast, of the $4,610 in contributions received for the current period by Sophie Hahn, only two have readily identifiable development connections, for a total of $500: 

• Janet Riley, spouse of San Francisco real estate investor Clint Reilly, $250; 

• Tomas Schoenberg, Swig Company commercial real estate, $250. 

Her total contributions have reached $35,270, with a land-use share totaling $2,500, or 7.1 percent of the total. 

Hahn also loaned herself $15,000, reported over two filing periods. 

Berkeley developers were making a last-minute push last week to flood the coffers of Terry Doran as he battles to win the City Council seat representing downtown Berkeley. 

The result, wrote one of Berkeley’s most prominent developers in an e-mail to “friends and colleagues,” would solidify their control of the City Council. 

In the digital epistle to fellow developers, Ali Kashani last week said Doran had “held off on receiving contributions from the development community previously because he did not want to suffer from the negative press the Daily Planet would provide. Now we are close enough to the election that Terry is ready for us to participate with him by donating.” 

Once a developer for the nonprofit housing sector, Kashani has joined the commercial sector, partnering with former city Land Use Planning Manager Mark Rhoades. One of their first projects is a planned five-story apartment building at the corner of Ashby and San Pablo avenues. 

The developer told his colleagues that the race for the fourth district council seat is “the most important race right now, and probably in Berkeley’s last 20 years. We have an opportunity to elect Terry Doran who will solidify the very shaky majority that we currently have on the council.” 

Reached at his office last Thursday afternoon, Kashani acknowledged sending the e-mail. 

He said that while Doran had initially discouraged developer contributions, “he didn’t raise enough money to cope with your editor’s champion of the masses,” a reference to Jesse Arreguin, a rival candidate for the seat endorsed by Daily Planet Executive Editor Becky O’Malley. 

Asked about response to the e-mail, Kashani said, “I have a lot of responses from people who said they are going” to a Sunday afternoon fundraiser for Doran, a former school board member who has been endorsed by every member of the current council except for Kriss Worthington. 

Worthington had been a close ally to Dona Spring, the Green Party activist who had held the seat until her death earlier this year. Two years ago, Spring had soundly defeated another developer-backed candidate. 

Kashani immediately surmised the reason for the call he received from a Daily Planet reporter. As soon as the journalist introduced himself, Ka-shani said, “You got my e-mail. There were people on that list I knew would give it to you.” 

Kashani wrote the introductory paragraph to a longer text, which he forwarded on from Doran campaign manager, Merlin Edwards II. 

His statement in full: 

“We are entering the final two weeks of the election, and we have some VERY important races to consider. The most important race right now, and probably in Berkeley’s last 20 years, is District 4 (formerly held by Dona Spring). We have an opportunity to elect Terry Doran who will solidify the very shaky majority that we currently have on the Council. This is a watershed opportunity and if we miss it we will be subject to the same old Berkeley politics. Terry held off on receiving contributions from the development community previously because he did not want to suffer the negative press the Daily Planet would provide. Now we are close enough to the election that Terry is ready for us to participate with him by donating. PLEASE CONTRIBUTE THE MAXIMUM $250 PER PERSON TO TERRY’S CAMPAIGN. Terry is having a fundraising party this Sunday. Come if you can. If you can’t, send a check. His website is http://www.terrydoran4district4.com/donat.html.” 

When questioned about his claim that the pro-development majority on the council was “shaky,” Kashani laughed. 

Candidates respond 

“I was very surprised when I heard about it,” said Arreguin. “I think it really represents what’s at stake in this election. They really don’t want someone who’s an independent advocate for the community; they want a rubber stamp. He’s been a rubber stamp for their projects on ZAB. I will not be a rubber stamp.” 

Both Doran and Arreguin served on the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC), which drafted the initial version of a plan that the city council is scheduled to adopt in May. 

Arreguin’s positions on the committee closely tracked those of Spring, while Doran favored a minority view that called for a concentration of high rises in the city center, so-called “point towers,” which Spring had criticized. 

Doran said that, contrary to Kashani’s e-mail, he had never refused any developer contributions, nor had he discussed the issue with Kashani. 

“Maybe he is using that kind of rhetoric to encourage people who have not given me any money,” he said. 

Asked about his position on development, Kashani said, “Are you trying to suggest that the developers who have produced all this new housing in Berkeley are tainted or bad people? I have been a strong advocate of appropriate development on transit corridors.” 

Doran said “a great many environmentalists have agreed with me,” while Arreguin points to his own endorsement by the Sierra Club.

With a week to go before the Nov. 4 elections, candidates running for the Berkeley Board of Education turned the spotlight on the achievement gap at a debate organized by the Berkeley PTA Council at Willard Middle School on Monday. 

Moderated by Margot Reed, PTA Council vice president, the 75-minute debate gave each candidate a minute to answer questions to a range of issues, including student achievement, the district’s student integration plan and special education. Another minute was allocated for rebuttals, but they were entirely absent during the course of the evening. 

About 50 parents—some accompanied by children working on their homework—sat next to teachers and administrators from the Berkeley Unified School District listening to candidates explain their positions in Willard’s well-stocked library on Stuart Street. 

The candidates began by introducing themselves, going over their backgrounds, highlighting career achievements and pointing time and again to their commitment to Berkeley Unified—be it through past successes, tutoring, helping at-risk youth or as community organizers. 

School board candidate Priscilla Myrick, a former chief financial officer with a record of tutoring students in classrooms, won the toss-up for the first question, which asked candidates to name the challenges they witnessed in the Berkeley public schools and what they would do to address them. 

Myrick promptly replied that, as school board director, she would ensure that school resources were optimized to give the greatest benefit to “9,500 plus” students. 

“I would be looking at K-12 programs and making sure that money is spent appropriately,” she said, stressing that teacher retention was also very important. “We need to make sure that students don’t fall behind.” 

As she tackled other questions related to the achievement gap, Myrick also spoke about creating aggressive summer school programs that would bring students up to grade level by the next school year. 

School board candidate Toya Groves, who works with at-risk teenagers at a Berkeley-based nonprofit, pointed out that Latinos and African-American students were some of the worst affected by the achievement gap. 

“We need to study the emotional and performance impact on African-Americans and Latinos,” Groves said. “We need to create a comfort level for all parents from all backgrounds.” 

Responding to later questions about the achievement gap, Groves said it was crucial to implement an in-house suspension policy that would address the mental health of students. 

School Board President and incumbent John Selawsky warned that the district’s budget crisis was far from over and that the public schools faced a major challenge from a slumping state economy over the next two years or more. 

District officials have said that they are wary of possible midyear cuts to the state budget by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, which could affect the Berkeley public schools adversely. 

“Tied to that is equity issues,” he said. “We are going to have to take account of our own funding. We are going to be squeezed by the state. Every district is going to be squeezed by the state. We have a lot of issues we have to deal with in the next few years.” 

He added that the district had tackled similar problems in the past by using parcel tax funds to ensure that music and arts programs in the district were able to survive in spite of a tight budget. 

Selawsky also made it clear by the end of the debate that he supported more electives for middle schoolers, which educators say give students a chance to cultivate interests in the creative arts instead of just becoming proficient in math, science and English, as mandated by federal and state standardized tests. 

After chanting the words “professional development” three times, Selawsky said that it was important to coach younger teachers if the district wanted to try out differentiated education in the future. 

Drawing on the 2020 Vision—a citywide effort initiated in June which aims to close the achievement gap—school board candidate Beatriz Leyva-Cutler said that it was important to understand the issues behind the achievement gap. 

“It’s not about just one problem but how we engage in all the different problems that affects our schools,” she said. “It’s affecting not just our schools but also our city.” 

Early childhood care and education are the key to solving a lot of problems behind the crisis in student achievement, Leyva-Cutler said. 

Candidates also expressed their opinion about registering out-of-district students, with the majority agreeing that awareness about legal transfers was necessary to address misconceptions about the issue. 

“It’s a Catch 22,” said Groves. “A lot of youth of color are coming from outside the district. A lot of economically disadvantaged families are being pushed out of Berkeley because they can’t afford to live here anymore but they are continuing to send students here. We need to maintain diversity, we need to maintain the transfer quota.” 

Selawsky said that contrary to common belief, the district did not have a massive number of out-of-district students. 

According to current information provided by district officials, Berkeley Unified has 550 out-of-district transfers, with 20 out-of district transfers registering this year, the majority of them children of Berkeley Unified employees and a couple who transferred through appeals to Alameda County. 

“There’s a lot of statutes that people are unaware of they can legally enroll in our schools,” Selwasky said. 

Leyva-Cutler pointed out that Berkeley Unified had issued a moratorium on out-of-district kindergarten registrations for the third year. 

District officials have said in the past that a lack of space in Berkeley’s elementary schools prevents them from relaxing this rule. 

Leyva-Cutler added that although it was important to keep a check on illegal transfers, it was important not to disrupt the continuity of an out-of-district transfer student’s education. 

“I think the issue is about illegal transfers,” Myrick said. “I think what people are asking about is people who are borrowing addresses, that’s something very difficult to detect. I think there’s an impression of it being large. People don’t know the facts and reasons behind the transfer.” 

Candidates also spoke about their plans to reach out to the LGBTQ, ethnic and racial minority families in the district in response to a question about how they would communicate district policies to these communities, something all candidates said still had a lot of room for improvement. 

“We have a parent outreach department and we have people who do outreach to different communities,” Selawsky said, adding that he had co-founded the taskforce with the district’s LGBTQ families on the district’s anti-harrasment policy. “That said, we do need more translators and more information on websites which is sometimes hard due to the lack of funding. There is a need and we will be doing more outreach.” 

Leyva-Cutler emphasized that parents needed to see for themselves what it is like to be involved in advocacy groups. 

Myrick said that although the district had taken some steps to disseminate information among minority families by hiring an outreach coordinator, she was disappointed that the school governance councils had not been consulted on the 2020 Vision. 

“I think the district is open to other suggestions to ensure that more needs to be done,” she said. 

Groves said that through her work with high risk teenagers, she had realized that the way to get parents to come to meetings was by celebrating their child’s success, however small it might be. 

“It saddens me that there are no parents representing the African American population here today,” she said, prompting the audience to look around and acknowledge the fact. 

Shay Black is an Irish musician who lives in Oakland just a few blocks from the Planet office on Shattuck. He has led an Irish music session in the nearby Starry Plough every Sunday for the last thirteen years. Recently, he’s become a YouTube celebrity. Last month, a jolly video starring Shay was made at the Plough, and posted on YouTube, and it now has had 250,000 hits. It’s a cover of a song originally written in Ireland that reclaims Barack Obama’s Irish roots.  

Here’s the first verse: 

“O’Leary, O’Reilly, O’Hare and O’Hara 

There’s no one as Irish as Barack O’Bama 

From the old Blarney Stone to the green Hill of Tara 

There’s no one as Irish as Barack O’Bama.” 

The Corrigan Brothers, who wrote it, hail from Limerick, Ireland, where earlier this year research into genealogical records unearthed the fact that Barack Obama had an Irish ancestor on his mother’s side, Fulmuth Kearney, who emigrated from Ireland to Chicago just after the Great Famine in 1850. The Corrigans put their version up on YouTube as a joke, and Shay Black discovered it there. 

Black added some verses of his own, rounded up a few of the regulars at the Plough to sing along and created an instant hit. He credited the Corrigans, but they weren’t happy with the way it was done, and battling press releases have ensued, with ample coverage in the Irish press. The Corrigans asked Shay to take his video down, but he refused, issuing this statement: 

“Removing the song from YouTube now would remove all the links [to the video] that people are forwarding. For whatever reason, the song has tapped into a vein that is actually becoming a vibrant political movement amongst white Irish folks who may have found it difficult to vote for a black man. Forty-six million people in the United States say they are ‘Irish’ and the song has made it easier to identify Obama as actually being Irish. Like JFK. I have been told that this song is the cause of a paradigm shift that could actually tip the balance in swing states in the election.” 

Whether it’s a game-changer or not, the song, in all its iterations, is a big hit in some quarters, especially among Irish-American Obama fans. However, the Berkeley O’Malleys have asked that their name be substituted into the first verse, and that O’Reilly be deleted, since the O’Reillys, or at least Bill O’Reilly, haven’t been looking too good lately.

Willard Middle School is interviewing some students who fire department officials said might have been involved in setting three small fires in a couple of trash cans in the school’s restrooms and an open garbage area in the garden during school hours last Wednesday. 

No one was injured in the fires, and school authorities started taking precautions immediately after the incident by sending students to the restroom in groups. There was no damage to school property, district spokesperson Mark Coplan said. 

Calls to Willard Middle School Principal Robert Ithurburn were not returned.  

Dong said that Fire Department officials would meet with the school’s vice principal, Ms. Jackson, on Friday to get an update about the situation. 

“Once we make the determination about which students were involved, we can send them to the Juvenile Fire Setters Program to better understand why they set the fires,” he said. 

“They can get counseling or intervention to help change their behavior.” 

Dong said that the station had received a fire alarm activation at 2:22. Coplan said that he had not come across trash can fires at middle schools in Berkeley during the last six years he had served as the district’s public information officer. 

“I have seen a couple at the high school though,” he said. In 2000, Berkeley High School reported a string of arson fires, at least one of which started in a trash can. 

Measure LL Landmarks Preservation Commission 

Shall ordinance No. 6,958-N.S., Repealing and Reenacting Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 3.24 (Landmarks Preservation), passed by City Council, granting the Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources; eliminating property owners’ approval in establishing historic districts; and substantially revising procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated) and regulating alteration or demolition of historic resources, subject to appeal to the Council, be adopted?  

Majority Approval Required 

One of the things that sets the city of Berkeley apart from its neighbors—aside from being the recognized national center for radicalism and progressive thought—is the preservation of its buildings. While the view of the hills and the long stretch looking down into the bay no longer have the frontier emptiness of a hundred years ago, many of Berkeley’s tree-lined neighborhoods have pointedly maintained the same look for decades, with houses and buildings intact that would have been familiar to our grandparents. Anyone unfamiliar with Berkeley will find this odd and seemingly contradictory—conservatives are thought to have cornered the market on preservation, after all. But most Berkeleyans sees preserving the city’s historic buildings as an integral part of its character and charm, whatever part of the political spectrum they’re in. 

Thus it is not surprising that changing Berkeley’s Landmarks Preservation Ordinance—the city law which has made that preservation possible—would draw one of the most heated and spirited political campaigns in recent memory in a city known for its spirited politics. 

The city’s original Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, among other things, established a Landmarks Preservation Commission with the authority to “designate landmarks, structures of merit, and historic districts” and to “regulate alterations to them,” according to the city attorney’s official analysis. 

In 2006, a divided Berkeley City Council passed modifications to the landmarks ordinance, sponsored by Mayor Tom Bates and Councilmember Laurie Capitelli, changes that supporters said preserved preservation while curing portions of the law that prevented needed development; opponents said the changes gutted important parts of the preservation ordinance and did away with needed barriers to demolishing historic buildings to make way for unnecessary development. 

Well, actually, it was more complicated than that. The council passed the Bates-Capitelli ordinance on first reading in July of 2006 on a 6-3 vote (Betty Olds, Kriss Worthington, Dona Spring no). But the council postponed a final vote after opponents of the landmarks modifications circulated petitions to put Measure J on the ballot. It was designed to enact the existing ordinance by vote of the people so that the council could never change it. In November 2006, 56.8 percent of Berkeley voters voted against Measure J, and so the City Council passed the Bates-Capitelli modifications on second reading. 

Measure LL is a second bite at the landmarks preservation modifications apple. This time it’s a referendum seeking to void the version of the ordinance as revised, in order to leave the original on the books. Just to make it more confusing, the support-opposition positions are reversed from two years ago. A yes vote on Measure LL means that the 2006 changes will go into effect. A no vote means that the original Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Ordinance will remain as it was before the council vote two years ago. 

Not surprisingly for Berkeley, both sides of Measure LL say they are in favor of preserving preservation. The ballot argument for the measure reads that “Measure LL supports legitimate historic preservation,” while opponents counter that the measure “destroys the protections of the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance, violates the California Environmental Quality Act, and will cost the City thousands in lawsuits.”  

The two sides also battle over whether the modifications are even needed to put the landmarks ordinance in line with state law. Proponents say that without the modifications, Berkeley’s landmarks ordinance is out of compliance with state law and cannot be enforced. Opponents say that the existing ordinance is already in compliance, and no such modifications are needed. The California State Office of Historic Preservation has endorsed the current ordinance as being compliant. 

Another key battle embodied in the measure is whether the existing landmarks ordinance goes “too far” in allowing halts to demolition of buildings through the landmarking process.  

Proponents of Measure LL say that the existing landmarks ordinance has provisions that allowed it to be misused by development opponents, and the modifications are designed only to give developers and building owners a fair and timely notification—what’s called a “safe harbor”—that their buildings won’t be subject to landmark preservation, before they sink money into demolition or development plans.  

Opponents of Measure LL say that the pre-2006 landmarks ordinance had sufficient protections and warnings for owners and that there is no evidence that the original ordinance was misused. 

Which side should be believed in this argument? That will be up to the voters.

Students at Berkeley’s Maybeck High School can move into new classrooms in St. John’s Presbyterian Church this spring, since the school received a relocation permit from city officials at a public meeting last week. 

St. John’s location at 2727 College Ave.—about a mile from Maybeck’s current site at the United Methodist Church on Bancroft Way—ensures that the teacher-run private coeducational prep school is still in close proximity to the UC Berkeley campus, school officials said. 

Although some neighbors had expressed concerns about traffic and noise from the proposed move, the city’s Zoning Adjustments Board approved the use permit in less than two minutes. 

School officials said earlier that the proposed project would not adversely impact the neighborhood. 

“I was overwhelmed with joy,” said Nelly Coplan, church administrator, after the meeting. “It’s a project we have been working on for a while. So when Maybeck dropped in on us in February—and I don’t want to sound too religious here—it was a sign from the sky. They will create a lot of new energy for us, not just in the church and fiscal matters but also social responsibility.” 

The 100-year-old congregation has been experiencing declining enrollment since the ’70s, Coplan said, which has become a major cause of worry for the church, especially since the building’s infrastructure is in dire need of repairs. 

St. John’s has always welcomed nonprofits to its premises, leasing rooms for $35 an hour, and at times it has allowed some community groups to host events for free. Coplan said Maybeck would be paying a monthly rate for the leased space but did not want to disclose the amount since the school has not signed a contract yet. 

Maybeck will be occupying the second floor of the church center, which was previously used by the German International School and the East Bay Girls’ School, and will be converting existing classrooms into smaller spaces to meet its needs. The German International School closed in June and the East Bay Girls School closed two years ago. 

The 36-year-old high school has around 240 students from all over the Bay Area and is not looking at expanding its enrollment anytime soon, Maybeck’s principal, John Muster, told the Planet in an earlier interview. He could not be reached for comment Friday. 

The classrooms will be spread across 7,000 square feet, Coplan said, and the school will also have access to the sanctuary, the Fireside Room and the basketball court. 

“Pastor Max is just crazy about sports and he insists that the students use the basketball hoop,” she said. 

Although Maybeck does not have any athletic programs, students attend P.E. classes. The school has an open campus, which allows students to go out during lunch and free periods. St. John’s also has a skateboard ramp which is used on Wednesdays by its youth group. 

“We are not moving anybody out of the church because the school is moving in,” Coplan said. “Earlier it was 90 percent empty; that will not be the case now. After Maybeck moves in we will be maintaining the relationship we have with the non profits here but we won’t be actively seeking to lease space. Honestly I think all our rooms have been taken up by Maybeck now.” 

Wareham shows 740 Heinz design 

The zoning board’s reactions to the Wareham company’s latest design for a proposed biotech institute at the site of the landmarked Copra Warehouse at 740 Heinz Ave. bordered on optimism laced with caution. 

Wareham presented the design to the board at the public meeting last Thursday and is scheduled to return with a formal application in the future. Company officials said that they had submitted a formal application to the city’s planning department a few weeks ago. 

Although board members acknowledged that they preferred the latest design for the proposed lab building—which preserves the warehouse’s original facade and reflects the neighborhood architecture—more than the previous ones, they urged Chris Barglow, a partner at Wareham, and project architect Randall Dowler of Dowler-Gruman Architects to figure out a way to get a variance for the proposed project. 

Wareham will be asking the zoning board for a variance since the building’s proposed height, 72 feet, is not allowed in the neighborhood. 

Both the zoning board and the landmarks commission have criticized the design and mass of the proposed building at previous meetings. Some members of the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commissions reacted favorably to Wareham’s latest design earlier this month but advised them to work on scaling back the height. 

Barglow pointed out that the company had reduced the mass of the building to 90,000 square feet from 100,000 square feet and had kept the height to 72 feet, a decrease of almost 20 feet. He said that the building’s exterior also had a lot more brick and less glass, to reflect the old industrial warehouse look so typical to the neighborhood. 

“A life sciences institute will be an asset to the City of Berkeley and the East Bay Green Corridor, but there is room for improvement,” said board member Michael Alvarez Cohen of the proposed project. 

Board member Terry Doran asked if Wareham would look into the possibility of giving some kind of community benefits to the city in exchange for a variance. 

“Is there something we could consider in the long range?” he asked. “Maybe something that would help a biology teacher at Berkeley High? Something that would benefit the city beyond the project?” 

Board chair Rick Judd acknowledged that, although the new design preserved traces of the old warehouse, Wareham still had a long way to go before it could get a variance. 

“The people who wrote the West Berkeley zoning are going to think it [the height] is inappropriate,” he said. “It’s way beyond the zoning of the area. I think you need to work on that.”

On Oct. 15, Margaret Emmington died peacefully at Alta Bates Hospital at age 104, but not before she fulfilled her last wish: the day before she died, she was able to mark her absentee ballot for Barack Obama. Over the last year she had emphatically stated that it was her hope to live long enough (imagining, even, that she might live to see the inauguration) to cast her vote for the man who would change the mind of the country. 

Margaret Ware Emmington (Mrs. Leslie) was born in St. Paul, Minnesota. Her distinguished American heritage included being the great, great, great, great-granddaughter of Col. Jacob Ford Jr. who served as an aide to General George Washington and in whose home General Washington established his military headquarters during the hard winter of 1779–80. Her great-grandfather, Joshua Ford, was among the early Williams College graduates who formed the American Foreign Mission movement, sailing with his bride in 1847 to Beirut, Lebanon. Indeed, her grandfather was born in Aleppo, Syria, growing up with Arabic as his first language. It made Mrs. Emmington proud that members of her family had served as some of the first cultural ambassadors to the Middle East and continued such links into the 20th century. 

In 1945, when Mrs. Emmington moved with her husband and two children to Berkeley, she immediately became involved in the life of St. John’s Presbyterian Church (designed by Julia Morgan in 1908) and remained a devoted member. However, when it was announced in 1970 that the congregation would build a new sanctuary at another site and, perhaps, sell the old building, she and her husband spoke up with alarm.  

The Emmington family began to voice real concern that this remarkable building could fall into the hands of developers and easily be torn down. It was out of this concern that a movement evolved to save old St. John’s, now used as the Julia Morgan Theater, as well as many other beautiful buildings in Berkeley being demolished at that time, and, thus, the efforts ultimately led to the founding of the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association and the adoption of the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. 

Mrs. Emmington respected the time-honored social traditions of the era in which she was raised and in which she raised her family. She was a clear, forward-looking thinker, who acted upon her ideals and inspired others to move toward their goals. She was as much in her element serving luncheon to members of the Claremont Park Book Club or presiding at a tea at the Town and Gown Club as she was walking into the Stadium Oak Grove last year on the arm of her daughter to give moral support to the tree sitters.  

She charmed all those she met and had a special way of bringing out the best in each person. As a neighbor recently recalled, “She was always interested in the world around her.” 

Mrs. Emmington is survived by her son, Bill; daughter, Lesley; grandsons, Henry, Bertram, and Stewart; and a cousin, Lorraine Knight.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Morris Jacobson on Monday postponed the pretrial hearing for former Berkeley City College student Andrew Hoeft-Edenfield until Jan. 26, 2009. Hoeft-Edenfield is charged with murdering UC Berkeley nuclear engineering graduate Chris Wootton,  

The pre-trial hearing had originally been scheduled for Monday. Alameda County Deputy District Attorney Stacie Pettigrew will be prosecuting Hoeft-Edenfield, who is being represented by Yolanda Hwang, a private attorney. 

Wootton, a member of the Sigma Pi fraternity at UC Berkeley, was fatally stabbed following a drunken row outside the Chi Omega fraternity on Warring Street in May. Hoeft-Edenfield, 20, was arrested later that day. He pleaded not guilty in August to murder charges and was denied bail. 

If crime figures presented to the Berkeley City Council Tuesday by Berkeley Police Department Chief Doug Hambleton are anything to go by, property crime—which includes burglaries, car thefts and arson—in the city has declined since the 1970s. 

However, the public’s fear about it, statistics notwithstanding, continues to rise. 

Hambleton blamed the information age—particularly the evening news channels—for installing paranoia in people about incidents taking place thousands of miles away but was quick to acknowledge that violent crime—which includes homicides, rapes, robbery and aggravated assault—was up. 

To the two dozen or so South Berkeley residents who witnessed a sudden spurt in neighborhood shootings this September, the graphs and numbers indicating a decrease in crime meant little, they told the council, during what turned out to be a two and a half hour discussion about community safety in South and West Berkeley, headed by Deputy City Manager Lisa Caronna. 

At the council meeting Tuesday, Caronna along with Hambleton, Neighborhood Services Liaison Angela Gallegos-Castillo and Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Director William Rogers presented a report about what the city was doing to address citizen’s concerns about the shootings, which left two people dead and one injured last month. 

The homicides, which occurred near Sacramento and Derby streets, were followed by two more shootings, which did not result in any injuries. It is currently unclear whether the shootings were related. 

“It’s not fear, it’s real,” said Berkeley resident Laura Menard, cheered on by twenty others who testified throughout the course of the evening about poor street lights, overgrown trees, trash and gang problems in South and West Berkeley. 

One home owner compared the area to that of West Side Story, while others complained that they were tired of seeing city officials neglect South West Berkeley over the years. 

“I have made 25 calls to the Berkeley Police Department and my most recent 911 call was not answered,” said Berkeley resident Mark Johnson, who recently bought a house in West Berkeley. 

“I have had my car vandalized and my garden turned into a pass-through for drug traffickers. We would like to know what your plans are on turning some of this around. I came to Berkeley for diversity, but it turned into a nightmare.” 

Gerard Carleton, another West Berkeley resident, said residents were tired of getting lip service from city officials. 

“Nobody wants to come forward with any solutions,” he said. “The time is now to change the rules of the game.” 

Hambleton said that statistics indicate violent crime in the city had been down in 2004 but has gone up since then, noting that there had been a spike in robberies over the last few years. 

Figures for this year show that the property crime rate in Berkeley is fairly stable so far but that the violent crime rate is on the rise, with the city averaging 50 robberies every month. 

Aggravated assaults are also down compared to last year. 

Mayor Tom Bates asked if the rise in robberies was a nationwide trend, given the current economic slump. 

“There has been a national rise in robberies,” Hambleton said. 

“The crime rate in Berkeley overall is low compared to the 1980s and 1990s. However, that’s not much of a comfort to people. It doesn’t make the situation acceptable.” 

He said the Berkeley Police Department had plans to use two bike cops in the South Berkeley corridor after the double homicide in September. 

“The initial reaction after the homicide was to increase patrol,” he said. “Officers were asked to spend more of their free time in that neighborhood, do more walking in that area. We have got a lot of feedback from South Berkeley but we still have a ways to go.” 

The shootings have led to existing neighborhood watch groups becoming more active and two new ones being formed, Hambleton said, adding that it was a positive sign. 

Berkeley currently has around 157 registered neighborhood watch groups of which only eight meet on a regular basis, he said. 

“We are asking people to light up their porch lights,” he said. “We are getting PG&E to donate compact fluorescent lights, which we will give to neighbors if they agree to keep their porch lights on.” 

Rogers told the council that the city’s Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Division was working with the Public Works Department to identify problem areas in dire need of tree pruning or better lighting. 

“Many street trees result in blocking light,” Rogers said, pointing out that so far the list included 23 streets in South Berkeley, which contained of 350 trees. 

“Trimming them may ensure more light. We want to make sure there is enough light.” 

Claudette Ford, the city’s public works director, said her department would be repairing street lights spread across 78 locations in South Berkeley. 

The Berkeley Police Department’s long- term strategies to combat crime include creating smaller beats and sending larger consignments of officers to South and West Berkeley neighborhoods. 

There is also a possibility that the department’s beats will be reassessed in the near future. 

The department’s Special Enforcement Unit makes an average of 33 arrests every month, Hambleton said. 

“We need to get guns off the street because they are killing people,” said Councilmember Max Anderson. “We need to promote peer-to-peer activity and not treat youth as aliens. We need to give them meaningful employment, not just get them locked up.” 

Gallegos-Castillo told the council that the city was making coordinated efforts to involve young people in academic and after-school job programs and offer year-round sports, playgrounds, summer camps, and teen programs, including youth development programs such as the Youth Commission and the Voices Against Violence program. 

Parks and Recreation currently spends $6.7 million on youth programs and the city’s Youth Employment Program works on a budget of $1.1 million. 

“We are constantly looking for ways to do outreach and market our program,” Gallegos-Castillo said. “We really do have a good program, but we need to get it out there.” 

The biggest moment of truth in the council meeting arrived when Councilmember Moore, who is responsible for West Berkeley, asked Hambleton if gangs really existed in Berkeley. 

“Community members talk about gangs, but I have heard different answers from the Police Department,” he said. “Do gangs exist in Berkeley?” 

Hambleton acknowledged that gangs were present in Berkeley and went on to elaborate about Hispanic gangs in West Berkeley and other gangs in South Berkeley. 

“You can see it from the graffiti, but you don’t get the level of activities in the Bay Area as you do in other communities,” he said. 

“It’s not as violent.” 

A number of people complained about illegal dumping in South Berkeley, which they said brought unwanted furniture and trash to the neighborhood. 

“It’s OK to break the rules or ignore the rules because no one cares about South West Berkeley,” said a neighbor. 

Councilmembers later asked city staff to look at ways to revitalize the Berkeley Safe Neighborhoods Council and research the option of using cameras to monitor the streets. 

“In my six years on the council, this is the first time we had a serious discussion on crime,” said Councilmember Gordon Wozniak. 

“We’d rather have a discussion on free speech or some problems in a galaxy far far away. We have a zero-waste goal and a climate change plan but we don’t have a crime prevention plan. Crime is as serious as climate change. People don’t feel safe in their homes.” 

The city manager’s office is scheduled to return with a report on violent crimes in Berkeley and a comprehensive plan on community safety on Jan. 27. 

Contact for South and West Berkeley Community Safety: 

Neighborhood Services Liaison Angela Gallegos-Castillo, phone: 981-2491 and Deputy City Manager Lisa Caronna, phone: 981-7000 

Community members can call the Berkeley Public Works Department at 981-6620 to complain about street lights that are not working. 

Starting in December, Berkeley’s homeless youth will be able to get off the streets every evening and spend some time looking for jobs, housing and peer support, according to a $100,000 contract approved by the Berkeley City Council Tuesday. 

Funded by the Public Commons for Everyone Initiative, which was adopted by the council almost a year ago, the program will provide supportive daytime activities for homeless 18- to 25-year-olds. 

Youth Emergency Assistance Hostel (YEAH!)—which provides seasonal shelter and other services to transition-aged youths at the Lutheran Church of the Cross at 1744 University Ave.—was selected, from the two agencies that applied to carry out the services, by a committee comprising city officials from the Mental Health Department and the City Manager’s office. 

Sharon Hawkins Leydon, YEAH’s executive director, said, “Despite the current economic climate, we plan to stay open.” The one-year pilot program includes a youth council, life skills and teaching young people how to speak, Hawkins Leydon said. 

Jane Micallef, the city’s acting housing director, said that a similar daytime service called Chaplaincy to the Homeless— funded by HUD and the city—had existed several years ago but eventually went out of business. “However, this program is going to be different from that,” she said. 

“It’s designed to provide the kinds of services transition-aged youth need, to move to the next phase of their lives,” she said, adding that the programs would be an expansion of the case management YEAH! already provides young people. 

“We will be targeting people who are homeless, but that doesn’t mean we will be turning away people who have a home.” 

The services, which will run from Dec. 1 to Nov. 31, 2009, will be open from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. Parking meter fees will help provide the funds for the contract. 

The daytime program will develop social support services, links with other agencies and organizations, mental health services, substance use recovery services, crisis intervention, and social, recreational and educational activities and will provide updates and statistics to the city’s Housing Department, among other things.  

By the end of the first year, the program is expected to have provided daytime services for 50 at-risk youths and enrolled eight of them in GED programs —with three receiving GED certificates—and to have connected at least 10 clients to the Homeless Action Center. 

Other goals include obtaining transitional or permanent housing for eight clients, with at least six (75 percent) clients keeping their housing for at least six months; and reducing jail time by 20 percent. Micallef said that a number of services had been included in the Public Commons for Everyone Initiative to ensure that it worked. 

“It’s a package of measures to mitigate problematic behavior and identify its underlying causes,” she said. “An important goal of the initiative is to ensure that transition-aged youth, particularly those with alcohol or drug dependencies as well as mental health issues, have an opportunity to take part in age-appropriate services which will make them self-sufficient and independent.” 

Council Approves Cab Fare Hikes 

Taxi fare rates in the City of Berkeley will increase from Nov. 3 following an approval by the Berkeley City Council Tuesday. City officials called the increment a straightforward realignment of Berkeley rates with those of its neighboring cities. 

The move increases the maximum taxicab fare rate from $2.40 to $3 for the flag drop, from 24 cents to 26 cents per 1/10 mile and waiting time or traffic delay to $26 per hour or 26 cents for each 36 seconds. 

According to Robert Hicks, the city’s director of finance, the city’s cab fare rates haven’t increased in the last six years. 

Cab owners and drivers requested an increase in rates primarily because of high gas prices, which have increased more than 100 percent since the cab rates were last increased in 2002, the report said. 

The report said that city officials have verified that higher cab fares exist in Oakland, San Francisco, San Jose and Daly City. Berkeley’s new rates match the rate in Oakland. 

A rifle in one hand 

And skirts to your knee, 

OK in Alaska, 

A bust as VP. 

You love your relations, 

And stick to the law, 

Except when it comes 

To your brother-in-law. 

You’ve plenty of charm 

And you’re certainly pretty, 

But you’ve not had to manage 

Any really big city. 

You’ve not been to Russia, 

Baghdad or Great Britain. 

International leader? 

You’re just a wee kitten. 

You’re not above spreading 

Political sleeze 

In the hope your opponents 

Just fall to their knees. 

The right to abortion? 

Your position’s no mystery. 

If you get elected, 

Roe v. Wade becomes history. 

If you get to the White House, 

The Dems will all grieve. 

Forget flailin’ on Palin! 

We’re bailin’—let’s leave! 

The Oct. 23-29 story “Four Candidates Battle for District 4 Vacancy” incorrectly reported that Jesse Arrgeuin was running both for City Council and for re-election to the rent board. While Arreguin had taken out papers for both seats, he withdrew from the rent board race when he filed for council.

The citizens' committee members who have been working on a Sunshine Ordinance for Berkeley have released their final draft, which can be read here . They hope that it will be passed by the Berkeley City Council, and they are asking community leaders to sign on in support. If the council fails to act, the ordinance could also be passed by a ballot initiative.

Here are a few recommendations for races and measures which I think are particularly important: 

BERKELEY 

Mayor: Shirley Dean 

City Council District 4:  

Jesse Arreguin 

City Council District 5:  

Sophie Hahn 

City Council District 6:  

Phoebe Sorgen 

Berkeley Measure FF (library bonds): Yes 

Berkeley Measure LL (Landmark Ordinance revisions): No 

State Proposition 8: No 

RICHMOND 

Measure T: Yes 

Council Candidates: Butt, Ritterman, Beckles 

Well, a good time was had by all. Did the first ever Daily Planet mayoral debate change the course of history? Probably not, but then it wasn’t supposed to. 

Our operating premise from day 1 has been that if people knew what was going on, they’d make the right decisions. We still believe that, but there’s a big “if” in that sentence. The problem is that a lot of people don’t seem to want to know what’s going on. They’d prefer to believe that this is the best of all possible worlds and that Berkeley in particular is nirvana, the navel of the universe, utopia in action. 

Most of the audience who showed up to hear what was billed as a debate between the two candidates for mayor were people who had already made up their minds about whom to support. Anyone who recognized the familiar faces in the audience might have guessed that about two-thirds of them belonged to critics of the way things are going, with another 20 percent acolytes, friends, clients and the (well-wired) spouse of the incumbent mayor. That left about 10 or 15 percent of audience as possibly undecided. 

If we’d been as flush as the national news organizations, we’d have linked these unchurched folks up to electronic monitors and checked frequently for how they thought things were going onstage. But (1) that’s way too expensive, and (2) “Undecided” usually means “Uninformed” and “Unlikely to Vote,” at least on the national level. 

On the local level, it’s a bit more complicated, since there’s very little coverage of local news. The San Francisco Chronicle frequently makes stunning errors in what passes for its East Bay coverage. The Daily Cal only prints 10,000 copies, and these are mostly distributed on or near the UC campus. The East Bay Express sometimes has a hard-hitting local article—don’t miss it this week—but a lot of its space is usually devoted to entertainment.  

Yes, there’s the Planet, but to pick one up you actually have to walk down to the corner, or take a bus downtown if a bus comes to your house, or even, godforbid, drive downtown if you live on Berkeley’s Olympian heights (where there’s actually a Parnassus Drive). Some privileged hill-dwellers also have a faux-local manifestation of the vast Media News empire delivered to their doors, but that publication specializes in No Bad News.  

But enough with the class warfare already! Our local candidates know better than to call each other socialists, since they realize that labelling your opponent a socialist might increase his or her vote count, especially among Berkeley’s nouveaux riches who don’t want to forget their red roots. 

(It’s confusing that what was formerly red or at least parlor pink is now blue in the media. The Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club should hold a forum on the implications of that shift some day.) 

The appearance of two uninvited candidates who insisted on taking their place on the podium with the two official ones enlivened the show considerably. We didn’t even know they wanted to participate. 

It seems that there’s a special category for registered write-ins. Who knew? If you don’t get around to qualifying to be on the ballot in the usual way, you can register as a write-in and then your votes will be counted—thus the appearance of Zachary Running Wolf and Kahlil Jacobs-Fantauzzi demanding equal time. 

Naive that I am, I thought all those names I’ve been writing in all these years were already being counted. Why shouldn’t they be? After the election, we’ll have to investigate why that might be, and if it’s constitutional. If you live in a district where your incumbent is unopposed, you might want to write in a name of your choice, even your own, to create a test case. 

So we missed inviting Kahlil and Running Wolf to the party, but we’re glad they showed up anyhow. They clearly relished pointing accusing fingers at some of the elephants in the room which the dueling mayors tended to tip-toe around, notably UC’s plans to cover Strawberry Canyon and West Berkeley with concrete in the name of greenishness, aided and abetted by shills on the Berkeley City Council. Almost everyone in the audience appeared to enjoy their contribution to what could have been a polite but boring dialogue between the mayors. 

The Planet’s other contribution to what should be the civic forum is today’s insanely expanded opinion section. We’ve splurged on extra printing in order to give everyone one last chance to tell us what we need to know, or at least what writers think we need to know. If voters really want to be informed, they’ll read every last word of it, along with all of our news articles.  

The jury’s not yet in on whether print papers are still relevant in the age of the Internet, but, to cover all base,s all this information is also on the Web at berkeleydailyplanet.com, with more to come before Tuesday. Forward the links to all your friends. 

The Executive Editor has made a few endorsements of candidates and causes, which can be found on the front page. A couple of Richmond readers have implored me to add Yes on Measure T and progressive Richmond council candidates Butt, Ritterman and Beckles to our endorsements, and that seems like a good idea, given Richmond’s crucial role in the future of the East Bay. Albany residents have written enough about their candidates that we don’t need to take sides. 

We came away from the mayoral debate thinking that we need to do this more often. A frequent criticism of the incumbent mayor is that he’s hard to find—that he’s all too accessible to a select circle of cronies but to no one else. After the election, regardless of who’s elected, it might be a good idea for the Planet to sponsor a series of town hall meetings with elected officials, to give them the opportunity to respond to constituents without the constraints imposed by council meetings where decisions must be made. We’ll work on it. 

NEXT TIME 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I think the Daily Planet-sponsored mayoral debate was a great idea. Next time, do it earlier so it makes a difference to the mail-in voters. 

Brian Reinbolt 

• 

NEO-NAZI SKINHEAD THREATS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The thought has occurred to many of us—a thought so disturbing we try to put it out of our minds. Then comes newspaper and television accounts of the neo-Nazi skinheads' threat to behead 80 people and murder Barack Obama! 

I'm appalled by these stories, given the sick people and copycats in our society who might pick up on the assassination plot. In making public such demonic threats, the media are doing this country a disservice. To repeat, many of us do have fear of the unimaginable, but we keep those fears to ourselves. I would hope the media will show more restraint and publish no more sensational stories of the skinheads. 

Dorothy Snodgrass 

• 

TRANSIT-BASED GROWTH 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

An older person expressed concern to me yesterday about the "transit-based growth" article in the Daily Planet, and she asked me to send a comment. I just checked out the city's website, set up an account for posting comments, and read a good part of Chapter 3, Sustainable Transportation and Land Use. Well, my comment didn't appear to get posted. I'll give it to your readers here, just in case. 

Two issues with the transportation/land use section: 

I was pleasantly surprised to see the amount of detail in this part of the city's plan. But two issues occur to me. 

1. BRT is an example of favoring public transportation over "regular" multi-lane thoroughfares. If this trend continues, how are drivers supposed to manage? Suppliers of food and other items for sale in farmers markets and stores are included in that category, as are car-share drivers. It seems certain that hybrid and zero-emission vehicles will get snatched up as soon as they become cheaper and more widely available. But how will they fare on the streets of Berkeley?  

I watched a travel show recently, and noticed that the European city featured had both pedestrian-friendly areas and really wide thoroughfares for vehicles. 

2. Personal vehicles will be around for a long time. I'd love to buy a Smart Car, but I live in a multi-story dwelling (no place to plug in). Has the city explored the idea of making metered electric-charging stations available for apartment-type dwellers? I'm not saying the city would necessarily pay for such stations--although such stations might conceivably benefit the city, as in providing power to the grid. 

Thanks for listening. 

Jean Hohl 

• 

ZIONISM 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

After all the ridiculous vituperation that rained down upon the Planet and myself following my Oct. 2 commentary on the shenanigans of Zionist promotions of the Jewish State of Israel, I was convinced that my Power Point presentation at the Unitarian Fellowship last night would be at least picketed. Sad I was that no Israeli flags appeared, no picketers, no provocative questioners, and the Planet controversy even failed to energize a sizeable audience. There were about 25-30 people present when I asked how many people attending were Jewish. About five hands did not rise. An almost all-Jewish 100 percent sympathetic audience. I'll tell you, dear reader, you missed a good presentation. Invite me to your school, church, community center and you'll see.  

I'm writing this letter, as I did my commentary, to make a simple point. Jews who oppose Zionism and its mythology and dishonesty had better begin to make themselves known and heard not just as individuals but as Jews. How else can other Americans know that Zionism does not represent the Jewish people? Zionism has no right to take away our voices, no right to intimidate us with their brazen accusations of anti-Semitism and self-hatred. Certainly the Zionists do represent most of the powerful and institutional sectors of the Jewish people, but very many Jews without power do not approve of this. We do not accept that Ashkenazi European, American and Russian Jews lay claim and lay waste to the land and subjugate the indigenous Palestinian people.  

Marc Sapir 

• 

PEOPLE'S PARK ANNIVERSARY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

We are beginning to organize the 40th Anniversary of People's Park, which is this April 2009. Talk of a week of events and a larger concert than usual are afoot. What would you like to see? Can you add your visions and energy to manifest this relevant reunion revitalizing revolution and responsibility through revelry? 

Please get involved. The first organizing meeting is on Sunday Nov. 9 at noon at the Cafe Med on Telegraph Avenue between Haste and Dwight. 

We are hoping to have a vibrant diversity of activities and encourage anyone interested in helping this manifest to come share your ideas and energies. 

Please come on Sunday or get back to us with your ideas and desires! Let us know if you want to be noticed for future meetings. 

Terri Compost 

• 

LONG HAUL RAID 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

How about a story detailing updates on the Long Haul Raid and the UCPD investigation that ensued? It's been over two months and many of your readers would like to see an update on this seemingly illegal raid. 

Liz Dellums 

• 

ROBO CALLS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I got a call last Saturday from former President Bill Clinton. So did a few thousand other people. It was an automatically dialed recorded political message. If I am sure of how I am going to vote on the particular issue, I immediately hang up. If I am not sure, I listen to the message. Then I vote /against/ the position of the calling organization. I figure that this is the surest way of stopping this intrusive practice. 

Robert Gable 

• 

CURATORIAL CENSORSHIP 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I'm adding my voice to the chorus of those complaining about misguided curatorial censorship at the Addison Street Windows Gallery. I understand that the person in charge believes that she is exercising good ethical standards, but she fails in at least two areas. First, guidelines for participation in a public gallery should be transparent and open to review, and it appears that her control is neither. And more important, the notion that eliminating any images of weapons encourages a peaceful citizenry misunderstands the value of socially engaged critical art. The examples that have recently been censored in no way glorify violence, but in fact are good examples of art that challenges the acceptance of violence as public policy. 

This sort of private control has no place in Berkeley public art spaces. I suggest that such an approach is indefensible, and can easily be carried to the absurd level of prohibiting such imagery as the Seal of the State of California. 

I encourage city officials to review this matter and seek a swift and just solution. 

Lincoln Cushing 

MEASURE GG 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Russ Mitchell's stance on Measure GG sounds convincing, but maybe it's because he slaps us with a giant red-herring: Why should the City of Berkeley drain its sales tax coffers to fund $14 million worth of emergency services for UC Berkeley? 

It's a just question, but I do want to point out something very important: It's not like we're getting nothing in return for the funding that the university gets from city taxes. UC Berkeley's police and fire departments do respond to emergencies off campus. (UC Berkeley PD for instance has a one-mile radius jurisdiction surrounding all university property—this includes a huge percentage of the city and surrounding areas.) 

Hypothetically, if Russ could get his way and stop the city from funding the university's emergency services, it's a good bet that a good portion of that money would have to go straight to Berkeley police and fire. Personally I don't consider this an unreasonable alternative, but it's unreasonable to expect that removing university emergency services funding would have no negative impact on the city. 

I think a better argument for or against GG would be based on the question as to whether it provides funding for city disaster preparedness or for university disaster preparedness. I have not yet delved into the text of the measure to find out which is the case, but surely it's an important factor the Berkeley voter should consider when making his or her decision. 

Tom Slankard 

• 

EMBARRASSMENT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

When looking at the ballot and the candidates for District 4 I sadly did not find the "embarrassment of riches" a recent letter writer found. I found embarrassment, but no riches. But I guess that really applies to the whole ballot and not just to District 4. 

Frank Greenspan 

• 

PROPOSITION 8 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Prop. 8 is an initiative that promotes discrimination, division and hate. Prop. 8 is not about the love and the sanctity of marriage; it is a spiteful and vindictive initiative being forced on the majority of Californians by a minority of religious extremists. 

The church isn't supposed to be involved in politics but look who is financing Prop. 8. Follow the money. Fundamentalists and evangelicals and out of state anti-abortionists and anti-gay forces are spending a large amount of money to pass this measure 

There is nothing altruistic and loving and sharing about Prop. 8, and isn't that what marriage is all about. 

Everyone is free to marry who they want, but not if Prop. 8 passes and religious ideologues get their way. No on 8. 

Ron Lowe 

Nevada City 

• 

FROM AUSTRALIA 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I hope you beautiful American people choose hope instead of fear ! 

As a strong believer in Jesus, I am appalled that the “religious right” have been so fervent in their fear-mongering about Barack Obama, as they were here, when a younger Kevin Rudd challenged Bush supporter John Howard for prime minister last year, and won. 

Like there, lies were told, negative hate filled accusations made, but the Australian people rose above all that, and joined the 21st century. I hope you do the same! 

Geoff Hinds 

Australia 

• 

ROB WRENN'S 'TRUTHINESS' 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Up to now I have been willing to give Rob Wrenn the benefit of the doubt. I presumed that he had not read the BRT draft EIR and therefore was merely mistaken about the claims he made for AC Transit's proposal. After reading his commentary in last week's Planet, however, I have come to the conclusion that Mr. Wrenn is deliberately attempting to deceive the public about BRT. Mr. Wrenn says in his commentary that "the BRT EIR estimates that BRT will increase bus ridership by between 56 percent and 76 percent." This is a flat-out falsehood. 

I refer Mr. Wrenn and other interested parties to the chart on page 3-28 of the draft EIR. As a result of BRT, AC Transit systemwide boardings are projected to increase between 2.8 percent and 6.2 percent, depending on which BRT alternative is chosen. 

The overall East Bay transit picture is even worse. Because some BART patrons would switch to BRT, thus DEcreasing BART ridership, overall transit ridership in the East Bay is projected to increase just 0.7 percent to 1.4 percent—no more than 5,000 riders per day. 

Finally, Mr. Wrenn once again tries to paint all BRT opponents with the same broad brush. If you're against this BRT proposal, he says, it's because you're anti-transit or too selfish to put up with minor traffic delays. This is as insulting as it is wrong. There is another, very compelling, reason to be against this BRT proposal. BRT as currently proposed (and documented in the draft EIR) would do almost nothing to increase transit use and would cost a staggering $250 million. Any public official who would vote to spend taxpayer money on such a boondoggle should be removed from office. 

Jim Bullock 

• 

LOW BLOW 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

A resident of District 6 informed me that she received the latest mailing from candidate Susan Wengraf that shows the other candidate, Phoebe Sorgen, in front of the marines' station and the price tag of $250,000 across her chest, with a note identifying her as candidate for District 6.  

The resident thought that this is not only a really low blow, but borders on defaming or character assassination. Of course, seeing that it was received Thursday there is very little time or venue for a response. 

Akio Tanaka 

Oakland 

• 

ALBANY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

We have raised our family and lived in Albany for 35 years and this is the most responsive and dedicated City Council Albany has ever seen! Because of Robert Lieber’s work with the Easy Bay Mayors we do not have to endure being sprayed with pesticides for the light brown apple moth. We value Robert’s contributions and his experience as health professional and a person with great vision. We also feel that if Albany is to have a voice in the greater Bay Area community we must have an elected mayor who can serve a standard term of office and thus we urge a yes vote on Measure Y. We also endorse Leo Panian and Ellen Toomey, new and enthusiastic candidates for City Council who will bring fresh ideas to our city. 

Carol Ginsburg and Joe Como  

• 

ALBANY VALUES? 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

James Cleveland's "Time for a Change in Albany" commentary last week was surly and quite the contrary to real Albany values. It sounded more akin to McCain and Palin's "Country First." While I am a supporter of the candidates endorsed by Congresswoman Lee, Assembly Member (and soon to be State Senator) Loni Hancock, EBRP Director (and soon to be Assembly member)—Lieber, Panian and Toomey, I respect the other candidates willingness to serve. Mr Cleveland commentary did them a disservice. I trust the citizens of Albany will cast their votes for who they believe best shares their individual values and hopes for the future of the city we all value. 

David Madson 

Albany 

MEASURE KK 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I have heard that Bates and Council have been distancing themselves from Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lately, but they still say Measure KK is bad, bad government. Actually, I think the measure is much more far reaching in it’s implications than just the particular issue it addresses. It would basically establish a precedent for DIRECT public involvement in major land use decisions, not just "public input" which is often impotent. This would create a major adjustment in the balance of power if it catches on. Now, some things should not be put to public ballot and it is therefore easy to go too far with this idea, but other things can be, I believe, and the public benefits in the end. It seems like the issue of lane removal would be on the “good” side, for it actually compels AC Transit to come to the public with an offer if they want to remove lanes from critical arteries, not just a 5 member majority of City Council with incentives which may be more about, say development for example. Saying “bad government” is not specific enough. It could be bad government, or it could be good government. It all depends. In either event however, it’s presence indicates that there is an absence of representative government—and that makes council look bad. I guess if that were being said about me I wouldn’t like it either. 

Joseph Stubbs 

• 

SURROGATE  

CANDIDATE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

When I decided that I could not both run for District 4 council and give my new baby the time she needed, I began looking for another candidate to support. I looked for a candidate with strong Progressive values who would be a responsive councilmember, respectful of different opinions, and will be 100 percent committed to environmentally sustainable policies. I also was looking for someone who will be committed to representing the district while also keeping in mind the needs of the entire City. While I found all of the candidates worthy of support, I decided that the candidate most deserving of my vote is Terry Doran. 

Not only did Terry contact me to discuss my ideas for the City and district 4, he also laid out a very clear explanation of his values and his positions on the issues. Terry is a lifelong educator and advocate for youth who is both a father and grandfather. He understands the challenges facing young families like mine. He also is committed to sustainable development that will prevent suburban sprawl, create the density needed to support a vibrant downtown and transit system, while protecting surrounding neighborhoods from the negative impacts of development. I am happy to endorse Terry for City Council. 

Jerry Threet 

• 

DISAPPEARING SIGNS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

A growing number of concerned citizens are reporting that No-on-LL lawn signs have been stolen. Even a $300 banner on a supporter’s hedge disappeared in the night. 

It is unlikely that the thieves are persons with no particular interest in Measure LL, or still less that the thieves are No-on-LL activists themselves. So it is reasonable to conclude that the thieves are proponents of the measure. 

Measure LL in effect allows the mayor and his developer cronies to gut the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance by eliminating much of the review process that is aimed at preserving the quality of Berkeley’s neighborhoods. If the measure passes, developers will have greater freedom to buy Berkeley’s treasured old homes, tear them down, and put up speculator monstrosities in their place. 

As of this writing, the mayor has not replied to an email on the thefts. It may well be that a few goof-balls who support LL are responsible for the thefts; and that the mayor had nothing to do with them. But it is impossible not to remember at a time like this that the mayor saw fit to steal 1,000 copies of the Daily Cal a day before the election in 2002 because it carried an endorsement of his opponent, Shirley Dean. 

In any case, if there are voters who are still unsure how to vote on this crucially important measure, perhaps this latest behavior of some of its advocates will convince these voters that they really should vote No on Measure LL. 

Peter Schorer 

• 

LA WOODS’ RECORD 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I have the deepest respect for the candidates for District 4; the field is almost an embarrassment of riches. But if Berkeley were to pay just a little more attention to L A Wood’s record, and learn a little more from him each time he spoke, we would have a very different city. 

We would never speak about an issue until we had done extraordinary research, and would feel free to study the opinions of others if we needed more perspective. We would seek to patiently heal our schools with our own efforts rather than evade their sicknesses, and work tirelessly to assist others in getting a clearer picture of the factors creating a problem rather than bully others into quick decisions. 

L A Wood’s decades of tireless community service and wealth of good works is as deep as his character. His independence, strength, and gentle clarity of vision is a gift to the community. 

Carol Denney 

• 

MEASURE FF 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am writing my first ever Letter to the Editor (in my life) in response to some of the questions people have about Measure FF. Measure FF is an important local bond measure that will allow the City to make much needed improvements to Berkeley’s well loved/used branch libraries. These improvements which will also address seismic and access issues will ensure they remain a safe place for our community for years to come. The bonds may ONLY be used for the construction and repair of the buildings.  

I realize that now is a difficult time to think about paying even a little more in taxes, but I do believe this is the most important time to invest in our libraries. In tough economic times libraries offer information and computers for job seekers, unlimited access to books, music, movies, magazines, and newspapers for families who might have been able or more willing to pay for them in more flush times. Unfortunately, making our libraries safe and accessible so we can all use them to our best advantage is not free. Please vote to protect our city’s infrastructure for the future. This modest investment will yield benefits for all of us. 

On November 4, I urge you to vote Yes on Measure FF. 

Sophia Skoda 

• 

EDUCATIONAL DECLINE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

We have read with concern and alarm Priscilla Myrick’s commentary [Daily Planet, Oct 23-29] about the very real decline of science and math education at Berkeley High—specifically, the fact that Berkeley High is considering doing away with its honors math program and eliminating the school-wide math and science departments and department chairs. This is exactly the wrong move at this critical time. The very future of this nation’s competitiveness in the evolving global world, the effort to recruit underrepresented minorities to careers in technology and science, and the ability to ensure that a Berkeley High diploma “ensures readiness for college-level work” is critically dependent on BUSD developing and maintaining a challenging and rigorous curriculum.  

Our son graduated from Berkeley High in the early 80s and had the benefit of several AP courses and excellent teachers which enabled him to attend Cal Tech and skip his freshman math course. Berkeley’s educational program was excellent then. We must continue to support a challenging and rigorous curriculum as we move to meet the challenges of today’s world.  

Ned and Janis Dairiki 

• 

BEATRIZ LEYVA-CUTLER 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As noted in today’s Planet, all four candidates for Berkeley School Director recognize the importance of closing the “achievement gap.” The question for voters therefore becomes: who will provide the strongest leadership to bring about the change we need?  

Beatriz Leyva-Cutler has been an educator, mentor, and community leader in West Berkeley for nearly three decades. She understands the needs and perspectives of the least well-served families in Berkeley public schools. She is bi-lingual and bi-cultural. Recently, she has served as a member of the Futures Committee at Berkeley High, which is charged with helping BHS to realize the “2020 Vision” for equity and excellence. I have served along with her on this committee and have seen her leadership skills in action. She goes straight to the heart of difficult problems; deals honestly and respectfully with other committee members; pays attention to details; and also sees the big picture, namely the need for cultural change within our schools.  

Certainly, we need to enhance the rigor and the richness of our school curricula, as all the School Board candidates seem to recognize, and we need to offer students plenty of support to catch up if they are behind. But higher standards and more tutoring won’t close the gap by themselves. We also need to create a culture of success built on trusting relationships between students and teachers. Anyone who doubts the relevance of school climate to student achievement should consider the findings of Stanford psychology professor Claude Steele. Steele’s research into the effects of “Stereotype Threat” has been extensively replicated, widely published, and internationally recognized. He and his colleagues have found that pervasive stereotypes (e.g. girls are bad at math, Asians are good at math, or Blacks are less intelligent than Whites) can have a dramatic impact on students’ academic performance. Moreover, schools do not need to do anything specific to activate this threat: it is, alas, already “in the air.” Fortunately, schools can do something to deactivate the threat of negative stereotypes, but a less threatening school culture will not come about simply as a result of good intentions and palliative measures. We need systemic change. 

Leyva-Cutler possesses the experience, the wisdom, and the courage to lead our community in creating the excellent schools that all our children deserve. Vote for Beatriz Leyva-Cutler for School Board. 

Carol S. Lashof 

• 

CANDIDATES’ DONORS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding your article on the District 5 race between Laurie Capitelli and Sophie Hahn, I felt your coverage was incomplete concerning who the candidates’ donors are. You establish that Hahn had raised almost double the amount of money for her campaign than had Capitelli, but your focus was on those “developers” who donated to the candidates. Had Capitelli’s campaign been the one that had raised double the amount of Hahn’s, I could see the logic of your article’s focus. 

The implication is that real estate agents, contractors, architects, and others whose job involves property support a candidate to further their own agenda. Who are the people who donated almost twice as much to the campaign of Hahn? What is their motive? Are they people who oppose development? From the article, all I could glean was that Hahn’s donors were “history professors from UC Berkeley and other universities.” She raised almost $30,000 from history professors who live in District 5?! Why are these donors not subjected to the same scrutiny? 

I do not know Capitelli or Hahn personally, but I do know several of names of the “developers” who were outed by the article; some are neighbors, one is a person who helped me get a loan when I bought my home, and one is a contractor who remodels people’s homes for a living. These people might support Laurie Capitelli because he’s been a good representative of District 5. 

Jeffrey Goldstein 

• 

A BAD SIGN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

While visiting Alameda last week, I witnessed someone removing a “McCain-Palin” sign and replacing it with a “McCain-Palin” sign. 

Ove Ofteness 

• 

THE BIG PEOPLE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The Berkeley statue on the pedestrian bridge is fun. So it’s representational. A little representational art never hurt anyone. 

My only complaint is that the representation is too post-1965, even in the little plaques surrounding the main statue. 

Berkeley’s specialness begins with Bishop Berkeley, after whom the city is named. Where is he? After all, in 1725 he advocated building a college in a remote spot on the edge of the world, in Bermuda, not thinking it the least inappropriate to build a college in a far away spot. (His visit to Rhode Island a couple of years later did not raise the money he had hoped for, so the plan was abandoned.) Berkeley was named in the 1860s by people who remembered his boosterism for the far west— “Westward the course of empire takes its way”—and especially the last line, “Time’s noblest offspring is the last.” They saw Berkeley, on the edge of the Pacific, as the end of westward expansion, and thus the “noblest” spot. 

We may not want to memorialize Benjamin Ide Wheeler riding his horse across campus. On the other hand, Ludwig in his fountain is worthy of remembrance. Some may complain that “no one remembers Ludwig,” but many of us recall the charming dog with great fondness. Forty years from now the memory of tree sitters may be equally (or even more) obscure to a younger generation. 

Maybe I’m being too critical too early: phase 2 of the construction may meet my desire for pre-1965 stuff.  

Phyllis Brooks Schafer 

• 

LETTER TO  

CHANCELLOR BERGENEAU 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I work on campus. I want to thank you for your concern about the anti-zionist graffiti on the bus shelters. We must strive for respect in this community. That said, will you please release a similar statement concerning recent sexist and racist graffitit directed at the campus labor union AFSCME? During a union election this past week, two of our posters in lower sproul were defaced with virulent anti-immigrant and sexist graffiti, after hours, not twenty-feet from the Bancroft bus shelters. 

The workers of AFSCME carry this university on our backs. We deserve respect and visibility for our contribution. 

Thank you for you attention to this matter. 

Hank Chapot, UC Gardener 

Oakland  

• 

MEASURE GG 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Over the past several years, budgets throughout the region have been slashed. Certainly a lot of waste has been cut, and each city and county department is running a leaner, meaner operation. But some departments have been cut beyond a safe level. 

This is the case with the Berkeley Fire Department and Emergency Services, and that’s what Measure GG will rectify. Measure GG will put an end to fire station closures in Berkeley, and provide paramedic level equipment and response capability to the seven engines and two ladder trucks. 

Currently, Berkeley’s paramedic level response is provided only by the city’s three ambulances. The measure will also restore funding to the local CERT program that trains citizens in emergency operations, and equips those citizens with emergency equipment so they can immediately respond to an emergency or natural disaster and aid the first responders. 

Fire suppression, medical emergencies, and light search and rescue are what these civilian volunteers have been trained to do. Measure GG helps to make sure they (as well as any neighborhood in Berkeley) can continue to be trained and equipped in order to help our Fire Department protect life and property. 

Please vote Yes on Measure GG. 

Bob Humphrey 

Pleasant Hill  

• 

MYRICK’S COMMENTARY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I taught chemistry at UC Berkeley for more than thirty years, and I applaud the Daily Planet Commentary of Priscilla Myrick, Berkeley School Board Candidate, stressing the importance of strengthening math and science teaching in the Berkeley schools. Especially is math so fundamental for all groups, since it is the key to so many professions—business, computing, engineering, architecture as well as science. Math skills have been a key to success for so many from abroad and from all walks of life in the U.S. 

John Rasmussen 

• 

PUBLIC ART 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Well I’ve had a chance to look at the new Berkeley “protest” sculpture from a several angles now and it either a lousy piece of public art or the wrong kind of art for its location. At its present location it’s impossible to see in any detail (and it’s a detailed piece of art) and just looks like a jumble of forms seen mostly in silhouette. Even up close, which few people will really see, it’s confusing. I think it should have a more central location where more people can move close and around it. Where, I don’t know, perhaps replacing the joke sculpture down at the Berkeley pier or maybe somewhere on University Ave.—hmm, maybe in the People’s Park near the focus of much of the sculptures event. 

Bill Newton 

• 

CAROUSEL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

What a disappointment! I went by the Tilden Park carousel recently, to check out the big buck renovation. The animal mounts look handsome indeed, but the painstakingly restored band organ, a marvel in its own right—I have pleasant memories of watching the mechanisms play real drums and cymbals—isn’t used! I enquired, and was told, “It’s too loud.” So the little kids go round and round to a cheesy recording played over bad speakers, in a space that now resembles a gloomy, dimly lit cave, even on a sunny day. Magic it ain’t. 

Dick Bagwell  

• 

MEDICAL MARIJUANA 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Please support medical cannabis in Berkeley by voting yes on Measure JJ. 

For many people in Berkeley living with HIV/AIDS, cancer, chronic pain, and other afflictions, the best way to ease their suffering is with doctor-recommended medical cannabis. Berkeley’s three medical cannabis collectives have provided medicine and other wellness services for over seven years. Today these collectives are at risk. New development plans in Berkeley threaten to shut them down, and the city lacks a proper land-use procedure to relocate them. 

Measure JJ creates a procedure to allow these collectives to relocate, so that they can continue providing Berkeley’s patients with the medicine they need. JJ does not change the city law limiting Berkeley to no more than three collectives. Berkeley’s three collectives pay taxes, offer their employees a living wage and benefits, and support the community. 

JJ has been widely endorsed by, among others, the Alameda County Democratic Party, the United Democratic Campaign of Berkeley, the Cal Berkeley Democrats, Berkeley Citizens Action, ACLU-Berkeley, UC Berkeley Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the Green Party, the Oakland Tribune, the Bay Guardian, two Berkeley city council members, and Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson. There is no significant opposition to JJ. 

Please join us in supporting medical cannabis by voting yes on Measure JJ. For more information, see www.YesOnJJ. com. 

Megan Sand 

• 

JESSE ARREGUIN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

District Four residents, if you haven’t voted yet, please mark your ballot on election day for Jesse Arreguin, a brilliant young man who is vying for a City Council seat in a crowded field. 

Jesse will bring energy and insight to crucial upcoming decisions including the Downtown and Southside Plans, a density bonus ordinance, the Climate Action Plan, and numerous other issues that will shape the City’s future. 

He has far more experience in housing, zoning, and the environment than all the other contenders combined, and his positions are balanced and thoughtful. 

Although Jesse’s support extends well beyond District Four, we are counting on you to make the wise choice on behalf of all the neighborhoods that will benefit from his expertise. 

Toni Mester 

• 

ARREGUIN FOR COUNCIL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The landlord lobby (Berkeley Property Owners’ Association) newsletter only attacks one candidate this year—Jesse Arreguin, who served effectively as the chair of the Housing Advisory Commission and the Rent Stabilization Board. That’s one more reason for tenants and progressives to vote for Jesse Arreguin for City Council in District 4. 

Tom Hunt 

• 

LA WOOD 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am writing in support of LA Wood who is running for the Berkeley Council Fourth District seat. LA is the candidate whose environmental and citizen-advocacy based politics most closely resembles the late and missed Dona Spring. As the only Green Party member on the Council, Dona was the force and voice for human survival on our threatened planet through better policy. LA Wood is the only candidate who has the experience and the expertise to challenge the tsunami of careless development that now threatens to transform the city into a toxic fiefdom of the University of California with their Bush-like attitude toward the biosphere. 

Anyone who has participated in any of the many different types of meetings, hearings, public comment, demonstrations knows how complex and treacherous the process of environmental defense is. LA served on the city’s Environmental Advisory commission (CEAC) and has spearheaded grass-roots campaigns against the big polluters like Pacific Castings. It was his activism that got the grants that bought the roof-top air monitors that finally revealed the stew of poisonous substances that somehow escaped notice of the state air quality management board with no challenge from local ‘leaders’. It was LA who called on the Council to better investigate the land the city bought for the Skate Park. Now we have $4 million gone and a polluted unusable site. LA was involved early on in the successful closing of the Tritium Facility, one of the nation’s worst tritium disasters dumping rad-waste daily on the kids at the Lawrence Science Museum. No other candidate better understands the subtle intricacies of the Federal and State environmental regulations and how best to protect the public. We need someone who has been in the trenches and knows the game. Vote LA Wood.  

Mark McDonald  

• 

WASTE AND FAILURE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In his October 9 candidate statement in the Planet, School Board incumbent and candidate John Selawsky brags that he has worked to “entirely solarize Washington Elementary School” and that his goal is “to solarize half of our Berkeley public schools in the next five years.” 

Now, most Berkeleyans support renewable energy, as do I. However, the School Board decided to “entirely solarize” Washington even as the Washington PTA pointed out that the project should be down-sized after implementing energy efficiency measures. That was never done, so we now have expensive solar panels fueling substantial energy waste. Further, the solar panels were paid for in large part with funds set aside for capital improvements.  

This kind of waste and failure to prioritize perhaps explains why Washington and Berkeley High kids have to schlep over to Washington’s shabby off-site bungalows due to a chronic shortage of classroom space. Having listened to all of the candidates and read their statements, Priscilla Myrick is the only one who speaks specifically to the need to establish priorities and stick to them, rather than respond to every worthy cause that comes along. Providing sufficient and decent classrooms is one of her priorities. She’s got my vote. 

Nancy Rader 

• 

VOTING 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I think everyone should read the column in last week’s paper by Priscilla Myrick, who is running for school board. Now is not the time to back off math and science education. My daughter went to Berkeley High and greatly benefited from double-period science there. 

For those people who are voting for District 4 councilmember, you may know that Terry Dornan always opposed double-period science. He said it “wasn’t fair.” That is why I am not voting for him. Who knows what other helpful policies he will consider “not fair”? 

Jenifer Steele 

• 

MEASURE WW 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I wish to thank Jef Poskanzer for his letter about Meansure WW in which he mentions me. As I said in my own letter I will abstain from voting for it because I don’t know if those opposed or for it are right or wrong. I sent my letter primarily to remind East Bay Regional Parks and others of the outrage of the fence around the meadow in the Berkeley Marina. To say that the park system “merely manages it” is misleading. Along with Citizens for East Shore Parks, of which Shirley Dean was a member of the board, they had, from what I learned, a considerable influence in regard to the fence and they could have the same influence in taking it down. My personal experience with Mr. LaForce whom he mentions in his letter was when I attended a meeting of CESP, where Mr. LaForce was the chairman and where he was totally deaf to hearing anything about the fence, which Mr. Poskanzer says he helped to construct, and he then moved to have the meeting proceed to another matter.  

Pete Najarian 

• 

MISPLACED AND ILLOGICAL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Your attempt to smear City Council candidate Terry Doran as a “developer” is misplaced and illogical. Mr. Doran has been workig hard for all Berkeleyans since he was an active and engaged teacher at Berkeley High School in the 1970s. He has the perspective and experience to understand there is good development and bad development. I have no doubt he will make reasoned decisions based on what is best for the majority of Berkeleyans, as he has done for more than 30 years. 

Paul Lecky 

• 

DOWNTOWN PLANNERS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Why was the community of downtown merchants and cultural institutions denied a voice in the planning of downtown? 

By edict, the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Commission (DAPAC) was seated only with appointed citizens. No seats were designated for merchants, downtown institutions or the Downtown Berkeley Association. Thus, no one on the commission had a livelihood stake in downtown. 

Like any human, the DAPAC commissioners pursued their interests and their priorities with some mind to their formal charge. Their interests reflected the core values of Berkeley citizens such as historic preservation and “sustainability.” Plantings and pedestrian safety were much discussed. Means to limit autos was the most popular topic. 

But commissioners’ interests did not much extend to the abc’s of downtown business vitality. Yawns greeted the three minute “public comment” speeches by the Downtown Berkeley Association. No envoys from vibrant small cities were asked to appear. Little curiosity was sparked by merchants of our downtown who are survivors of its commerce-unfriendly environment. Of course, merchants and institutions were allowed to speak for three minutes in the pre-agenda slot with the hoi polloi. 

With no human voice on the committee, the businesses and institutions of downtown were as inanimate “Monopoly” game tokens, to be moved about at will. With nothing personally at stake and no method of collaborating with those who have everything at stake, the commissioners talked about downtown for nearly three years. They authored a plan for its future. City staff has subsequently made small adjustments. But their efforts can not replace the voice which was omitted. 

We want the streets of our downtown to feel alive, don’t we? But what message did we send to those we expect to animate it? 

Bruce Wicinas 

• 

NO ON PROP. 4 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The National Women’s Political Caucus- Alameda North (NWPC-AN) strongly encourages The Berkeley Daily Planet to endorse NO on Prop 4. Proposition 4 is an attempt to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, while endangering our teens’ safety and challenging a woman’s right to privacy. 

Look familiar? This is the third attempt in the last four years parental notification has appeared on the California ballot. Twice before, California voters said no and are encouraged to vote against this wolf in sheep’s clothing initiative, for the third time. 

Parents rightfully want to be involved in their teenagers’ lives, and the good news is that most teens do go to their parents when faced with an unintended pregnancy. But in the real world, parental notification laws don’t work. No law can mandate family communication. If passed, some girls will seek out illegal abortions rather than notify their parents; some will attempt to hide the pregnancy and give birth alone; and some may panic and take their own lives in a state of desperation. 

There is no evidence that Prop 4 enhances our teens’ safety and welfare. It is time to protect a woman’s right to choice... again. 

Frieda K Edgette (Glantz) 

Communications Chair 

National Women’s Political Caucus—Alameda North 

• 

EUGENE COCKERHAM 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am amazed that the City of Berkeley is still putting up with promoter Eugene Cockerham. 

A dozen years ago, he rented halls in north Berkeley, Queen Aida Hall and Berkeley Black Repertory Theater in south Berkeley, San Pablo Recreation facility in west Berkeley, and other similar facilities in Berkeley and adjacent cities. Each time the result was out of control, unruly crowds, fights, gunfire, local property damage such as people dancing on car roofs and hoods, noise and nuisance, typically requiring massive police (30-40 officers) presence to disperse the crowds. My vague memory is one person was shot and killed at one of the Berkeley events. 

He always promises small quiet parties as he rents the various halls and auditoriums, and now apparently restaurants. 

He then puts up fliers at Berkeley High School and other high schools. Word of a party anywhere travels quickly with this age group. He collects his money fast at the door, but then quickly disappears when things get out of control, leaving both the facility owners and the party patrons burned when the police and/or the fire department close down the overcrowded facility. 

Seeing the repeated pattern, I phone police and other offices in several adjacent cities to find out how they handled similar events. They all knew who Cockerham was, but they quickly put a stop to his activities in their jurisdictions. I wrote this information up in detail and presented it to the planning commission along with several recommendations that were successfully being used in adjacent cities. Then Assistant City Attorney Zack Cowen argued that with some minor tweaks, the existing City of Berkeley procedures were more than adequate to handle the problem. 

Apparently not. And now Berkeley’s method of cracking down is sending another letter to restaurant owners. 

Eerily similar to the City of Berkeley’s lack of will to close down long term drug houses despite the Alameda County Grand Jury’s conclusion that the city’s inaction in that area is essentially misfeasance and dereliction of duty. It seems that because we are a college or university town, anything goes and rules don’t apply. 

Osman Vincent 

• 

MONEY OR EXPERIENCE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Richard Brenneman’s recent articles in the Daily Planet missed the real campaign finance story in this Berkeley City Council election. District 5 candidate Sophie Hahn has invested $55,000 in her campaign for the City Council, including $19,000 of her own money and almost $14,000 from out-of-town donors as far away as London. No District 5 candidate has ever spent event $30,000. While money always helps a campaign, it doesn’t qualify a candidate, measure substantive community knowledge or provide real experience in Berkeley politics. District 5 needs a Council representative with demonstrated experience who is committed to making a Berkeley a better place, not to advancing a political career. That candidate is Laurie Capitelli. 

Lessly Field 

• 

MAYORAL FORUM 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I appreciate the Planet’s effort in holding a mayoral forum on October 27. However, it was billed as a discussion between the only two credible and legally-qualified candidates, Shirley Dean and Tom Bates, and I was looking forward to a serious one-on-one. 

Instead, two persons who failed to meet the minimal requirements to appear on the ballot showed up and forced themselves onto the podium (as “write-in candidates”), proceeding to take valuable time away from Dean and Bates, and diluting the discussion with their personal opinions in which no one is really interested at the moment. I understand how hard it is to turn such persons away and do not hold the Planet responsible. Instead, I say shame on Zachary Running Wolf and Khalil Jacobs-Fantauzzi for horning in and disrespecting the rules to become a candidate, the rules about invited speakers, and the rightful expectations of attendees. 

To me, this is not at all amusing. It’s part of the mis-en-scene that often makes Berkeley a laughing stock in the real world. Imagine, if this type of things happened in the final presidential debates.  

I left very early. 

Barbara Gilbert 

• 

WENGRAF RAISING MONEY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thanks for the story about Susan Wengraf raising money for her run for city council (Only One Major Fund-Raiser In Three City Council Races). You are right about one thing, she’s done well. She has over 235 contributions, everything from $25 up to $250. But come on guys, you’re stretching the truth when your category for developers includes a professor of planning, an interior designer and real estate agents (who, chances are, only sell old houses). What next? Why not a house painter because she paints houses? A writer because he works out of his house? 

Susan Wengraf, has been helping constituents of District Six for 16 years as Betty Olds’ assistant. So it’s not surprising then that she would receive contributions from people all over the spectrum which includes conservationists, teachers, social workers, artists, and a lot of just plain citizens like me who are convinced she’s the best person for the job. 

Anna Avellar 

• 

MEASURE FF 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am amazed that there is any opposition to Measure FF. Measure FF will allow a 30 year, $26 million bond to raise the funds that will be used to fix, improve and make our branch library buildings safe and accessible for everyone. Libraries are the most popular of public services and we need to be committed to their maintenance and preservation. Measure FF will fund seismic retrofits, repair roofs, foundations, electrical and plumbing, expand space in some branches, and make the branches more accessible and welcoming to children and adults with disabilities. Access issues in the branch libraries have been ignored for too long. An investment in our branch libraries benefits us now and will benefit future generations of Berkeley residents. I can’t think of a better use of our money. 

Susan Henderson 

• 

FLOODING ALBANY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Why are PACs flooding Albany to elect certain candidates? 

They want a 5–0 PAC candidate Council majority to totally control Albany. A Sierra Club PAC endorsement sounds objective. It’s not. The candidates must pay for the “endorsement.” PACs also want to impose Big City politics on Albany with their Measure Y, a directly elected mayor. 

Albany works—it need no Measure Y. 84 percent of all California cities Albany size use the system we’ve used since 1927 including Emeryville, Piedmont, Orinda, Moraga, and all Marin cities south of San Rafael. Each city’s community-centered system of 5 Council members rotating the mayor position in every case creates a stable, desirable place to live. 

PAC influence is obvious. 

In a June 2008 Council meeting Lieber, Wile, and Atkinson voted $600,000 of your money to do a visioning process of Golden Gate Fields, a private property—a vision of when Golden Gate Fields is “gone.” The racetrack is privately owned, not closing, and so alienated by Lieber’s tactics that they will not even accept his calls either corporate or local. A City consultant in 2007 warned that any process without property owner commitment fails and wastes money. 

Albany projects a 2009 deficit of $200,000. If Thomsen, Javandel, and Pilch are elected we could postpone/cancel this study and save $400,000. It eliminates the deficit, and creates a $200,000 cushion. 

On May 19, 2008 Lieber asked the Council to vote to improve nurses’ benefits at Alta-Bates-Summit where he works as a nurse. The City Attorney warned Lieber he had a conflict of interest. The CA Nurses Association PAC sent you one of the 4 flyers you received last week. 

We have only one choice to regain control of Albany: elect candidates Thomsen, Javandel, and Pilch, and Vote NO on Measure Y. A local newspaper has endorsed these three independent candidates in the editorial “Albany Needs Rational Leadership.” They also oppose Measure Y. 

Break the PACs hold on Albany. Vote for Thomsen, Javandel and Pilch. PACs need elect only one PAC candidate to control Albany. If they do, in 2010 and after, only PAC-endorsed candidates can afford to run in Albany. Albany’s century of citizen government ends. 

James D. Cleveland 

Albany 

• 

MEASURE HH 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Please vote Yes on Measure HH. It is vital that every voter in Berkeley votes for Measure HH. This measure continues critical property tax funding for the City’s emergency medical services. This measure would not raise taxes in any way. The passage of Measure HH will authorize the City to continue using existing tax deductions for emergency medical services, parks, and libraries. Easy Does It Emergency Services, which addresses the critical needs of Berkeley residents with disabilities, depends on this funding. Thank you for voting Yes for Measure HH. 

Leslie Gordon and Gina Sasso 

Co-Directors 

Easy Does It Emergency Services 

• 

PROP 8 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Saturday some of the young people of Nevada County lined the Nevada City bridge. The refrain ‘No on 8’, ‘No on 8’, ‘No on 8’ and cars honking in agreement was music to my ears. 

Enthusiastic kids, 13 to 17, who know the truth that Prop. 8 is an anti-gay measure and that marriage is about love and a spiritual connection, were standing up for their convictions. 

They were giving back to the community and saying no to the bogus and self-righteous agenda of religious conservatives. No on 8. 

Ron Lowe  

Nevada City  

• 

PROP 8 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It is not enough for the religious right to kick gays out of their churches, families and communities. Now they must have a constitutional amendment making gays second class citizens, stripping them of the right to marry which was granted by our supreme court. Now they give millionsto the “Yes on 8 “ campaign. Millions that could have bought much food and warmth for the poor this winter. I guess they feel Prop 8 is more important. 

If Prop 8 passes it will be nothing more than a tool for people to extract from their lives others they are uncomfortable with and to further shore up the walls that divide gay and straight people. Every homosexual was born of a heterosexual union. This means there are a lot of people turning their backs on their own sons and daughters by voting “yes” on prop 8. 

It also means we are not so very different from one another. 

Daniel J Chaney 

• 

MEASURE FF, GG, HH 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I expect many Berkeley voters will be joining me this election in voting NO on all the tax-raising measures on the ballot – FF, GG, and HH. With the stock market in free fall, declining home values, and a slumping economy, there is no better time to tell our elected officials that we’ve had enough of the politics of brinksmanship. 

That’s where our elected representatives in city government spend every cent in the budget and then place essential services in jeopardy. Each year they faithfully bring us to the brink of insolvency. Their message to you: pay more tax or else! 

Your message to them should be “NO.” Don’t be tempted by arguments that the services at risk—say, fire protection—are too vital to neglect. By placing such services at risk, 100 percent of the neglect is due to the politicians who have followed wasteful and unwise policies. 

Nor should you be swayed by the argument that the additional taxes requested are relatively small. Your current tax bill is an accumulation over time of similar “small” increases. Politicians have played citizens against each other in a game of “divide and conquer” for decades.  

2008 is the year to put a stop to them by voting “NO.” It’s the only word they will understand—every part of it. 

Jim Fisher 

• 

MEASURE LL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Measure LL is such a serious threat to Berkeley’s future, that I want to urge voters to do more than just voting NO on Measure LL. Vote for candidates who oppose Measure LL, because they understand that residents should have a voice in the future of their own communities – a voice that they would lose if Measure LL were to pass.  

Vote for: 

* Shirley Dean for Mayor 

* Jesse Arreguin for Council in District 4 

* Sophie Hahn for Council in District 5 

* Phoebe Sorgen for Council in District 6. 

The only way that we’re going to stop the blatant favoritism that the City Council shows to developers is to replace the Council members who ignore residents’ concerns. That’s real change.  

The same Chamber PAC that violated campaign laws with impunity in 2006 is back in this election with a last-minute mailer making the outrageous claim that Measure LL is a preservation ordinance. Measure LL is no such thing! It’s designed to help developers destroy historic buildings and neighborhoods by minimizing community input. The fact that pro-development members of the City Council have to rely on the discredited Chamber PAC to make their case only shows the lengths that they will go to in order to get citizens to vote against their own interests. Vote NO on Measure LL and then vote for the candidates who are ethical enough to oppose it.  

Susan Chase  

• 

VOTE LIKE YOU MEAN IT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I’m asking all registered voters in Berkeley to vote with me for Beatriz Leyva-Cutler for School Board. 

Most of you know me as one of the founding members of PCAD (“Parents of Children of African Descent”) and UIA (“United In Action”.) Some of you know me as an education advocate. Some of you know me as a former member of the Leadership Council for the CAS (Communication Arts and Sciences) small school at Berkeley High. 

All of those things aside, I am writing to you as a citizen of Berkeley who loves the potential that this city has to offer and recognizes the hard work ahead. 

Our school district is at a defining moment. We have hired a superintendent who brings a variety of skills to our district, including the expertise to provide solutions and strategies for our most significant problem – disparities in achievement between our students of color and their white and Asian peers. The City, District and United In Action have formed a partnership to collaboratively develop strategies so that all children can succeed in our schools. 

Like the presidential election, we cannot successfully move forward with more of the same. We’ve got to seize this opportunity to bring new leadership to our board that will support the work of our new superintendent. And further, this problem is bigger than our schools. The City of Berkeley, Health Status Report, 2007 states the following: 

“Social Determinants of Health: Education—There is a strong, positive relationship between education and health that is well documented. The more education a person gets, the better his/her health.” 

Our schools provide the academic tools to our citizens that help them to become healthy, informed, empowered and engaged members of this community. Healthy citizens are the bedrock of a strong and vibrant community. For these reasons and more, I am voting for Beatriz. Her professional career and community efforts have been dedicated to supporting children, youth, and families. 

Beatriz is an employee of The Bay Area Hispano Institute for Advancement (BAHIA), a program that provides bilingual early care and education to children ages 2-10 years, serving as Executive Director for the past 20 years. You can look at all of her qualifications at her website, www.beatrizforschoolboard.com. She is committed to the support of our children and families. 

She has the experience, leadership skills, passion and compassion to be an exemplary director. We cannot return to the leadership of the past. Beatriz provides the leadership that will help all children and students in Berkeley become lifelong learners and ultimately, healthy, engaged, informed and productive citizens in our 21st century City. 

Beatriz Leyva-Cutler for School Board! A Vote for Our Children and Families! 

Michael D. Miller  

• 

MEASURE KK 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

At the mayoral debate on Oct. 27, Tom Bates said “Measure KK would prevent the city council from even taking a look at BRT” or planning any other transit system involving dedicated lanes. 

As Shirley Dean pointed out, this is completely untrue. Under the measure, the city would simply have to demonstrate to the voters that the benefits of any proposed plan would outweigh the detriments. This is exactly the type of discussion we have been trying to have with the city—and Bates, as usual, shows little interest in having a dialog with rank and file citizens. I suppose that’s why he never returned my phone calls a year ago when I first heard about BRT. 

It’s only out of frustration with the city’s lack of dialog on BRT, that 3000 Berkeley voters signed the petition to get the initiative on the ballot. They felt there was no other way to get their voice heard. If it were not for the work of our coalition, BRT would have been rubber stamped by the City Council with a minimum of public input and little regard for the needs of Berkeley residents. 

It’s clear that the Bates plan for Berkeley is to use BRT to create Transit Station-oriented high density development so that, to quote Bates, “the people who work in the city (i.e. at the Cal/LBL/British Petroleum facility) can live in the city.” This high density development will allows the city to alter the character of Berkeley forvever, generating real estate transfer fees, profits for developers and capturing Federal dollars. But the residents of Berkeley will find themselves living in an Emeryville-like canyon of high-rise condos. 

Ironically, under this plan for Berkeley, Bates and crew get points for being Green. Hence the Sierra Club’s and League of Women Voters pathetically misguided endorsement of Bates. But cutting down trees to put up concrete and stucco seems like a rather grey vision to me and the many people who chose to live in Berkeley for its unique character. 

In short, a yes vote for Measure KK will force the city to meet with neighborhood groups and work with AC Transit to develop a bus improvement plan that meets the needs of Berkeley residents, and not just the University of California. Vote Yes on Meaure KK. 

Bruce Kaplan 

Berkeleyans for Better Transit 

Co-proponent of Measure KK 

• 

THE BIGGEST LIE OF ALL 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Berkeley voters have just received a mailer containing the biggest lie told thus far in our local races. What whopper dwarfs all of the other lies? This mailer makes the incredible claim that voting for Measure LL would “support Berkeley’s landmarks ordinance.” But this is the very ordinance that Measure LL repeals and then replaces with a substantially weaker, developer-friendly ordinance. It’s an outright lie, just as it’s a lie to refer to Measure LL as a landmarks preservation ordinance at all, since it really is designed to expedite demolitions of Berkeley’s historic resources.  

The source of this deception should be no surprise to Berkeley voters. It’s a group with a well-earned reputation for this kind of activity—the political division of the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber PAC, as it is known, spent over $100,000 in 2006 to further its extreme pro-development, anti-neighborhood agenda. The lion’s share of the money was spent to defeat a measure designed to save our current Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, the one that Measure LL would now repeal. Subsequently, the Chamber PAC was found to be in violation of campaign finance disclosure laws and folded. Now it’s reopened, but it’s up to the same old dirty tricks.  

If Measure LL was actually good for Berkeley, then the Chamber PAC wouldn’t have to lie to try to get it passed. It’s only good for developers and the politicians who benefit from their money. Don’t be fooled by people who see profit in destroying Berkeley’s neighborhoods and environment. Vote “no” on Measure LL and save Berkeley’s landmarks for future generations.  

Judith Epstein  

• 

MORE STOLEN SIGNS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Measure LL signs on both private and public property are being stolen and vandalized at an alarming rate. Are Measure LL supporters so bereft of arguments to make in its favor that they can only resort to dirty tricks?  

This rash of thefts coincides with the entry of the Chamber PAC into the election as the champion of Measure LL. The Chamber PAC was found guilty of election violations in the 2006 election, and it wouldn’t be a surprise if the same unsavory tactics continue this time around.  

We have to stand up to these powerful development interests. Residents whose signs have been stolen or vandalized may write to info@savethelpo.org or call 524-0949 for replacement signs. Be sure to contact the Berkeley Police Department if these acts occurred on private property. Most of all, vote NO on Measure LL.  

Austene Hall  

• 

BASIC ARITHMETIC 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

While I am not surprised at The Planet’s use of flexible truthiness in its editorial and news pages, I would expect you to at least adhere to the rules of basic arithmetic, which are generally not thought of as being subject to interpretation. More specifically, in the article “Only One Major Fund-Raiser in Three City Council Races” (Oct. 23), reporter Richard Brenneman writes “...Wengraf received substantial funding from that [development] sector,” and after listing development sector contributors (including planning professors, lawyers, and even interior designers!), states “The total of $3,750 represents 21 percent of Wengraf’s total contributions.” 

Adding up his own numbers we get a total of $3,500, not $3,750. Wengraf’s total contributions were $27,070; thus only 13 percent of her total contributions comes from his ridiculously expansive definition of “development interests”. Hardly “substantial funding.” Looked at another way, she has received 87 percent of her donations from more than 200 citizens in the non-development sector. 

Judith Tabb 

• 

YES ON KK 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

One thing leapt out from Steve Geller’s October 23 commentary. Regarding businesses deliveries, he says: “Mid-morning deliveries to businesses are often obstructed by cars parked along Telegraph, so the truck drivers simply block a traffic lane. Nobody seems to object to this practice, noteven the police.” 

Well, of course, nobody objects to this now, because we have two lanes of traffic in each direction. If a lane is blocked by a delivery truck, drivers can simply pull into the second lane. But if Measure KK loses and the two center lanes are dedicated exclusively to AC Transit buses, a lane obstruction wouldn’t be just an inconvenience – it would be a nightmare that would bring all traffic to a dead halt! 

Most people grasp immediately that losing the two center lanes of traffic on Telegraph Avenue is a very bad idea. That’s why people from all parts of town and all walks of life, including bicyclists and bus riders, signed the petition to put Measure KK on the ballot. 

Vote yes on Measure KK. 

Gale Garcia 

• 

AVOIDING INTERACTION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As unpleasant as the election season can be, I am always interested in candidates’ forums, because it’s the only time that members of the public have a chance to ask questions of our elected officials. Sadly, we have a mayor who seems to avoid interacting with the public in all but tightly controlled situations, reminiscent of the way President Bush has been handled for reasons that have become all too obvious. 

In the last few months, Mayor Bates has failed to participate in almost all candidates forums sponsored by various community groups. On Monday night at the mayoral debate, sponsored by the Berkeley Daily Planet, we found out why. Mayor Bates did participate, but he avoided answering questions directly, and he almost seemed incapable of giving a coherent explanation of his policies. 

But how can a mayor who regularly seems to resent having to interact with the public be effective at his job? He can’t, because he’s only open to getting information from a limited number of sources. Over the six years that Mayor Bates has been in office, it’s only gotten worse. I can’t imagine the extent to which citizens will be excluded from input in major decisions if he is allowed to stay in office for another four years. 

It’s time for a change at City Hall. I’m supporting former mayor Shirley Dean, because she has demonstrated a mastery of public policy and she is more than willing to listen to citizens. 

Gus Lee 

• 

WHO’S BEHIND VV 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The “Committee to Safeguard AC Transit, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Parcel Tax Measure VV” is the committee in support of the county-wide parcel tax on the November ballot for AC Transit. This committee donated $20,000 to the campaign against Measure KK, the Berkeley measure that would require a vote of the people before traffic lanes could be removed from general use for buses only. 

Why is the Measure VV campaign so wealthy that it has money to spare? 

The Campaign Disclosure Statement for the Measure VV campaign, filed at the County Registrar’s Office, reveals that a single donation of $250,000 came from the ABC Company, which happens to be the US distributor of the extremely unpopular VanHool buses. 

Martha Jones 

• 

BERKELEY’S TRICKY POLITICAL MACHINE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In Berkeley, hit pieces are often sent to voters late in the election, to confuse innocents and demoralize others. A postcard re Measure LL on which we should all vote NO!, would allow Mayor Bates new Landmark “Preservation” Ordinance (LPO) to replace our 34 year State-Certified LPO. The original LPO has helped preserve our flatlands neighborhoods, parks, libraries, schools, from big regional development plans. 

The “Powers that Be” in Berkeley, including Tom Bates elected to the State Assembly, gained a supermajority in the early 1980’s. They have not lost their majority to date! 

This group is a powerful political machine today. They manipulate local policies and endorsements of groups large and small, including the Sierra Club and League of Women Voters! 

Our “machine” uses tricks to take and hold power. 

Here is a protest song about the machine’s favorite trick—to get busy voters especially students, parents, workers, and newcomers, to vote their complete voter slate cards recommendations. 

Sing this to the tune of “Doing’ What Comes Naturally”: 

Folks are dumb, 

Where I come from, 

When they vote with slate cards, 

They vote for those, 

They don’t know, 

That’s why they give’em slate cards!! 

So read your Voter Handbook, talk to people you trust, and only vote for what you really understand and believe in. 

Merilee Mitchell 

• 

BASIC CIVIL RIGHTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am concerned by the basic civil rights implications of Proposition 8. Those who believe that all Californians deserve the same rights, benefits and protections under the law should vote NO on Proposition 8. 

I support marriage equality for all people. 

Catherine Montgomery 

Piedmont 

• 

CONSENTING ADULTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Maybe people who don’t think like me or act like me shouldn’t be allowed to get married. Let me think about this. Yes. Okay. I think that anyone who would ever try and limit the freedom or equality of anyone else, unless that person had committed a serious crime, that person should never be allowed to marry or raise children—or be permitted to pass along that anti-American mind-set to any one else’s children. Wait, no, that would make me also a bigot. And I am not. I believe that anyone’s—everyone’s—freedom is as important as mine. I even think that it is an important right for people, who want to do so, to teach their children that gay people should not get married. Exercising that right represents an important freedom. 

Proposition 8 is a ballot initiative promoting bigotry. We must not amend the California constitution to include discrimination of any kind. Please consider what a horrid anti-American proposition that is, and vote NO on Prop 8. 

Vicki McReynolds 

Moraga 

• 

FEAR AND HATRED 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Proposition 8 is a ballot initiative that increases fear and hatred. 

I was raised by my heterosexual parents to pay my taxes, work hard and be a good person. I am now a Christian minister and have devoted my life to service. I am a hospital chaplain and spend my days trying to help people who are facing the end of life, who are frightened, who are lonely. If you met me you might think I look like any of your friends and neighbors. Yet in my life because I am lesbian, I have been called horrible names and even threatened—which was very painful for me and deeply frightening for my mother—like any parent she wants her children to be happy and free. This proposition claims that for me to have the same rights as anyone else somehow threatens the marriages of heterosexuals. Are the proponents of this measure saying I’m somehow responsible for the high divorce rate in our country? 

I’ve heard people say that they prefer “marriage” to remain as it traditionally has been: between one man and one woman. Yet “traditionally” Judeo-Christian marriage has been between one man and several women. Also “traditionally” it was illegal for a black person and white person to marry. Clearly we do not embrace these “traditions” any longer. So, how can my having the same rights as my heterosexual brother, to be given full social standing, to be fully a part of our community, threaten anyone? 

We can not amend the California constitution to include discrimination of any kind and that’s why I’m voting NO on Prop 8 and I hope the rest of my state will stand with me. 

Kelly Childress 

Oakland 

• 

OUT OF STATE RELIGION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Why haven’t the mainstream media covered in more detail the out of state religious organizations from Utah and the likes on contributing $25 million dollars to interfere with the basic rights of Californians. 

Who is this Mark Baldazar, and what gives him the right to interfere with the civil rights of ordinary Americans. 

Gay marriage is a right not a privilege. I had the privilege to serve in the United States Armed Forces, I am straight. How dare these ignorant individuals violate what so many hold dear, and to show their love with marriage. This is what I served to defend. 

P.S. I think Gavin Newsom is a swell guy to break the ice in this matter. 

Stefan Gilkerson 

Concord

In general we resist financing public projects by sale of bonds. Paying them off is just a form of us the people borrowing, and paying high interest to hugely wealthy individuals, or to banks/bankers, to use funds that should've been reserved for our use by taxing where the money is ahead of needing to spend it for us. We don't even have to sharply tax people who get as much as half a million dollars a year... but get it from the really huge incomes from amazing sources including investments, that are just money making money. 

When you vote, please consider the positions of the Peace and Freedom Party. (local measures below) 

The Peace and Freedom Party's presidential ticket is Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez. If you want to vote for a ticket that is against the "War on Terror," the death penalty and corporate control of the economy, is for single-payer health care, a living wage for all workers, and reforms to make the government more democratic, you have several choices, most of whom are write-ins. If you want to vote for a ticket that will get enough votes that most people will notice, you have fewer choices. The Nader/Gonzalez ticket is the only one that meets both criteria, of being at least minimally progressive and having the name recognition, resources and ballot access to have a real political impact.  

In Alameda County, we have a couple of local Peace and Freedom Party candidates, Marsha Feinland and Gene Ruyle. 

Marsha is running for State Senate in the 9th State Senate District, to replace the outgoing Don Perata. In Alameda County, her district includes the cities of Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, Alameda, Dublin and Livermore, as well as most of the unincorporated community of Castro Valley and rural areas in the county's northeast corner; it also includes part of Contra Costa County (almost all of Richmond and about half of San Pablo). 

Gene is running for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 10th Congressional District, which is mostly in Contra Costa and Solano counties but includes Livermore and nearby rural areas in Alameda 

County. 

The state Peace and Freedom Party has come out in favor of Propositions 2 and 5, against Propositions 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, and neutral on Propositions 1A and 12. 

The Alameda County Peace and Freedom Party did not take a local position on state Propositions 1A or 12, but has taken positions on several local propositions and candidates besides our own partisan candidates. 

In Oakland, we urge NO votes on Measures N (a parcel tax for charter schools, placed on the ballot by the state-appointed administrator rather than the elected school board) and NN (a parcel tax to hire more 

police). 

In Berkeley, we urge YES votes on Measures HH (allows the city to spend taxes it is already collecting), II (delay redistricting from 2011 to 2013) and JJ (loosen restrictions on medical marijuana), and we urge NO votes on Measures KK (require popular vote on dedicated transit lanes) and LL (modifications to Landmark Preservation ordinance). 

In Alameda, we urge a YES vote on Measure P, and in Albany we urge a YES vote on Measure DD. Both of these are increases in the real estate transfer tax, one of the few non-regressive taxes local governments can increase within the restrictions of Proposition 13. 

We have also endorsed one City Council candidate in Berkeley, our own P&F activist Jon Crowder in District 2, and the pro-tenant slate for the Rent Board (its five candidates are Nicole Drake, Jack Harrison, Judy Shelton, Jesse Townley and Igor Tregub). 

We also recommend write-in votes for two candidates, Dave Heller for Congress in the 9th CD (he decided to run against Barbara Lee when she voted for the Wall Street bailout) and Zachary RunningWolf for Mayor of Berkeley (he has been active in a number of community struggles, and the two candidates on the ballot are both unacceptable). 

For more further explanations of our positions and links to the campaigns' websites, please visit 

http://www.peaceandfreedom2008.org/counties/alameda.html. 

Last but not least, we recommend that you stay active, campaigning on electoral and non-electoral issues. If you'd like to help with the party's campaign during the last week before the election, please visit 

our Berkeley campaign office (at 1952 University Avenue, between MLK and Milvia) or phone it at (510) 705-8864. 

You might be a tenant who has discovered mold in her kitchen. Your landlord is being dismissive of this grave impact on your habitability. Whom can you turn to? Since you reside in this city, you call 510-981-RENT, get in touch with a case counselor, and, if this does not resolve the issue, take your case to the nine elected Rent Stabilization Board commissioners. The landlord complies, and your faith in the rule of law is restored. 

You might be a homeowner struggling to pay down the mortgage on your house. With a rising cost of living and no sign of increases in your wage, staying one step ahead of the bill collectors is quickly becoming a full-time occupation. Whom can you turn to? You contact Rent Board commissioners, who can either walk you through the kinds of rights you possess when threatened with a foreclosure or can refer you to agencies which help you set things right again.  

The Berkeley Rent Board is the last bastion of progressive policymaking in Berkeley. Its power to provide housing and rental policy guidance to the Berkeley City Council, resolve tenant-landlord disputes, and inform tenants of their rights and responsibilities makes it continuously relevant to all of Berkeley. 

This year, we face unique challenges on several fronts. It is incumbent upon Rent Board commissioners and staff to educate the most vulnerable groups of tenants—students, new Berkeley residents, and senior citizens—about their rights and the Rent Board’s ability to fight for them. It is crucial that we work across the county and the state to create long-term solutions to the foreclosure crisis that has gripped the Bay Area with an iron fist. It is necessary to travel to Sacramento and develop connections with Sacramento legislators until housing is viewed as a fundamental right throughout California. 

The progressive slate of Rent Board candidates—Nicole Drake, Jack Harrison, Judy Shelton, Jesse Townley, and Igor Tregub—pledge to roll up our sleeves and meet these challenges head on. For these reasons, we were selected by nearly 200 tenants, activists, and students at last August’s convention held by the Committee to Defend Affordable Housing. To these ends, we were endorsed by Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson, four Berkeley Council Members, Berkeley Citizens Action, and dozens of other clubs, organizations, and individuals. 

The five of us bring numerous attributes that are unique among the candidates. Nicole Drake is a Berkeley City Council legislative aide and the Co-Chair of the Housing Advisory Commission. Jack Harrison is an incumbent and current Vice-Chair of the Rent Board as well as a lifelong housing rights attorney. Judy Shelton coordinated volunteers in last spring’s campaign to defeat Proposition 98, which would have taken thousands of affordable housing units off the market. Jesse Townley is the appointee of the late and irreplaceable Council Member Dona Spring to the Fire and Disaster Preparedness Commission and its former Chair, as well as a neighborhood and arts advocate. Igor Tregub is Dona Spring’s appointee and Chair of the Labor Commission, a Cal alum, and former UC student government senator and city affairs advisor. We have among us more than 50 years of experience in advocating for Berkeleyans like you. 

The five of us will use our expertise and passion to help ensure that the progressive housing policies we develop will receive the support of a broad coalition of city, county, and state lawmakers. We will work tirelessly to stop the loss of diversity that occurs every time another resident is priced out of Berkeley. We will defend the right of every tenant to live in seismically safe units yet ensure that the costs of retrofitting will not be passed on to tenants. We will work with the Mayor and City Council to promote affordable and green technology in buildings, such as solar panels and composting. 

Just like the Rent Board, our progressive slate indeed offers something to every Berkeley resident. If you have suggestions, please let us know by visiting www.berkeleyrentboard.org. For a Berkeley we can all call home, please support Nicole Drake, Jack Harrison, Judy Shelton, Jesse Townley, and Igor Tregub. 

Nicole Drake, Jack Harrison, Judy Shelton, Jesse Townley, and Igor Tregub are candidates for the Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board. 

Terry Doran, currently on the Zoning Adjustments Board, is running for Dona Spring's seat on the City Council. As a member of the Zoning Adjustments Board, Terry voted against the positions of Dona Spring, Jesse Areguin, the Le Conte Neighborhood Association, and the Elmwood Neighborhood Association.  

The first issue on which Terry disappointed neighbors was his approval of mega-cell antenna concentrations for south and north Shattuck Avenue. These antennas have for three years been opposed by the Le Conte Neighborhood Association and many neighbors. The second issue was Terry’s vote for an over-sized restaurant and bar in the Elmwood District. Space limitations do not permit my discussing other pro-developer decisions Terry has made on the ZAB.  

Through these actions, Terry abandoned what was once his progressive voice in our community in favor of supporting corporations, developers and landlords. This reality was clarified in last week’s Daily Planet. It quoted an email from one of Berkeley’s most prominent developers, Ali Kashani, to fellow developers:  

“The most important race right now, and probably in Berkeley’s last 20 years, is District 4 (formerly held by Dona Spring). We have an opportunity to elect Terry Doran who will solidify the very shaky majority that we currently have on the council….Terry held off on receiving contributions from the development community previously because he did not want to suffer the negative press the Daily Planet would provide. Now we are close enough to the election that Terry is ready for us to participate with him by donating. Please contributed the maximum $250 per person to Terry's campaign.”  

Developers are no dummies. Terry Doran has their support because of the positions he has taken on their behalf as a member of Berkeley’s Zoning Adjustments Board. Terry’s pro-corporate/developer positions may also explain the enormous banner that Patrick Kennedy, our city’s wealthiest, multi-million dollar developer, just had installed on University Avenue, a few feet away from Jesse Areguin’s campaign office. 

As an active member of the Berkeley Neighborhood Antenna-Free Union (BNAFU), I had many conversations with Dona Spring about the cell antenna issue. She regularly expressed opposition to cell antenna proliferation in Berkeley’s flatland residential areas. 

While south Berkeley has 14 different antenna locations, with multiple antennas pointing directly into our homes, the Berkeley Hills have none. Verizon Wireless and Sprint-Nextel, both tele-communications giants, worked with Patrick Kennedy to install antennas on UC Storage. Patrick Kennedy owns UC Storage and stands to make about $20,000 a month to rent his walls for antenna placement.  

BNAFU, with both Dona’s and Jesse Areguin’s assistance, has argued that Berkeley has a right to local control of antenna siting. Our position was recently strengthened by the Federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Sprint vs San Diego. We need Jesse Areguin’s voice on the City Council to preserve local control.  

Terry voted in January of 2007 to install multiple mega-antennas at UC Storage. At the ZAB meeting, Terry said, in front of 60 neighbors opposing the UC Storage installation,  

“It is obvious that you (the neighbors) don’t want these cell phones (sic) in your neighborhood. But I, too, have done as much research as I can. My son’s a scientist, my daughter-in-law’s a scientist.” 

Terry said this even though he had received, from our citizens’ group, the Bio-Initiative Report authored by several biologists, doctors, bioengineers, and physicists. The Bio-Initiative Report argues that cell antennas are in deed dangerous. The Report is available at antennafree.com. 

A few weeks ago, Terry confirmed his pro-corporate, cell antenna position once again by providing the fifth necessary vote on the ZAB to allow Verizon to move ahead again with a second mega-antenna installation on the French Hotel. There are already 25 antennas within a half block of the French Hotel. 

The antennas on both UC Storage and on the French Hotel face eastward, directly into apartments and single family residences. However, the antennas’ strength in terms of RF radiation indicates that they are meant to serve the Berkeley Hills. We residents of the flatlands don’t need these antennas, because our cell phone reception is excellent-this according to both the employees of local Verizon and Sprint stores, who talk to customers every day, and according to these companies’ computer–generated maps of the flatlands.  

BNAFU is asking the city to consider a more equitable, lower wattage, more equitably distributed cell antenna system throughout the city. Such a system could put more money into city coffers since some of these antennas could be placed on city poles. 

On a second planning issue before the ZAB, Terry Doran also ignored the position of the Elmwood Neighborhood Association, Dona Spring, and Jesse Areguin. All three of them opposed an enormous and out of scale 5,000-square-foot restaurant and bar development at the old Wright’s Garage Building nearon College and Ashby. The project included late hours and no parking at an already congested intersection.  

At this point, Terry is riding on Berkeley’s corporation/developer bandwagon. He supports them while ignoring the voices of local residents. 

Please support Jesse Areguin and work to get him elected. He is the only one of the five candidates running in District 5 to be solely endorsed by the Sierra Club, Progressive Dems of the East Bay, the Green Party, the East Bay LGBT Dems, the Cal Dems, the East Bay Young Dems, Berkeley Citizens Action, the SF Bay Guardian, the Berkeley Daily Planet's executive editor, and Dolores Huerta. 

Michael Barglow is a South Berkeley resident. 

California voters are rarely given the chance to vote for an initiative that addresses a problem that many thought was unsolvable. Proposition 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act, provides the opportunity for voters to bring change to the state's crumbling and bankrupt criminal justice system in a manner that cannot be achieved within the special-interest-dominated world of Sacramento.  

Prop. 5 is the only initiative on the November ballot that is slated to preserve state funds and save taxpayers' money—at least $2.5 billion, according to the state's Legislative Analyst. A 2007 bipartisan report authored by the Little Hoover Commission, entitled "Solving California's Corrections Crisis: Time is Running Out," stated that "30 years of tough on crime politics has not made the state safer" because of our failure to implement strategies that reduce the offender's likelihood to re-offend. Prop. 5 is a three-pronged effort to improve public safety by bringing balance to California's criminal-justice system.  

The first element of Prop. 5 is its mandate to create a system of care for youth involved with substance abuse. Under this initiative, counties will be provided financial resources to establish a modern system of drug treatment. The second area addressed by Prop. 5 is treating nonviolent adult drug offenders after their arrest. Many county-run drug treatment services are disjointed and poorly funded, which reduces their potential effectiveness. Prop. 5 creates a coordinated and unified continuum of services that gives judges greater flexibility and broader controls.  

If an offender commits a nonviolent drug offense, Prop. 5 states that treatment intervention should be a priority. If the offense is a nonviolent non-drug offense but the judge determines that substance abuse was the root cause, Prop. 5 gives courts the flexibility to use treatment as an alternative to, or in conjunction with, incarceration. By offering more choices, the initiative eliminates the situation where judges must rely on a single treatment option or impose incarceration—an approach long deemed a failure by addiction experts.  

Perhaps the most important element of Prop. 5 is the establishment of rehabilitative services in the parole system. Today, inmates are routinely returned to the community with limited resources and few opportunities. Lacking both support and incentives, they soon fall back on old patterns. When offenders violate their parole, they are typically returned to prison, where they serve a mere five months before they are again released. Under Prop. 5, this failed one-dimensional system will be replaced by an array of sanctions and treatment options primarily operated at the local level. Interventions will range from incarceration to residential and nonresidential drug treatment. The initiative also mandates that higher levels of parole resources and supervision be devoted to higher risk parolees.  

Prop. 5 offers voters a rare opportunity to bring change that is long overdue and that will advance the public safety interests of all Californians. The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that offers policy analysis, program development, and technical assistance in the criminal justice field. For more information, please visit www.cjcj.org. 

This commentary was first published in the San Francisco Chronicle and later reprinted on AlterNet. 

Editor -- 

I am saddened that you chose to publish Marilyn Saarni's “East Bay Regional Parks District [EBRPD] Board Race Reader Commentary.” I believe the Planet, which has covered some EBRPD-related issues, should explain why it featured so prominently a lively but baseless vilification of Norman La Force, the choice of most Berkeley-Albany-El Cerrito-Richmond area environmentalists, public employees, and other progressives for the Ward 1 seat on the 7-person EBRPD Board of Directors. 

La Force, who I predict will receive over 70% of the votes on Tuesday, has been a tireless, relentless, and usually successful environmental lawyer-activist. For 25 years he has been one of the most effective organizers and pro bono lawyers for Citizens for the Eastshore State Park, which La Force has served as a co-leader with the late Dwight Steele and former Albany Mayor Robert Cheasty, which the suburbanite and pro-recreationist majority of the EBRPD and management have half-heartedly supported. 

Saarni discredits her own cause, off-leash dogs in the parks, by spreading vicious untruths about La Force on the balloon-bread of superficial understanding of a broad range of EBRPD conflicts. 

As an “unscientific” environmental advocate for over 30 years, focused on recycling and anti-landfill struggles but also on parks and transit, I share with La Force a keen awareness of EBRPD shortcomings, as well as an appreciation of its virtues. I am supporting La Force: he has been there for environmental causes for the long haul, not for Saarni’s interests.  

Environmental organizers know that brilliant journalistic coverage like that of the Planet’s Richard Brenneman or the late Fred "Skip" Garretson, a great environmental reporter for the post-Knowland Oakland Tribune, isn't enough to persuade elected and appointed officials to change bad policies. Electoral organizing to build coalitions with public employee unions and environmentalist-financed lawsuits against unwise public-agency policies better serve governmental and social reform than does special-interest character assassination. Daily Planet, please note. 

It is obvious that La Force has incurred dislike for opposing some of Saarni’s pet cause. I testified on his behalf when he was passed over for appointment to the vacancy created by the death of a “spunky” former Director (who didn't like La Force). “Spunk” and not having crossed the special interests were the apparent deciding qualifications for public office that day. Only one director (Doug Siden, who does not always agree with environmentalists) had the decency to vote for La Force, the best-qualified and most-accomplished candidate.  

Finally, Saarni states she was President of the Regional Parks Foundation in 1988. She misstates its principal role (to raise corporate and philanthropic donations for EBRPD, some of which are used to campaign for open space bonds) by characterizing it as a “watchdog group,” when it is in fact staffed by the Assistant General Manager for Public Affairs and is certainly uncritical. 

It took the collapse of a heavily trafficked bridge in Minnesota to alert significant numbers of Americans to the price to be paid for neglecting the nation’s physical infrastructure. But despite the equally dramatic descent of our political life in recent decades, few notice the cost of neglecting the nation’s cultural infrastructure that—along with so many of our bridges, dams, and watermains—was largely created by FDR’s New Deal.  

Even before the New Deal, however, as the U.S. economy tanked into the Great Depression in 1931, Berkeley citizens voted to tax themselves to build a new Central Library building in downtown Berkeley. That building still stands in a newly renovated state to serve all Berkeley citizens thanks to another local vote in 1996. Measure S renovated and expanded that Deco gem, now on the National Register of Historic Places. 

That success can be repeated if Berkeley again chooses to fund its branch library buildings. The four branches and the Tool Lending Library have not been renovated since the 1970s, while three of the branches were built before the Second World War. Upgrading all systems in these buildings—including seismic retrofitting and ADA compliance—would allow the branches to fully serve their neighborhoods. Furthermore, the branches would be made more spacious, welcoming, and usable for their patrons. The Berkeley Public Library has just completed a Branch Libraries Facilities Master Plan, though the city has known about its library inadequacies at least since a 1996 study produced similar, though then less alarming, conclusions.  

My neighborhood library is the lovely North Branch, constructed in the Spanish Revival style in 1936 with funding from the New Deal’s Public Works Administration (PWA). Unfortunately, federal funding ran out before the building could be entirely finished. If you wonder why the building seems so cramped, it’s because the projected west wing meant to house a meeting room, reference area, and staff offices was never built. 

North Branch is such a beautiful and well-loved part of its neighborhood that it is the busiest of the four branches—and one of the busiest in the state. It houses a varied collection of books and materials for patrons of all ages and presents hundreds of programs as well as the popular Quilt Show exhibit. In 2001, it was designated City Landmark #243.  

Besides its very severe space limitations, however, North Branch has aged utilities that require upgrading of its mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and telecommunication systems. Moreover, the library needs a fire sprinkler system for the entire building. By completing the wing that was never built, the proposed plan would add approximately 1900 square feet, or 35 percent of the existing building. If Measure FF passes, the library will seek community input on changes to this and other branch libraries.  

Measure FF would restore existing historic features at the North Branch while fixing structural damage from leaks, decay, and pests. Much as I might wish for a state government—and, even more so, a federal government—that would act as the New Deal did to support public education in all of its manifestations, I am not hopeful that this will happen in the foreseeable future. Public libraries, like all public services and independent bookstores, are under siege from the advocates of total privatization. In the main, public libraries no longer receive federal or state funding, depending for their support almost entirely on the communities that they enrich.  

I therefore call on Berkeley voters to maintain their sterling legacy of local support for public libraries in Berkeley by voting Yes on Measure FF to upgrade all of our branch libraries. 

Gray Brechin is the Project Scholar of the California Living New Deal Project.

In general we resist financing public projects by sale of bonds. Paying them off is just a form of us the people borrowing, and paying high interest to hugely wealthy individuals, or to banks/bankers, to use funds that should've been reserved for our use by taxing where the money is ahead of needing to spend it for us. We don't even have to sharply tax people who get as much as $1/2m a year...but get it from the really huge incomes from amazing sources, including investments, that are just money making money.  

When you vote, please consider the positions of the Peace and Freedom Party (local measures below). 

The Peace and Freedom Party's presidential ticket is Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez. If you want to vote for a ticket that is against the "War on Terror", the death penalty and corporate control of the economy, is for single-payer health care, a living wage for all workers, and reforms to make the government more democratic, you have several choices, most of whom are write-ins. If you want to vote for a ticket that will get enough votes that most people will notice, you have fewer choices. The Nader/Gonzalez ticket is the only one that meets both criteria, of being at least minimally progressive and having the name recognition, resources and ballot access to have a real political impact. 

In Alameda County, we have a couple of local Peace and Freedom Party candidates, Marsha Feinland and Gene Ruyle. 

Marsha is running for State Senate in the 9th State Senate District, to replace the outgoing Don Perata. In Alameda county, her district includes the cities of Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, Alameda, Dublin and Livermore, as well as most of the unincorporated community of Castro Valley and rural areas in the county's northeast corner; it also includes part of Contra Costa County (almost all of Richmond and about half of San Pablo). 

Gene is running for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 10th Congressional District, which is mostly in Contra Costa and Solano counties but includes Livermore and nearby rural areas in Alameda County. 

The state Peace and Freedom Party has come out in favor of Propositions 2 and 5, against Propositions 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, and neutral on Propositions 1A and 12. 

The Alameda County Peace and Freedom Party did not take a local position on state Propositions 1A or 12, but has taken positions on several local propositions and candidates besides our own partisan candidates. 

In Oakland, we urge NO votes on Measures N (a parcel tax for charter schools, placed on the ballot by the state-appointed administrator rather than the elected school board) and NN (a parcel tax to hire more police). 

In Berkeley, we urge YES votes on Measures HH (allows the city to spend taxes it is already collecting), II (delay redistricting from 2011 to 2013) and JJ (loosen restrictions on medical marijuana), and we urge NO votes on Measures KK (require popular vote on dedicated transit lanes) and LL (modifications to Landmark Preservation ordinance). 

In Alameda, we urge a YES vote on Measure P, and in Albany we urge a YES vote on Measure DD. Both of these are increases in the real estate transfer tax, one of the few non-regressive taxes local governments can increase within the restrictions of Proposition 13. 

We have also endorsed one City Council candidate in Berkeley, our own P&F activist Jon Crowder in District 2, and the pro-tenant slate for the Rent Board (its five candidates are Nicole Drake, Jack Harrison, Judy Shelton, Jesse Townley and Igor Tregub). 

We also recommend write-in votes for two candidates, Dave Heller for Congress in the 9th CD (he decided to run against Barbara Lee when she voted for the Wall Street bailout) and Zachary RunningWolf for Mayor of Berkeley (he has been active in a number of community struggles, and the two candidates on the ballot are both unacceptable). 

For further explanations of our positions and links to the campaigns' websites, please visit "http://www.peaceandfreedom2008.org/counties/alameda.html". 

Last but not least, we recommend that you stay active, campaigning on electoral and non-electoral issues. If you'd like to help with the party's campaign during the last week before the election, please visit our Berkeley campaign office (at 1952 University Avenue, between MLK and Milvia) or phone it at 510/705-8864. 

I decided to run for Mayor because I strongly believe that our city needs new, authentic leadership that is in touch with all citizens. Historically, our mayors have catered only to specific communities. This has resulted in a city divided, with stark inequities in housing, education, safety, and opportunities. My mission as mayor will be to bring the city together as a community and to improve living conditions for all residents, to support ecologically sustainable improvements, and to reclaim the ideals of our city. 

I am committed to eliminating the inequitable gaps in our city—the housing gap, the achievement gap, the health gap, the safety gap and the technology gap. The focus of healthy environments and green practices needs to be inclusive, rather than just in certain neighborhoods. Affordable housing and transportation continue to be a problem for many Berkeley residents. We need to look for ways to support both owners and renters in making safe housing affordable and to improve transportation to all parts of our city  

I have been a Berkeley resident for over 14 years. I received BA from UC Berkeley in American Studies and my MA in Education & Technology and my teaching credential from University of San Francisco. I have devoted much of my time to improving youth services in the city, including six years on the Berkeley youth commission and teaching high school. I will make sure that schools have resources to serve our students and I will invest in our youth to make sure they have supervised after school enrichment programs, safe places to play, and leadership training opportunities.  

I value the art and culture of the diverse members of our community and will expand multicultural programs. I was the arts and programming director at La Pena Cultural Center and the International House. At KPFA I was elected to the local advisory board, as well as a member of the national board of Pacifica. I have also organized many cultural events to enrich the city, such as programs in public parks and community centers.  

I will bring something different and new to City Hall. I am committed to the well being of all members of our city and I have experience with a wider network of residents than past mayors. I am ready to bring a strong vision to the office and to work collaboratively with all community members to improve out city. These are critical times. We need change at the national level and the local level. We know that the leadership of the past will not work for the future. I ask that you write in my name for mayor. I will represent the people, not the status quo of the position.  

Kahlil Jacobs-Fantauzzi is a candidate for mayor of Berkeley.

I am endorsing Shirley Dean for Mayor of Berkeley; I firmly believe that her program of 50 solutions to the current crisis and problems of the City of Berkeley will benefit the entire population of the city, especially those of us who are disabled and with special needs. I lived in Berkeley during Mrs. Dean’s first term as Mayor and know that disability services were much better funded and more extensive then. 

Disabled with multiple sclerosis for 20 years and with fibromyalgia for a year, I am low-income, collecting Social Security Disability in order to live. I believe Dean’s election is crucial for my health and well-being, as well as the health and well-being of Berkeley as a whole. 

Unlike current incumbent Mayor Bates, I find Shirley Dean open, honest, and caring. She has lived in Berkeley and worked tirelessly for this city all her life including her two terms as mayor from 1994-2002. 

I have never done more than vote in elections before. Now I find myself forced in good conscience, while seriously ill with my two chronic, auto-immune illnesses, to campaign for Shirley Dean and Barack Obama. I also had never attended a City Council Meeting before this last year either. Four times, seriously ill, in my electric wheelchair, I have felt compelled to go to the meetings to speak on behalf of the environment of both my Berkeley neighborhood and the 100-year-old Veteran’s Memorial Oak Grove which was located on the UC Berkeley campus, a supposedly public institution over which we, the public, should have some rights and control. 

The atmosphere at the City Council meeting was distressing and almost horrifying to me. I found Mayor Bates dismissive of the “average” citizen of Berkeley or any Councilmembers who disagreed with him. I saw him looking bored or swaying in his chair, obviously looking everywhere but at the person speaking. It is clear to me—I have a master’s degree in Ecological Psychology (the relationship between people and nature) and have studied body language—that he does not care how anyone who he feels disagrees with his agenda. Tom Bates is incompetent at leading a community and needs to be voted out of office, in my opinion and experience. 

My Elmwood neighborhood was spared the attentions of the developer that Mayor Bates wanted to have convert a garage on Ashby Ave. into a nightclub with no parking, but we lost the battle for the oak grove. It was clear to me from his actions at the meetings that Mayor Bates supported the university’s agenda over that of the citizens of Berkeley. I did not know that the City Council had voted in private session to allow UC to cut down the oak grove by not appealing the court’s decision, but the symptoms of my illnesses worsened the day the oaks died and have not yet improved. 

Candidate and former mayor Dean differs immensely from Bates. She wants UC Berkeley to pay for the 14 million dollars in city services that they currently use for free. She plans to set budget priorities so that basic core services, such as street and sidewalk repair, police and fire services, and services to the disabled in compliance with the ADA, are adequately funded. She would like to start a “Buy Local” campaign so that 60 cents of every dollar spent locally benefits the citizens of Berkeley. 

Many of her 50 points are very environmental and green. Shirley Dean, who is a mature woman, actually climbed up into one of trees of the oak grove that was being protected by tree-sitters in the one of the longest urban tree-sits on record. I saw her speak eloquently for the grove at a City Council meeting. Do not let these precious lives die in vain. Vote out of power all those who through their actions or inactions allowed this destruction to happen! 

I was dumbfounded by the amount and quality of endorsements that Mayor Bates has. Have any of these people actually seen him in his role at a City Council meeting? The endorsement by Loni Hancock is a bit more understandable—they are married! I am told that Loni Hancock was a good mayor of Berkeley. I voted for her at the state level, but will never do so again while she continues to be married to this man. 

I used to trust the Sierra Club recommendations for candidates, but I do not see how a man who supported the University destroying a 100-year-old oak grove to build an athletic training facility in front of a worn-out stadium on an earthquake fault or who champions gross over-development in Berkeley can be considered environmental and green. Josh Kornbluth I respect as an artist/actor but not his political sense in endorsing Bates. Finally, Barbara Lee is a hero of mine; she was the only congressperson with enough integrity to oppose the President’s war in Iraq, but she obviously does not know Tom Bates. 

Both Berkeley and the U.S. of A. need a drastic change. Please vote your conscience, and if you do, I believe it will be these two candidates: Shirley Dean locally and Barack Obama nationally. Please give me and other disabled people the Berkeley and the nation that cares about our needs, and not just money and greed. 

Yvonne “Voni” Knebel Dwyer is a resident of Berkeley and has an M.A.in Ecological Psychology.

Hard issues that include local development come up on a project-by-project basis but never rise as a top-level campaign issue. Political campaigns are remarkably free of pro- or anti-development dialogues. Even UC Berkeley, the big bully in town, has hardly been mentioned by the candidates in their mailers and websites.  

The video on Bates’ re-election website emphasizes balancing the budget, being a leader as a green city with a mighty fine Climate Action Plan and education. At the end, mention is made of the upcoming Brower Center, a new hotel and the relocation of Freight and Salvage to downtown. UC and future development is not mentioned at all. Hmmm, must not be an issue people care about. Wrong.  

I have attended a number of candidate forums since September and there are always questions from the audience about increases in Berkeley’s density and the number of big buildings going up. These are not friendly questions. People want to know about future plans and about parking congestion and quality of life concerns.  

Quietly but quite importantly, political barriers are being put in place to trump local opposition to development in Berkeley. They are fundamentally end runs to local control regarding growth, and they are being used by elected officials to avoid discussing the issues. Each of these is a story by itself so please pardon the brevity. 

1. ABAG, Association of Bay Area Governments, has given Berkeley a huge requirement for new living units even though the city has added thousands of units in the past four years and the city is one of the most densely populated city in the area. I assume our representative to ABAG went along with the requirement. 

2. Assemblywoman Hancock introduced a bill requiring the Department of Transportation to partner with certain metropolitan planning organizations (ABAG) to develop and implement models that mandate the use of smart growth concepts. Smart Growth is the catch phrase for high-density urban planning. In referring to the San Pablo Corridor Project Hancock told a press group touring the area, “How can we extend our view past our own zoning ordinance and our own piece of the pie and make a street that exemplifies the New Urbanism?”  

3. Mayor Bates refers proudly to Berkeley’s partnership with the Bay Area’s Greenbelt Alliance. Take a wild guess what the implication is of being an alliance member? The central purpose of the Alliance is push development inward into existing urban areas, use smart growth planning that calls for high-rise residential construction near transits hubs.  

Most neighborhood associations do not support “smart growth” when it is used a rationale for high-rise, high-density projects. Clearly, Berkeley’s Planning Department and Bates have drunk the smart growth kool-aid, and the big reason is that the people who contribute to either their budget (Planning Dept.) or their campaign for office.  

I have heard Bates and council members like Capitelli say in public forums that the city has no choice but to approve high-density development. They use ABAG, the Greenbelt Alliance and other mandates as the reasons they feel obligated to comply with new development. It’s a convenient political strategy to hide behind a higher authority.  

Perhaps its time to demand that candidates give full disclosure about their positions regarding development, smart growth and higher densities. 

Norbert Humphrey is a Berkeley resident.

Measure JJ will ensure that medical cannabis continues to be safely available to Berkeley’s patients and that the needs and rights of neighbors are respected. 

We appreciate that the Daily Planet recognizes that every initiative presents policy issues to be weighed and balanced by the voters. We write to clarify those issues because the Planet’s Oct. 21 Voter Guide was somewhat misleading on JJ. 

The measure’s history is unusual and may have led to the Planet’s misunderstanding.  

In 2004 the measure was subjected to an unconstitutional election using now-decertified electronic voting machines. When the Superior Court ordered the measure back on the ballot for 2008, the city council had already made two significant changes to the medical cannabis ordinance. Both are unaffected by JJ: 

1. JJ does not change the city council's current limit of no more than three collective dispensaries in the city. So it is incorrect to say that JJ supporters somehow contest the city’s “freeze” on the number of dispensaries. The number of dispensaries in Berkeley is unaffected by JJ—except to the extent that it helps to maintain the current number rather than allowing them to close for lack of zoning procedure. 

2. JJ does not change the city council’s proximity limit banning dispensaries from locating within 1,000 feet of schools or of each other. 

These two changes are a huge shift in the context of JJ in 2008. With the cap of three and the proximity limits in place, JJ recognizes clinics as an accepted use, and provides procedures and standards for them. 

JJ’s primary zoning effect is to help dispensaries relocate when they must. Today, two of Berkeley’s three dispensaries are on the verge of closing, slowly crushed between the need to relocate and the lack of clear directives for city staff to facilitate such a move. 

If two-thirds of our dispensaries close, it will drive thousands of patients to the dangers of the illicit market, deprive our city and state of significant tax revenue, and add dozens of dispensary service workers to the rolls of the unemployed and uninsured. 

Our existing dispensaries can relocate under JJ, but only if they meet the safety and operating standards of the Peer Review Committee, are at least 1,000 feet from schools, and are not located in residential zones. 

Berkeley’s existing dispensaries are grandfathered and entirely self-regulated. JJ will create a responsible system of regulation for the first time, in which city staff, clinic neighbors, and police will have an appropriate role. Such regulation is already well-developed in neighboring Oakland and San Francisco. 

JJ is endorsed by the Alameda County Democratic Party, Berkeley’s County Supervisor Keith Carson, the United Democratic Campaign of Berkeley, Alameda and Emeryville, the Oakland Tribune, and the Bay Guardian, among many others. The ballot argument in favor of JJ was signed in its entirety by two city council members, a Berkeley family practice doctor, a Cal Ph.D. social work researcher, and a harm reduction expert. Please see www.YesOnJJ.com for more information. 

Measure JJ is well within Berkeley’s long tradition of putting progressive values into actual practice. Please support medical marijuana patients and clinics in Berkeley—vote Yes on Measure JJ. 

Roger LaChance is a member of Citizens for Sensible Medical Cannabis Regulation—Yes on JJ.

It’s hard to understand why the mayor and certain council members don’t run on a pro-development platform. They should just come out and say, ‘I want growth, including big buildings, higher density, less parking and more noise.” They could also say, “I’ll take all the money developers can bundle for my campaign.” And of course the most important thing, “I’ll vote for every big development project put forward, even if it goes against the will of our neighborhoods.”  

Development is the elephant in the campaign that stays quietly in the background. Development and growth don’t appear openly on any of the mailers we get. Instead, you get what Councilmember Capitelli of District 5 has put out in his five mailers in this campaign: “Our Neighborhood Voice” and “Neighborhood Results.” Four years ago Capitelli’s campaign contributors were mostly developers. And again, in this election, he has listed developers as the main source of funds. During his tenure on the council he and his appointees have voted consistently in favor of development projects, often in defiance of neighborhood concerns.  

The effort to elect developer-friendly candidates has surfaced in a rather un-seemly way in the past week. Ali Kashani, a major developer, e-mailed his fellow developers, asking them to contribute to a certain candidate’s campaign for council. In its online edition, The Daily Planet quoted Kashani’s email: “We have an opportunity to elect Terry Doran who will solidify the very shaky majority that we currently have on the council.” Kashani’s email also makes the point that it will be hard to make a fuss over the contributions this late in the campaign. Sounds a lot like the developers have a plan to make sure a majority of the council is in their pocket. It’s brazen!  

It would be less worrisome if elected officials served their neighborhoods with the same energy and loyalty they give to the people who fund their campaigns. Right? 

Unfortunately, there are ample examples where neighborhood voices have been shut down and ignored, while a stream of special dispensations have been granted to Kashani and his development allies.  

A recent example was the proposed North Shattuck Plaza. When the Shattuck Plaza development was announced, neighborhood groups, local merchants and other affected parties expressed numerous concerns. In response, Capitelli promised to take the plaza idea “off the table.” To make the neighborhood’s view clear, he was presented with a Live Oak Codornices Creek Neighborhood Association (LOCCNA) petition with 1140 signatures opposing the North Shattuck Plaza project. It is not Nimbyism when so many in the community say no to a major community change.  

So what did Capitelli do? He put the project back on the table by slipping it into the City’s Pedestrian Master Plan, subverting community process and will, paving the way for the North Shattuck Plaza to go forward without focused local community input. Serving and listening to neighborhoods? Hardly.  

We need to elect independent council members like Sophie Hahn, the neighborhoods’ favorite, running against Capitelli, the developers’ favorite, in District 5. She is beholden to no one but the voters.  

The elephant is so big. When are we going to acknowledge that development, smart growth, transit hubs and the decline of neighborhoods are the real issues? Soon, I hope.  

Rober Arnold is a Berkeley resident.

I have just read the horrific West County/ Contra Costa Times editor’s endorsement of Norman LaForce. Clearly someone did not do a full background check. LaForce is not only “a thorn in the side of park officials,” he is fiercely aggressive and known for vengeful acts. The CC Times editor omits that the citizens of El Cerrito launched a recall to rid themselves of their thorny city council member. Nobody did a quick LexisNexis search on LaForce’s name. No reporter examined the revealing transcript of public testimony when the East Bay Regional Parks board had to appoint Jean Siri’s successor after she died. Jean would roll in her grave if she knew any newspaper had endorsed this man. 

If LaForce is elected, he will threaten the park access of every person who walks a dog, rides a horse, seeks accessible trails, and bikes on the lands of the East Bay Regional Parks. His scientific background is nothing, as he has demonstrated in public hearings many times. He has worked harder to keep humans out of parks than any other “park proponent” I know. He definitely will try to crush any “opponent,” including the disabled, the young and the elderly. Not because they are right or wrong, but because they oppose him. I urge everyone to watch their back if he’s elected. 

He has already hounded the park users group off the Albany Landfill, gleefully destroying one of very few accessible areas for dog walkers with limited mobility in the entire East Bay. He forced creating a breeding burrowing owl habitat on the landfill, at cost of tens of thousands of dollars per year, even though scientific literature quickly reveals likely failure. An hour’s research in the UC Berkeley scientific journal collection showed immediate evidence of the scientific fallacy of this proposal—but he still forced it down everyone’s throat through his usual bullying and threats. When I did research, I found that California Fish & Game had actually recommended a “watch and see” mitigation with no winter time construction for the wintering middle-aged burrowing owl (non-breeding) that might be displaced by building the Gilman Fields, so this entire action was provoked by LaForce, who saw an opportunity to further crush the community of users at the Albany Landfill. Think: just a portion of that money invested in expanding two or three breeding burrowing owl habitats in the Central Valley, their chief breeding ground, would have actually produced young owls. And still have left money in the Gilman Fields JPA’s pocket for our young sports players. The Albany Landfill park users could have continued to clean up the park, remove the star thistle, build art, and start plans for a supportive insectary environment to protect pollinators in our changing climate. 

As Jef Pskanzer wrote last week, Norman will proudly claim the feat of kicking out park users from the Berkeley Meadows (part of the Eastshore State Park). One can have honest debates about how to create urban edge ecosystems that allow both human uses and wild life to thrive together (yes, it can be done beautifully), but Norman’s rigidity will never consider other perspectives or creative solutions. 

I have been puzzled for many years why the local Sierra Club chapter and the Citizens for Eastshore State Park have allowed Norman to speak for them. It has seriously damaged their credibility in any forum where trained scientists and park users intimately familiar with park lands have listened to him. His dirty backroom dealings have been breathtaking. He builds alliances with former opponents so that he can achieve vengeance for a perceived “loss.” He threatens politicians with the damnation of the Sierra Club and CESP. I can only conclude that the board members are comfortable with his questionable practices. 

I have observed LaForce since 1988, when I was working to support the passing of Measure AA, the original EBRPD land acquisition bond measure; at that time I was president of the Regional Parks Foundation, a nonprofit that tries to watchdog EBRPD affairs. He asked to represent our group, but I had already heard him testify with many inaccuracies in front of both County Supervisors’ boards and a city council. I went back to my board and told them that we could not accept his offer because he would quickly destroy their credibility. 

Folks, vote for Mr. Whitney Dotson for East Bay Regional Parks board. He will work for park access for everyone. He listens and understands the balance required for both his constituency’s needs and the care of the land. He works with staff and community. He already is serving a second term on the Park Advisory Committee, and has a working knowledge of EBRPD objectives. We need someone who believes in bringing all the community, including the often-maligned low income citizenry of Richmond, into our beloved parks, and who will particularly attend to increasing access for the disabled in our area. 

The East Bay Regional Parks needs wise direction—not the bludgeon of Mr. Dotson’s opponent, Norman LaForce. 

Marilyn Saarni was co-founder of Albany Let It Be; former president and editor of the Regional Parks Foundation. She is now business/ scientific editor/ computer resource manager at UCB for small research centers.

Once again the City is asking to tap further into our wallets instead of making the effort to manage its huge budget. Together with many of you, Berkeleyans Against Soaring Taxes (BASTA!), Berkeley Property Owners Association (BPOA), Telegraph Business Improvement District (TBID) and neighborhood groups are committed to responsible fiscal management. We urge “no” votes on ballot measures FF, GG & HH.  

Measure HH. Gann Tax Override 

Fortunately, state law does not allow special tax assessments to go on long after their “special” justification is gone.  

The City has multiple revenue streams to pay for essential services: county tax: $39 million; sales tax: $14.7 million; transfer tax: $12.5 million; utility users tax: $14.6 million. The list goes on … Economizing on just 5 percent of the City’s massive budget would make Measure HH unnecessary, and save the struggling taxpayer an average of $900 per year.  

Yes, we approved these taxes in the past, but we were deceived. As soon as we agreed to pay special taxes to improve streets, parks, EMT and other services, the City pulled back its general funds in these areas and spent the money elsewhere. By fooling us into paying “special” taxes for basic services, the City can divert our regular tax dollars to pet projects.  

Measure GG. Disaster Preparedness 

Fire protection is a crucial public service. This is so obvious that the City counts on voters to approve taxes without thinking further. But ask yourself why fire protection of all things is put at risk when the City spends far more money on lower-priority issues. The City cynically plays politics with your safety, meanwhile spending millions on developers; outside contractors, many of which provide ineffective services; increases in staffing levels and staff compensation (the average is $159,000).  

Scheduling mismanagement in the Fire Department costs millions in unnecessary overtime pay. Because of a whopping 37,000 hours of overtime, virtually all Berkeley’s firefighters were top earners, with 25 percent paid over $200,000 even before their latest 14 percent raise.  

There is no guarantee Measure GG funds will provide adequate emergency staffing. Council is planning on holding back $2.5 million of staff costs to purchase equipment. Once again we will see more overtime. Further, GG doesn’t stop the City from slashing the General Funds it now spends on fire and disaster services.  

Whenever the City wants more money, they threaten to undermine public safety. “Protecting stations from closure” is a bogus scare tactic; Berkeley hasn’t had ten stations since the 1950s!  

There are 8,400 medical emergency calls annually—less than one an hour to be shared by seven stations. Often the same incident generates multiple calls, so the actual medical emergency load is much less.  

In 2004 neighborhood associations like CENA, LeConte, NEBA, BANA, CNA, Willard urged a “no” vote on Measure M, a measure similar to GG. When Measure M lost, there were no rotating brownouts. The City funded the BFD with general funds (as they should!). This month Mayor Bates assured the Thousand Oaks Neighborhood Association that he will protect fire and disaster preparedness services.  

Measure FF. Bond for Renovation of Four Branch Libraries  

We love our libraries, but we need to make sure their proposals are financially sound and good for the community. Here’s what needs to be done:  

Get construction costs under control. Measure FF proposes to spend $980 per square foot for new construction and refurbished space, yet the average for California libraries is only $344. Berkeley’s projected costs are way out of line! 

Look for other sources of money. The City of Lafayette is only one quarter Berkeley’s size. For its library construction, Lafayette raised more than $24 million, without adding new taxes, from public grants, private foundations and voluntary donations. Hundreds of private foundations provide millions of dollars for library construction, and for operational costs (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Carnegie, AT&T, etc). If Lafayette can bring in outside funding for building and operating its library, why can’t Berkeley?  

Get contribution from the City of Berkeley. Other cities financially support their libraries.  

Bonds are not the way to go. Given the current credit crunch, it is extremely expensive to get funding for a bond. Many cities experiencing rising bond costs have decided it is better to wait before issuing new ones. Current economic conditions make it essential to reconsider: How much will this really cost?  

Accessibility. In the 1990s all public buildings were required to be made accessible by State law. The West Library received expanded accessibility upgrades in 2008. Berkeley’s library facilities are not in such a state that revisions can’t be made to the proposal.  

Four years ago, the City threatened financial chaos unless a slate of new tax measures passed. Voting No on the 2004 tax measures saved the average homeowner $700 per year, and the sky didn’t fall – in fact, the City experienced an $18 million surplus!  

The proposed 2008 tax and bond measures would cost the average taxpayer $1,000 per year, but combined they represent a miniscule 5 percent of the City’s budget. The City can economize that 5 percent. Vote No on Measures FF, GG & HH, and direct the Council to fund essential services first, and stop diverting our money to non-essential and wasteful projects.  

Sharon Hudson’s previous two commentaries on Berkeley elections appeared in the Oct. 6 and 16 issues of the Berkeley Daily Planet. 

In my previous commentary, “The Balkanization of Berkeley,” I argued that district elections contribute to Berkeley’s inability to function effectively. First, council members are never accountable to almost ninety percent of those they impact. Second, district elections balkanize Berkeley and reduce our ability to work together. Third, council members have too much power over their own districts, which leads to “orphan constituents” without representation, and inhibits free expression and challenge to incumbents.  

For these reasons, I believe that Berkeley should revisit the district election system. I don’t recommend returning to the previous citywide election of all council members. But we could modify the district election system and mitigate its drawbacks.  

A simple modification would be to combine our eight districts into four districts, with two council members from each district. This is a very common municipal structure. Providing a second representative for constituents might considerably reduce the orphan constituent and inhibition problems. Larger district size would reduce geographical parochialism and produce a wider field of candidates per district. The two council members should be able to work together effectively, while staggering elections would prevent two-person slates within districts.  

Although this system wouldn’t create direct accountability to voters in other districts, it would increase the power of each district to defend itself, because council members thinking of doing damage to another district would alienate two colleagues instead of only one. On the downside, larger districts increase campaign spending, and if district majorities consistently outvoted minorities to elect two very similar candidates, it would reduce some benefits of having two representatives.  

A more comprehensive solution would be a hybrid system, with some (two to four) council members elected citywide and others (four to eight) by district. This would partially address all three problems with district elections. The citywide candidates would be accountable to all voters, and would give orphan constituents a place to turn. Candidates could run for citywide seats without alienating the incumbents in their districts, and would bring a citywide perspective to the council. While the citywide portion of the mix would still be subject to the disadvantages of the slate system, this could be reduced by staggered elections.  

I prefer a refinement of the hybrid system that would improve out-of-district accountability. We could require that after two terms as district representatives, council members would have to either sit out a district election (permitting others to run), or would have to run for one of the citywide seats. This would create accountability, because during their first two terms, district representatives who wanted to serve another consecutive term on the council would have to earn broad voter approval so they could win a citywide seat.  

I generally oppose term limits because they reduce decision makers’ experience, and empower staff and lobbyists relative to elected representatives. But the proposed term limits would only be temporary and within the district; I don’t propose term limits for citywide seats or a ban on returning to the district seat after sitting out one cycle. The alternative—council members who are never answerable to almost ninety percent of the voters they impact—is much worse than targeted term limits.  

Another possiblity would be a proportional voting system, in which those outside a district also cast votes in other districts’ elections. Perhaps each voter outside a district would have 1/7 vote in that district’s election, so the cumulative votes from around town would equal those of voters within the district. This is something like an “instant” hybrid system. Although in theory proportional voting should increase accountability and reduce orphan constituents, how well it would work in practice would depend on council members’ calculations of the numbers of votes to be gained by any out-of-district action.  

The obvious downside of the proportional system is its mathematical complexity. However, this shouldn’t be a problem with computerized elections. The voters and the council members themselves would encounter no more complexity than anyone encounters in a citywide system, that is, the task of educating themselves about a number of citywide issues and candidates. In any case, a proportional system would permit council members to concentrate primarily on their own districts, while reducing balkanization somewhat.  

Finally, a non-intuitive but intriguing—and very simple—idea is to keep our district elections, but eliminate the requirement that candidates live within their districts. This would indirectly increase accountability by instilling some fear in incumbents of being effectively challenged by popular candidates from across town, even if they see no threat within their own districts. It would provide many more electoral options for both voters and candidates. It would permit people to serve on the council even if their political views are at odds with most of their own district, preventing loss of good talent. It would permit candidates who have strong ties to a district to run even if they don’t live there (e.g., they might work there, own a business there, or have recently moved out). Remember, under the old citywide election system, people always voted for people who lived outside their areas. The district voters could decide for themselves whether a candidate from outside their district is able to represent them well.  

Of course, each of the ideas presented has some potential problems. One drawback to introducing any citywide candidates is that citywide campaigning favors moneyed interests and moneyed candidates—and hence, entrenched incumbency. And campaign contribution limits and expenses will again make slate politics for the citywide seats very attractive. But the citywide seats would be relatively few, and staggering elections would cut this number in half for each election.  

The idea of introducing even a few citywide council members frightens many Berkeleyans, who fear that minority interests may be disadvantaged, as they were before 1986. The fear of the “tyranny of the majority” is well founded—a rude testament to how divided Berkeley is, and how shamefully far we are from being a compassionate, united city. Having experienced the tyranny of the majority myself, I would not like to introduce it back into the system.  

However, it is unclear how “majority” and “minority” interests would play out under any of these systems today, because Berkeley politics is in flux, with greatly diminished “party” philosophies and influence. As long as we don’t return to a system of only citywide candidates, I think the advantages of instituting some citywide candidates would far outweigh the glaring disadvantages of the district-only sytem: unaccountability, balkanization, lack of representation, and inhibition of political discourse.  

Thomas Jefferson suggested that governments need to change every generation. The astonishing dysfunctionality of the City of Berkeley, which is rotting from within despite glossy propaganda from City Hall read in blissful ignorance in cozy back yards, indicates that the time for change is here. It is vital that we create political structures that encourage open expression of all ideas, respect minority interests, give people multiple options for representation, create accountability, reward service, foster civil behavior, and reduce parochialism. However, because the change from citywide to district elections had some unintended consequences, we want to think carefully before changing again—but let’s not fear to do so. I hope that broad discussion in the community will yield a new electoral form that will work better for Berkeley. 

Sharon Hudson is a long-time Berkeley resident, Southside renter, and old-style Progressive.

At the Oct. 21 council meeting, misleading information on Berkeley property values and foreclosures was publicly stated by City Manager Kamlarz, Councilmember Capitelli, and Economic Development Director Caplan. The City should investigate, correct, and update this information. 

First, it was stated that property values in Berkeley are down only 6.7 percent. However, an official Council report of Sept. 23, 2008, item 17A, attachment 3, states that for the year ending June 30, 2008, the median sale priced single-family home was down 6.7 percent, but that the median sale-priced condo was down 15 percent. Duh, this adds up to more than a 6.7 percent drop. Further, it is now October 21, well into the beginning of what may well be the Second Great Depression. I’m sure that in the last four months, prices have dropped substantially below those of June 30. It should not be all that hard for our officials to have up-to-date numbers. 

Second, it was stated that the number of foreclosures is between 100-108. I very recently looked into this matter with a realtor friend, and below is the information she provided: 

A client of mine looked it up on Realtytrac (not sure of spelling) and gave me this information as of Oct. 15: 

• 132 in pre-foreclosure 

• 132 bank-owned 

• 30 for auction 

City officials should well know that actual foreclosures are only part of the “foreclosure” problem. There are delinquencies, foreclosures, and auctions. There are also problems that don’t always show up in the numbers—short sales, distress sales at low prices, homeowners struggling with mortgage payments and tax bills, etc. Things are going to get much worse for our homeowners, residents and for local government, and we need to face up to this and plan accordingly. 14 percent salary increases for City employees just doesn’t seem right or fair at this time! Nor do new tax/bond measures imposed on our hard-pressed citizenry. On these I will be voting no and I am urging others to vote no. 

Barbara Gilbert is a Berkeley resident.

Several people have asked my opinion regarding some Berkeley candidates and ballot measures. For what it's worth, here are my preferences. 

Of the seriously contested offices and measures, I am supporting (in one case, opposing): 

The re-election of Mayor Tom Bates. He's done a fine job of maintaining civil relationships among the council members, guiding the city through difficult budget balancing without significantly cutting services, growing the City’s tax base and moving toward making Berkeley the “greenest” city in the U.S., through measure G and the recently released Climate Action Plan.  

The re-election of Councilmember Laurie Capitelli (District 5). He has proved to be a hard working and effective official who is especially good at responding to constituent needs and complaints. He supports programs to deal with global warming as well as “smart growth” efforts that will meet the need for more housing downtown and along major bus routes and reduce (not eliminate) reliance on automobiles.  

The election of Terry Doran to City Council (District 4). Like Tom and Laurie, Terry supports housing downtown and along transit routes and efforts to make our city energy efficient. As a former Berkeley High teacher and School Board member, he is a strong advocate for improvements to our educational system. He is a long time resident and serves on the Zoning Adjustments Board.  

I oppose Measure KK. This measure masks itself as a general measure but is actually aimed at reducing the City’s ability to negotiate with AC Transit for improved service between Berkeley and Oakland. Some Telegraph Ave. residents and merchants put together this measure as a means of thwarting AC Transit’s concept of creating a dedicated bus lane along Telegraph Ave. south of Dwight and a portion of Shattuck Ave. The measure would require a city wide vote before any plan could be implemented, causing unnecessary and possibly deal killing delays and costs. 

I support Measure LL. As a member of the City Planning Commission, I labored for over a year on the revised Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, which revisions strengthen the ordinance by reducing the ability of the Landmarks Commission to landmark undeserving properties. The abuse of landmarking has given historic preservation a bad name in Berkeley; the new ordinance would help restore confidence in the landmarking process. 

David Stoloff is a member of Berkeley Planning Commission.

Opponents of AC Transit’s planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service have proposed an alternative that they call “Rapid Bus Plus” (RB+). But their half-baked proposal doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny; it’s a minor variation on existing inadequate 1R service rather than a real alternative. 

All the most vocal opponents of BRT have signed their names to the RB+ proposal, but it is not supported by anyone with any expertise in public transit planning. 

BRT would replace the 1R (formerly the 40 bus) that runs up Telegraph from Oakland and proceeds via Bancroft to downtown Berkeley. BRT will improve service on this heavily used route by making it more frequent, faster and more reliable. 

Dedicated lanes will enable buses to stay on schedule since they won’t get bogged down in automobile traffic. It will allow for more frequent service by reducing bus bunching. 1R buses are supposed to arrive every 12 minutes, but they deviate frequently from this schedule; sometime two buses arrive one after the other. While buses will never be “fast,” and will continue at average speeds well below the speed limit, travel time will be reduced. The environmental impact report (EIR) for BRT estimates that travel speeds will be as much as 31 percent faster during peak periods. 

One problem with “rapid bus” service such as the 1R or the 72R on San Pablo is that it deteriorates as auto traffic increases. In the past two years, the rush-hour speed of the 72R has dropped by 30 percent. If any of the forecast growth occurs in the Southside and downtown, already unreliable 1R service will deteriorate further. 

Creating dedicated lanes for buses is the key BRT feature that makes faster, more reliable, more frequent service possible. Another BRT feature that contributes to improved service are the stations with level boarding and ticket vending machines. Like light rail, BRT makes boarding easy. No steps to climb; people using wheelchairs can roll right on the bus. 

And it’s possible to require people to buy their tickets in advance by providing ticket machines at each station. No wait while a line of boarding passengers pays at the front of the bus. 

RB+ proponents reject dedicated lanes, stations, level boarding, and even ticket machines. They claim vending machines are “trouble-prone.” This is odd since such machines are used by BART and by transit systems around the world. 

But ticket machines are “infrastructure” and BRT opponents are opposed to any infrastructure that might take a little space from cars and that might encourage some development in commercial areas where BRT stations are located. 

Studies of BRT systems in other cities published by the Federal Transit Administration have found positive impacts for the local economy and local business. For example, the Silver Line BRT in Boston has been accompanied by “new construction on vacant lots, rehabilitation of historic buildings and enhancements to retail.” 

So what is the “Plus” in Rapid Bus Plus? It comes down to just one thing: passengers could buy tickets in advance from merchants. Besides that, there is no difference between their proposal and existing rapid bus service. 

Needless to say, you couldn’t require pre-purchase of tickets if tickets could be purchased only from merchants. There aren’t merchants near every bus stop, and where there are, they may not be open from 5:30 a.m. to past midnight, which would be necessary if bus patrons were to rely on them for pre-purchase of tickets. AC Transit would lose revenue if it had to pay a percentage to local merchants. Without the promise of increased ridership that comes from BRT, AC would not be able to make up for the lost revenue. 

There are some transit systems where merchant sales supplement the transit agency’s direct sales. In Paris, you can buy tickets from “tabacs,” but you can also buy them at 300 metro stations, as well as at bus terminals, tram stations and commuter rail stations. And, you can buy a ticket from the bus driver. Paris has embraced what local BRT opponents reject: dedicated lanes for buses on major routes and dedicated lanes for their new trams. 

In their RB+ proposal, BRT opponents tack on various things that are not inconsistent with BRT. They want fuel-efficient buses. Good idea. AC Transit has calculated that BRT will reduce generation of global-warming inducing CO2 emissions by 12,500 pounds a day even with the added buses for more-frequent service. 

City staff working on the Climate Action Plan have calculated that the reduction in CO2 attributable to BRT could be closer to 56,000 pounds a day if zero-emission buses are used. The sooner that BRT introduces zero-emission buses the better. 

The CO2 reduction would result from new riders attracted by faster, more frequent, more reliable service. The BRT EIR estimates that BRT will increase bus ridership by between 56 percent and 76 percent, an estimate in line with actual increases in ridership achieved by BRT service in other U.S. cities such as Eugene, Oregon. 

RB+ proponents also want to preserve local bus service, but BRT does not preclude that either. Two of four BRT alternatives under consideration would retain local service. 

RB+ proponents also want “dramatically reduced transit fares”, which is a bit utopian in the current context of budget cuts and rising operating costs. In any event, capital funds for BRT can’t be used for operations. The capital investment in BRT will have a favorable impact on operating costs since labor costs and fuel costs per mile traveled will be lower with dedicated lanes than for slower-moving buses mired in traffic. 

The starting point for BRT opponents is that transit cannot be improved if doing so causes even the slightest inconvenience for motorists. While the BRT EIR found that traffic will continue to flow on  

Telegraph with BRT, the extra minute or two that it might take to drive up Telegraph at rush hour is too much for them. While AC Transit would replace parking spaces that have to be removed, going a little further to find a space is also unacceptable. Their “cars come first” mindset is at odds with the City’s officially adopted transit-first policy. 

RB+ proponents repeatedly show their unfamiliarity with existing public transit. They make the amazing claim that what they are proposing would be similar to Muni’s N-Judah light rail line in San Francisco, going so far as to describe the N-Judah as “essentially Rapid Bus Plus on rails.” In fact the N-Judah has dedicated lanes for more than 70 percent of its route. It travels on rails in a dedicated right of way under Market Street and in dedicated lanes on surface streets, wherever the streets are wide enough to allow for a separate lane for buses and cars. (In one stretch, cars can enter the transit lane to make left turns.) 

To convert the N-Judah to RB+, you would have to move it back to the surface of Market Street without its own lane, where it would quickly get bogged down in automobile traffic. That would certainly not improve service. Buses that share surface streets with cars in downtown San Francisco average only 7.5 miles per hour. 

San Francisco is not scared of BRT; plans are moving forward for BRT with dedicated lanes for buses on both Geary Boulevard and Van Ness Avenue. San Francisco’s Transit Effectiveness Project has determined that one cause of transit delays is traffic congestion where transit vehicles share lanes with cars. Bus riders want faster, more reliable service, and that is also key to attracting new riders and convincing them to leave their cars at home.  

Rob Wrenn is a former Transportation Commissioner.

TransForm (formally the Transportation and Land Use Coalition) recognized very early on that Measure KK is really about process and not whether or not voters agree with the concept of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). If approved it would further delay an already exhaustive public process in Berkeley, and we encourage Daily Planet readers to vote “no” on KK. 

Proponents of Measure KK wrongfully claim that it will make decisions on transit more democratic. They feel the measure is needed because the City Council is not listening to them. In fact the City Council has heard their concerns. However, proponents of Measure KK wanted the City Council to take dedicated transit lanes out of all future discussions, without further analysis to see if claims of intolerable impacts on traffic and parking would be true or not. Measure KK proponents are making judgments before a final study has been completed, and they expect the City Council to do the same. When it became clear that the City would not make the same judgments without further analysis, and were likely going to continue the study of the impacts of dedicated lanes, they claimed that the process was not “democratic enough” and acted to put Measure KK on the ballot.  

We disagree with them, and trust that upon a quick summary of the process to date, you will too. 

According to AC Transit’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), over a three year period from 1999 to 2002, AC Transit prepared a Major Investment Study (MIS) of the Berkeley–Oakland– San Leandro corridor to examine alternatives for improved transit service. The study was a public-driven process that included public outreach meetings. Three advisory committees were established, including a Community Advisory Committee to provide policy and technical guidance. The conclusions of that study would be the basis for what would be explored in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. 

During the MIS study, the Berkeley City Council (then led by Mayor Shirley Dean), publicly adopted a city policy to give BRT—with dedicated lanes—priority on Telegraph Ave. 

In May of 2007 AC Transit released the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for BRT and held three public meetings where the concept of BRT was presented and comments were recorded from the general public about the DEIR for a total of 45 days. All the comments still being made now by the Measure KK proponents were made at that time, and AC Transit is obligated by law to address them in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). 

The City Council is still working out how and where BRT would operate in Berkeley, to include where dedicated lanes would exist, where stops would be located, what downtown streets BRT would take to turn around before heading southbound, etc. (See the Planning Commission Agenda for Oct. 29, 2008, in addition to several meetings and workshops that have already taken place.) An unknown number of future public meetings remain to be held before the City Council finalizes a vision of BRT in Berkeley for AC Transit to study (called a “Locally Preferred Alternative”). The results of AC Transit’s study would then be reported in the FEIR, which would also be released to the public, re-starting almost the entire process all over again before final approval by the City Council and the AC Trasit Board of Directors. Clearly, BRT is far from a “done deal”—as opponents often claim. 

But wait. If Measure KK passes, there’s more. 

If Measure KK were to pass, upon the City Council's approval of the FEIR, planning staff would then be required to do another study of the impacts of the proposed BRT project. The results of that study would then be released and voters would be expected to evaluate the study and cast an informed vote on approval (or not) of the dedicated lanes in the next election, or in a special election, if necessary. 

As anyone can see, this process has already been encumbered enough. Requiring a whole new study and a public vote undermines staff time, public input and processes that have occurred to date, and are still yet to come. Perhaps most ridiculous of all is the fact that approval for modifications to the street for the travel or parking of private cars requires a fraction of the aforementioned process. Why didn’t Measure KK include those processes? It is this beleaguering of transit improvements alone that have led the long list of elected officials and organizations to take a “No on Measure KK” position. We hope you’ll join us. 

Joel Ramos is a member of TransForm.

We are writing in re-sponse to LA Wood’s candidate statement in the Daily Planet, to explain our endorsement decision in his race, and to address the charges that our process was “back room” and “slate politics at its worst.”  

First of all, there are too many candidates in the geographic area we represent for the Sierra Club, Northern Alameda County Group, to interview them all. We are volunteers, and most of us in the group have full-time occupations. There is no paid Sierra Club staff that arranges these interviews for us. Therefore, we choose those we consider to be the most viable candidates in each district to interview using the club’s viability criteria of past performance, endorsements, and fundraising capability.  

This year, in the District 4 race, we felt Jesse Arreguin deserved our early and sole endorsement because he has participated in our Northern Alameda Group meetings since late 2007 and has made significant contributions to our group prior to his decision to run for office to replace Dona Spring. Jesse is an independent candidate, just as Dona was. Those closest to Dona asked him to run, and he has the overwhelming support of those she worked with, including Nancy Holland, Dennis Walton and dozens of District 4 residents).  

Jesse’s environmental credentials are extensive. He spent many, many hours as part of the Downtown Area Planning Committee (DAPAC), writing and creating an overwhelming downtown community vision consensus (17-4) that includes LEED certification requirements, renewable energy, greater urban core density, affordable family housing and increased green space, the Sierra-Club endorsed plan. Jesse has fought for open space at Eastshore State Park, EBMUD water conservation/ restoration EIR analysis, expanded recycling and zero waste improvements at transfer stations.  

As chair of the Rent Stabilization Board, Jesse has long been a champion for affordable housing, allowing Berkeley to remain Berkeley, and not become gentrified from rent escalation and evictions. He supports the Sierra Club urban density policy of 20 percent affordable housing.  

Our process was neither “back room” nor “slate politics,” as was charged. We feel we have nothing to apologize for and are proud to give our sole endorsement in District 4 to Jesse Arreguin.  

Kent Lewandowski is the chair of the Sierra Club Northern Alameda County Group. 

The arguments that have appeared against Measure KK (Berkeley’s initiative to give you a vote on future street conversions) do not hold up.  

Measure KK was qualified for the ballot by a group of Berkeley citizens from all over town who came together out of frustration over trying to have some positive input into AC Transit’s Bus Rapid Transit (“BRT”) project. I learned about the proposed BRT on Telegraph and Shattuck Avenues approximately two years ago. I started attending meetings, workshops, hearings, etc.  

The vast majority of people speaking at these meetings were opposed to the proposed route and configuration and made their concerns known. They have written many letters to the editor and commentaries on this subject that have appeared in the Daily Planet. (Thank goodness we have a local newspaper that permits lively debates on local issues!) AC Transit issued its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (“DEIR”) and we responded with our concerns as individuals. The cost was originally given as $400 million. (Later this was reduced verbally to $250 million, then $235 million.) But the BRT plan kept rolling along.  

Last year, AC Transit inaugurated the 1R “Rapid Bus” service along the proposed BRT route, in addition to a local bus route 1. The 1R runs Monday through Friday using big, double VanHool buses with stops that are approximately one third of a mile apart. The local 1 stops are approximately two blocks apart.  

At some point the current group, known as Berkeleyans for Better Transportation Options (BBTOP), coalesced and came to the conclusion that we needed to take more steps if we were going to have our serious concerns represented. 

We had goals, one of which was to let the greater Berkeley community—and not just the informed few—know about BRT and the problems we see with it.  

The major problems are reducing the capacity of Telegraph Avenue to one lane in each direction for all but bus traffic and eliminating approximately 75 percent of the parking on Telegraph from Alcatraz north to Bancroft Way. We proposed a modification to the Rapid Bus, called “Rapid Bus Plus,” to add all the benefits of BRT except the lane closures and mid-street stations. We met with AC Transit and other stakeholders to present this plan. But the BRT plan kept rolling along.  

Last spring our group wrote the KK Initiative, had it approved by Berkeley and Alameda County, and we began to collect signatures. We collected over 3,000 signatures, approximately 50% more than were necessary to qualify it for the ballot, in less than six weeks. Now it is on the ballot. At the very least, this will inform the citizens of Berkeley about BRT and start them thinking about where Berkeley is headed.  

The main arguments against this initiative are that it will cost the city lots of money, and that it is anti-environmental. Neither is true.  

If Measure KK passes, you will get a vote before any major project such as BRT is approved and dedicated traffic lanes are transferred to AC Transit or similar organizations. But the cost cited in the ballot argument against Measure KK is grossly inflated. Most of it represents analysis that Berkeley should do before handing over any public traffic lanes to AC Transit, whether or Measure KK passes and requires a public vote.  

As to the anti-environmental argument, according to data contained in AC Transit’s only environmental study shows almost no decrease in emissions, pollution, or travel time if BRT were implemented. The report makes no claims at all about greenhouse gases, and suggests a modest decrease in car trips.  

AC Transit is already using the large, unpopular diesel buses along this route, and most of them have almost no passengers for most of the day. And these are hours of low traffic congestion. How will creating a bus only lane change this situation? Overall, just about any alternative transit investment would do much more for the planet—and we can only spend this money once.  

I would also like you to compare the list of endorsers for Measure KK, pro and con. The No on Measure KK organization has the endorsement of a long list of politicians and special interest organizations. Yes on Measure KK is endorsed by Berkeley neighborhood and small business organizations, groups that represent Berkeley residents and business owners directly. This issue is not just about how buses are going to run on Berkeley streets. It is also about development. If BRT is built, it will trigger high density development around each station which would be beyond the control of Berkeley zoning regulations.  

So the trade-off for BRT on Telegraph and downtown appears to be that we spend between $235 and $400 million, confine all but bus traffic to one lane each direction, eliminate most of the parking along Telegraph, eliminate local bus service and other negative impacts—all to save two to three minutes on the trip between downtown Berkeley and downtown Oakland. And to give developers new opportunities to build high-density housing, which neighbors do not want, along the route, centered at each station.  

We find this an obviously bad deal. But we are not voting on BRT at this point, only for the right to vote on BRT-type projects.  

That is why we worked so hard to put Measure KK on the ballot—to ensure that citizens can be heard on this important issue and others like it. Please vote Yes on Measure KK.  

Mary Oram is treasurer of Advocates for Voter Approved Transit and a member of BBTOP.  

As the election draws close, the debate concerning KK is coming to a close. KK has been a success. Regardless of the final outcome, KK began a real city wide public discussion of BRT. The Transportation Commission won’t do it, The City Council won’t do it, and AC Transit won’t do it—KK has.  

The most interesting thing about the debate has been the League of Women Voters stance against KK with no discussion with the proponents of the initiative. KK is for democracy—allowing you to vote on an issue that will affect many people. You have to wonder why the League is against it? Has the League become an institution against democracy?  

The Sierra Club’s “no” position is another wonder. Like the League, the Club made its decision without allowing the proponents of KK to explain why BRT is not environmentally friendly. One would think the Club would question the fact that the Draft EIR on page 4-131 says that “Implementation of BRT would result in a 0.03 percent reduction in pollutant emissions” and on page 4-152 the draft says “The energy impacts of the build alternatives as compared to the No-Build alternative would be negligible.” No mention is made of any saving hoped for by reducing automobile usage in either case. Has the Sierra Club been taken over by the people who hate cars so completely that they don’t care about the environment?  

Then we come to our elected officials and those running for office. Are they so afraid of democracy that they don’t want their constituents to vote on an issue that will change the face of Berkeley? They tell you that the cost of this initiative will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Of course any plan that the City must be part of will cost money, they fail to tell you that. Special elections would not be necessary. All we have to do is plan around the next general election and the cost almost disappears.  

The arguments put forth by “The Friends of BRT” against KK make you wonder if they feel they know best. Reducing car congestion on the streets of Berkeley will take a much more serious discussion with the University of California, the developers, and the business owners of Berkeley. If “The friends” are really serious about this, they would be urging Mayor Bates and the City Council to talk to these groups and find solutions. All UC wants to do is build more parking lots so more of their staff can drive in Berkeley. The developers aren’t much better, they want to build without parking, but won’t provide the means for those who live in their projects free public transportation.  

Those against KK try to convince us that the initiative is poorly written. It seems like this is a worn out reason to oppose KK. In fact, the initiative very clearly states that it only requires the voters to approve projects that would dedicate Berkeley streets to transit-only or HOV/Bus-only use. It does not disallow any of those uses.  

The Rebuttal to arguments in favor of measure KK is so full of unproven and/or false statements that Council member Kriss Worthington says, “The first, second, and fourth sections of the rebuttal are unproven and/or false. I am opposed to Measure KK but I can not sign my name to be associated with this rebuttal argument. I think it is more honest and more effective to stick to facts and avoid hyperbole and inaccuracy. Some opponents of BRT and some supporters of KK offered lists of proposals, so why say that they ‘say nothing.’ That’s not true. The ‘normal’ process is ongoing and neither we nor they know if they will get what they want.” Kriss continues, “If the No on KK makes so many false statements it could turn public opinion against us and that would be very sad.”  

It seems to me the voters need to protect themselves from grandiose plans that will probably not achieve the results proponents claim. Protect your right to have a say in the quality of life issues surrounding transportation in Berkeley. Vote “yes” on KK.  

Dean Metzger is president of the Claremont-Elmwood Neighborhood Association.

In a commentary in last week’s Planet about Albany’s City Council election, which pits a Sierra Club slate against three other candidates, Nan Wishner wrote of the three slate candidates, “I have heard an objection that electing Lieber, Panian, and Toomey will create an all-progressive council. I don’t have a problem with a council committed to the progressive values of environmental stewardship and social justice that I believe most Albany residents share.” I am a progressive environmentalist committed to social justice, and I have a big problem with the assumption that electing the straight Sierra Club slate is consistent with progressive values. 

If the slate is elected, the Albany City Council will have been entirely selected by the Sierra Club. Even if “most Albany residents” share Ms. Wishner’s values (as I think they do), progressives also value representative democracy. A complete Sierra Club win will deny representation to anyone who dissents from the Sierra Club’s agenda, or its means to accomplish that agenda. Consequently, a total Sierra Club takeover will drive Albany further apart rather than “bringing Albany together” as Mayor Lieber’s latest campaign slogan claims. This violates the spirit of the Sierra Club Board’s own resolution to “support alternative electoral methods that better reflect the diversity of public opinion” (passed on July 22, 2000, and described in http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200101/lol2.asp). 

Progressives have traditionally fought political monopolies because they are exclusionary. A Sierra Club monopoly should not be granted an exception in any event, but particularly because past Sierra Club candidates and supporters have used many of the divisive tactics employed by such monopolies to gain power. 

Weeks before the 2004 Albany Council election, the Sierra Club slate of Lieber and Brian Parker filed a complaint with the FPPC against some opposing candidates, and arranged publicity for their complaint (described in part in http://www.albanyca.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2289). Lieber subsequently won and Parker lost. The FPPC ultimately resolved long after the election that the complaint had no merit. This maneuver likely did not throw the election, but it did foreshadow the future. 

Two weeks before the 2006 Council election, David Madson and Jon Cunningham filed a lawsuit against opposition candidates Caryl O’Keefe and Francesco Papalia (http://www.ebdailynews.com/article/2006-10-26-eb-money). At the same time, Peter Maass sent a letter to the Council accusing O’Keefe and Papalia of illegal campaign activities. The Sierra Club slate publicized these charges, which are still listed for the moment on the former Sierra Club slate’s site (http://saveourshorelineteam.com/news-coverage/). After the election, the court found against Madson and Cunningham and awarded attorney’s fees to O’Keefe and Papalia, but the damage was done. Even though Sierra Club candidate Wile was caught stealing Papalia’s literature during the campaign (for which she subsequently apologized), Wile beat O’Keefe by 285 votes. After this victory, Wile appointed Madson to the Traffic and Safety Commission, nominated Maass for the Planning and Zoning Commission, and appointed Parker, who filed the 2004 FPPC complaint and ran the 2006 Sierra Club slate campaign, to the Waterfront Committee (http://www.albanyca. org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=3427). 

Even if the Sierra Club’s political activities in Albany were exemplary, progressives should not support its bid for an outright political monopoly. The evidence of its past tactics makes this even more imperative. Please consider each of the six candidates on their individual merits and vote for those most qualified in your opinion. If you do vote for the straight Sierra Club slate after such consideration, do so knowing you are voting to monopolize 100 percent of the representation on the Council for yourself, to the exclusion of many of your neighbors. This is not what being a progressive is about. This is not what Albany is about. This is not what democracy is about.  

Preston Jordan is a member of Albany’s Charter Review Committee, but the views expressed above are his own.

Every Berkeley resident concerned about the city’s future should vote “no” on Measure GG. Why? Consider a conversation I recently had with Mayor Tom Bates. 

I bumped into Bates at the Spice of Life Festival a week ago Sunday. I asked him why property owners and renters should be asked to pay ever more in taxes when the city is doing such a lousy job finding other sources of income. In particular, I asked him why he had agreed with the University of California to make Berkeley taxpayers subsidize police, fire and sewer services for UCB to the tune of $14 million a year. 

“It’s the best deal we could get,” he said. 

That’s hard to believe, I told him, “The city has ultimate leverage in such ‘negotiations.’” I said, “why negotiate at all? Why not simply say, ‘Hey, it costs our taxpayers $14 million a year to provide you with services. You don’t pay any taxes. We’re simply informing you that you need to pay for what you use or we won’t provide the services to you anymore.’ Isn’t that the way the rest of the world works?” 

“We couldn’t do that,” Bates responded.  

“Why not?” 

“We have to provide those services to them.” 

“No, you don’t,” I said. “Not if they don’t pay for them. There is no law that requires such a thing.” 

“Well, the university makes the argument that they are the economic engine that drives Berkeley’s economy,” Bates told me. 

“But the university is already here,” I said. “It’s not like we’re some bum-luck town in South Carolina trying to attract a BMW plant. The university isn’t going anywhere. A $14 million subsidy buys Berkeley nothing.” 

He took another tack. If the university were forced to pay its way, there would be pressure to make other groups pay. 

I didn’t follow the logic. “Everybody else in Berkeley is already paying!” I said. 

He nodded, and thought for a few moments. “Well,” he said with a little smile, “I have considered putting a perimeter up around the university and charging people to get in and out.” 

At that point, I realized an intelligent conversation was impossible, and I wished him well. 

The $14 million subsidy figure leads us to the Berkeley’s next revenue-raising failure. Consider these two figures: 

1. $14,225,098; 2. $14,442,238  

Number 1 is the sales tax revenue for Berkeley in 2002. Number 2 is the sales tax revenue five years later, in 2007. 

First, notice that the $14 million the city earns in sales taxes goes straight to subsidizing the university. Just about all of it. 

Second, notice the puny rate at which sales tax revenue increased in Berkeley over that period, a time when the economy was growing strongly around Berkeley and across the USA. The State of California saw a sales tax increase of 30 percent over those five years. Berkeley: barely 4 percent. 

So while Berkeley taxpayers subsidize UCB, our city leaders are creating barren storefronts downtown and scaring business into surrounding communities. No, we don’t want to look like Emeryville. But a town that can’t even get an organic grocery store built or agree to allow its car dealers to move from inner-city neighborhoods to locations next to the freeway clearly shows an anti-business bias and is putting its economic future in jeopardy. 

Finally, let me restate what others have argued on these pages: that Measure GG is a fear-based campaign that might have been taken from the Karl Rove playbook. The extra taxes ostensibly would be used to beef up fire protection and medical emergency response. Both are good things. But shouldn’t fire protection and ambulance service be one of the city’s topmost priorities? Shouldn’t the least essential parts of the city’s budget be put up for taxpayer approval instead? 

The dirty secret of Measure GG is that the increased revenue is fungible—it goes into the city’s general account. It can be spent on anything. By creating fear and anxiety about the level of fire services, city leaders get away with not having to make tough choices about more-expendable programs. 

Enough! Stop subsidizing the university, and use the money for fire protection, for a warm water pool, and more. Get smart about making Berkeley attractive to business. Stop scaring citizens with stealth tax hike measures. Send city leaders a message: Vote “no” on GG. 

Russ Mitchell is a Berkeley resident and a journalist who has written for the New York Times, Smart Money and others.

The Indo-American relationship has never been so high and as good as it has been during last three years.  

During this period the US government under the leadership of  

President George W. Bush has strengthened the relationship between the  

two countries by extending full civil nuclear co-operation with India and other bilateral ties including creating environment for more business, commercial, educational and social activities between the two countries. 

It has been reported that during the last three years the enrolment of Indian students in the US universities has been ranked at the top among the foreign 

students. 

Moreover, majority of Indian professionals and executives working in the US companies and institutions have an income level above the average level of income in the USA. 

Hence the Indian community in the USA has contributed as much as it has received from the United States, if not more. 

Consequently India and the Indian American communities earnestly hope that the new President will improve upon the existing good relationship between the US and India which would benefit both the countries economically and socially. 

The coming presidential election in the USA on November 4 will be a very keen contest between the Democrats and Republican candidates. The  

Democratic Presidential candidates Barack Obama and Jo Biden represent change in American policies at national and international level. The debates leading up to the election has witnessed clash of personalities, ideas and vision of the two candidates and the debates have been very close. Perhaps the candidate who can convince the American voters what he can deliver will clinch the election. As John Kennedy had aid in his acceptance speech…. 

“ You must do for the country what is required of you and not ask what the country has done for you.” 

The clash is not restricted to political ideology, but electing the first African-American President; and between a liberal and a conservative President; between youth and aged; between progressive policies or old dreams of the American middle class families represented by John McCain and Sarah Palin in particular. 

Sarah Palin has added a new dimension to this election. She represent the vast majority of middle class families across the States and their dreams, (except in New York and California), where the mother takes care of the family while the father earns. And if the family lives in Alaska, the father may be digging the terrain to find gold dust or drilling for oil, while the mother takes care of family’s daily needs and even flying the children to schools or sending them to Oregon State or Berkeley for graduate school.  

If Obama is elected then he will become the first African- American President in the USA and this would be the most significant change that would take place in the history of the United States. 

It is a long journey from the American Civil Rights movement initiated on the model on non-violence developed by India’s immortal leader Mohandas Gandhi and followed by Martin Luther King. 

Many of my American friends have commented that contribution of Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence concept to the United States is of much more value than the sum of all aid USA has given to India since 1950. 

The above statement is supported by a recent story published (October 24) in the leading English daily in Calcutta by Jonathan Power that. “The non-violent tactics of Mahatma Gandhi are pushing at an open door. Even the Pentagon has begun to look at their value in situation of conflict and political impasse.” (The story then refers to the non-violent struggle by the opposition in Zimbabwe to push aside the dictatorial regime of Robert Mugabe). 

Obama is young, smart and has experience as a community organizer and has organized activities with the local India-American groups in Illinois. The India-American strongly feel that Obama will establish a stronger tie with India. 

He identifies himself with the Black American but there are groups within the main stream Black Americans who do not consider him to be a part of their community, since his ancestors are not slaves. He has also faced criticism from a few black community and church leaders. 

He is particularly concerned about healthcare coverage for the middle class families and has promised to make healthcare accessible to all Americans. Of course he may face difficulties to get the bill on healthcare approved at the congress. 

He is also concerned about creating more jobs for the Americans. But with the present financial crisis it may be difficult for him to find pragmatic policies. 

John McCain too proposes to extend healthcare coverage from American people but he wants do it with the cooperation of private companies. He too proposes to provide more employment opportunities, but in general he would be following the policies pursued by President Bush including his policies on India, Pakistan and Afghanisthan. Obama wants the thrust of front line activities concentrated in Afghanistan.  

The statements of the two presidential candidates of the USA are not very assuring for development of business and job opportunities in the USA for the Indians and outsourcing of jobs to India. Over the years the Democrats and Republicans have supported the Indian communities and encouraged US companies to off load business (outsource) to India. The Indian-Americans are likely to vote for the candidate whose policies convince them of a better future.  

The Democratic candidate Barak Obama has made repeated public statements that he wants American companies to create more jobs in the USA and each dollar earned by these companies should be re-invested in the USA and outsourcing to be limited. Such statements of Barak Obama have made India and the Indian communities in the USA worried. It is a fact that Obama is inexperienced in foreign policy, but his Vice President Jo Biden would give him plenty of support in foreign policy matters.  

Recently (on Oct. 23) in an interview given by Obama to the Asian News Service (IANS) on foreign policy matters and on relationship with India and Pakistan and has stated “Joe Biden and I will make building a stronger relationship, including a close strategic partnership with India a top priority.” But he has not elaborated what these strategic partnerships are. 

On his agenda for H1-B visa and outsourcing of work, he said “I support comprehensive immigration reform that includes improving our visa program, including H1-B program to attract world’s most talented people to America.” However, he has avoided making statement whether he will increase the number of H-1 visas which will enable more foreign immigrants to find job s in the USA; this is vitally important for foreign immigrants. 

On the issue of job outsourcing Obama has stated…”Revolution in communication technology have sent jobs wherever there is an internet connection and have forced workers in Chicago and Boston to compete for jobs with those in Bangalore and Beijing. We live in a competitive world. 

The American workers need to be supported and given tools needed to compete in the global economy. So I would pursue common sense measures such as offering tax incentives to companies that create jobs in the United States…” 

Republican candidate John McCain will perhaps follow the policies of George Bush. But his voting records for the US’s own nuclear power generation is not very assuring since he still believes in drilling more wells in different states of the USA. It is not clear how far he will be able to strengthen economic ties between India and the USA. 

Obama has publicly stated that he supports India’s civilian nuclear program and has voted for the same in the senate. Hopefully if he is elected, Indian can expect the recently signed nuclear program to proceed in the right 

direction. Because the Indian government is under attack by the opposition in the parliament for agreeing to surrender the country’s sovereign rights on nuclear arsenal program.  

The present economic crisis in the USA (with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, AIG and others) has added fuel to the fire, and the world community is doubtful whether the US economy can recover from the mild recession within next six months by which time the new President must actively pursue his policies. The financial crisis in the USA has affected the world’s financial markets including that of India. And the meltdown affect is creating panic around the world. 

The future of Indo-American relationship will depend much more on resolving the present economic crisis and gaining the confidence of the world community by the new President. A positive outcome with the revived economic conditions will enable the two countries to deal with other world issues, such as world terrorism and globalization and human rights.  

K. P. Bhattacharjee, a graduate of UC Berkeley, is an author, architect and planner who lives in Calcutta, India, where he is the executive director of the Centre for Human Settlements Int’l. 

Patrick Kennedy outdid himself Saturday night, Oct. 24, at the Gaia Building. He rented the theater to Hip Hop party promoters, with no notice to the Police Department. The “party” became a melee in the street. I operate Anna’s Jazz Island, a music venue sharing the entrance lobby with the Gaia theater which is routinely rented out for huge private parties in clear violation of its Use Permit. 

This “party” began with deafening Hip Hop music and hundreds of young adults in long lines: up Allston to Oxford for the women and down Allston and around Shattuck for the men. All were fully searched, one at a time, on the sidewalk at the lobby entrance by seven huge security guards armed with guns. Armed guards on Allston Way at my entrance! The entrance and the sidewalk and much of the street were mobbed. Hundreds entered and hundreds more young people arrived, trying to enter, but were turned away due to over-capacity crowding. 

At about 10 p.m., I called the Fire Department, requesting the presence of the Fire Marshall out of concern that both my customers and the hundreds of party-goers already inside could all be trapped in the building in an emergency, unable to get out, by those blocking the exits. One of the promoters told an early arriving police officer and me that the promoter group paid $4,000 for the use of the theater space and were told that capacity was 450 people, including the roof, so I had no right to complain. 

From 9 p.m. on, I received calls from my customers distressed that they could not get near my entrance due to crowds standing in the street. By 10:30, the security guards let no one into the building, or into the lobby I share with the theater, since the mob was then out of control. A large group of young men jumped into the window of Anna’s Jazz Island, over the seating and tables as the music was playing, and ran through the club to enter the party through the back. Virtually all my customers left at that point. 

The Hip Hop cars began slowly driving up Allston, signing and radios blaring, people jumping in and out of the cars. The Berkeley police arrived in force at about 10:30, sealing off the block at both ends with twelve police cars in all. In a large show of force, with the security guards yelling at the hundreds of milling young people on the street, police officers ordered all partygoers to leave. The crowd was moved down to Shattuck, away from the Gaia Building. The shutting down of the party took well over an hour. 

The musicians at my club stopped playing early since almost all my patrons had fled. Due to the mob on the street, and at a musician’s request, police officers escorted his elderly parents to their car. The musicians were unable to leave the premises until after midnight since they were unable to pull up their cars and load their instruments. My staff and I left at about 12:30. 

Many young people were angry that they were being forced to leave a party for which they paid $20. In spite of that, all the Berkeley police officers were stellar—calm and professional, even when taunted. Both Lt. Files, the Watch Commander, and Sgt. Smith were very helpful. 

The Gaia Building Use Permit requires 100 percent cultural use. This has been the subject of litigation because the City of Berkeley refuses to simply enforce the Use Permit, which does not allow these huge private parties. Nor does it allow the two evangelical Christian churches that meet in the theater on Sundays and Mondays with no permit, with the Church office off the lobby. Gaia party attendees regularly drink alcohol and act out on the sidewalk in violation of the law. And this is not the first out-of-control party that cost the citizens thousands of dollars on crowd control. Recall, at an earlier “party,” during crowd dispersal, bottles were thrown at the police. Saturday night was foreseeable, even likely with no oversight. Even so, the City Attorney says Use Permit enforcement is entirely discretionary. Mayor Bates, Councilmembers Capitelli, Maio, Moore, Olds, Wozniak and City staff have all supported non-cultural uses and have voiced no objection to the parties. 

Saturday night’s winners? Patrick Kennedy, the party promoters and the security guards. They each made a bundle. The losers? The Citizens of Berkeley who paid thousands of dollars for police officers to control the crowd, Anna’s Jazz Island, Island staff who made very little money, music lovers who could not come in, music lovers who became fearful and were forced to leave for safety reasons, the musicians who had almost no audience and who had to stop the music. 

Anna’s Jazz Island was voted the “Best Jazz Club That Isn’t Yoshi’s” in 2007. We are often called a treasure, feature local musicians playing live music at affordable prices for all ages. The Mayor, the Council and City staff profess a love of the arts and their benefit to the City. How long will there be a Jazz Island when the City allows the unlawful profitable private parties and churches to overwhelm the promised cultural use to our community? How much are citizens willing to pay for the police to enforce crowd control for this non-permitted private profit? How many people need to be hurt if the hundreds had gotten to the roof, if people had been trapped in a fire, a shooting or other calamity? 

Anna De Leon is the owner of Anna’s Jazz Island, in the Gaia Building.

This political season has seen many deceptive local campaign mailers, with several attributing a sense of absolute power to San Francisco progressives that they only wish they had. But the most ridiculous and politically counter-productive mailer appeared in Berkeley, and was endorsed by one of my favorite groups, the Sierra Club. As the accompanying photo shows, the Sierra Club wants Berkeley voters to believe that a ballot initiative (Measure KK) that would require voter approval when parking is removed for bus lanes endangers our efforts to combat global warming. The Club also wants voters to believe that defeating Measure KK will help save polar bears, while a yes vote heads them toward extinction. Identifying supporters of Measure KK as joining Sarah Palin in opposing polar bears is not a sound strategy for building a movement, and almost mocks the importance of local climate change efforts by linking Measure KK to the polar bear’s plight.  

I am a member, huge fan, and public cheerleader for the Sierra Club. My second book, Reclaiming America, highlights the Club’s 1996-7 campaign to strengthen the Clean Air Act. Its effectiveness at the national level is beyond dispute.  

But local Sierra Club activists do not always share the strategic savvy of its national staff. And a good example of this can be found in the Sierra Club’s Northern Alameda County Chapter’s ill-conceived attacks on Berkeley’s Measure KK. 

Bus Lanes and the Polar Ice Cap 

Measure KK is a response to citizen concerns about a proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lane on Telegraph Avenue. Many people, including myself, who typically support BRT lanes, do not favor their installation on Telegraph Avenue.  

The ballot measure wanted to ensure that a Telegraph BRT lane could not be installed without a public vote. Because its proponents oppose such lanes in other locations as well, Measure KK covers bus lane changes anywhere in Berkeley that impact parking.  

In my view, Measure KK’s expansion beyond Telegraph Ave. was a mistake. It enabled opponents to shift the debate from sound transit strategy to the question of whether holding elections over every BRT plan is too costly and administratively burdensome. But the No on KK campaign was not content to rely on such arguments. Instead, it links Measure KK to the melting of the polar ice cap, and to the peril of the polar bear as shown in the accompanying photo.  

This reminds me of Republican efforts to blame the mortgage meltdown on the Community Reinvestment Act. Or of John McCain’s view that much of the nation’s financial woes are attributable to excessive “earmarks.” What is the purported link between Measure KK and the polar bear? According to the mailer, “With nearly 50% of greenhouse gas emissions coming from transportation, local improvements to transit can make a big difference in the fight against global warming.”  

I agree. The underfunding and historically poor management of AC Transit has left East Bay residents heavily dependent on the automobile, and any “local improvements” that expand public transit should be supported. But the 50% figure cited has absolutely nothing to do with subjecting BRT lanes to voter approval. In fact, the statistic appears to refer to all transportation including cars, and tells us nothing about the impact of changing bus routes on climate control. 

KK Opponents and Sarah Palin 

As its local chapter accuses Measure KK advocates of threatening the polar bear, Cathy Duvall, the Sierra Club’s National Political Director, issued an alert last week about Alaska Governor and Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s suing the Interior Department over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species.  

It’s Palin and her oil industry allies, not Berkeley residents who support the right to vote on bus lanes, who pose the real threat to the polar bear. Rather than divide Berkeley residents over a false argument over global warming, the local Sierra Club chapter should be unifying local residents to back the changes we need to preserve our world.  

Randy Shaw is the author of the newly released, Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, the UFW and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st Century (UC Press). The article first appeared on BeyondChron.org.

Last week, inspired by some recent mantid encounters, I wrote about the dilemma of the male mantid. Female mantids are hungry little beasts, and a male may become a meal as well as a mate. All that is undisputed. What’s controversial is whether the male is complicit in his own demise—whether he behaves so as to increase the likelihood of being eaten—and what the evolutionary roots of such behavior might be. 

Biologists who believe most if not all traits exist for a purpose have come up with plausible reasons for the male mantid to offer himself up: if being consumed helps his mate produce more eggs, if his sacrifice limits the access of other males to the female, if his chances of future mating encounters are limited. Others, like the late Stephen Jay Gould, tend to see evolution as a quirkier process, with organisms, like Vonnegut’s Malachi Constant, the victims (or beneficiaries) of a series of accidents. 

Gould’s skepticism about the sacrificial behavior of male mantids is supported by recent laboratory research, in which the subjects did their best to avoid becoming a post-nuptial snack. Some female mantids use pheromones to lure males, although it’s not clear whether that happens in the test species. If so, you have to give these guys points for staying clear-headed enough to judge how hungry the female was, and approach her accordingly. 

But what’s true of mantids may not follow for another well-known group of sexual cannibals, the spiders. The behavior is widespread among these arachnids, from black widows to orb weavers. Male jumping spiders perform elaborate dances for their potential mates. If a female is unimpressed, she eats him. She doesn’t even let him finish his routine. 

Arachnologists have found some support for the complicit-male model. Maydianne Andrade of the University of Toronto worked with the notorious Australian redback spider, a relative of the black widow. (Those who listened to Dr. Demento’s radio program in the early 80s may recall an Aussie song entitled “Redback on the Toilet.”) She observed male redbacks executing suicidal somersaults into their partners’ jaws while mating. Paternity analysis showed that if the female redback consumes her mate, his sperm will fertilize more of her eggs than if he somehow makes his getaway. Andrade also reported that females who ate their mates took longer to become receptive to other suitors, which would allow the sperm of the deceased a head start. 

I’m not sure if this applies to all spiders, but the mechanics of reproduction would doom male redbacks in any case. Male spiders use a pair of leglike structures called palps to transfer their sperm to the female. A redback’s palps break off inside the female, and he’s pretty much a goner. (Male mantids, on the other hand, are capable of mating again if they survive the encounter.) 

But against that case, there are numerous examples of male spiders who don’t behave suicidally. Male crab spiders try to restrain females with silk before mating. (Yes-spider bondage.) Some orbweaver males prefer females who are shedding their skins, a process that slows them down considerably. Others approach a female only if she’s occupied with a prey item. Male long-jawed spiders use those jaws to hold the female’s jaws open during mating.  

So, despite the fate of the male redback, it seems unlikely that male spiders are hardwired by evolution to volunteer for certain death. It may just be that a female spider’s default mode is to eat whatever comes near her, mate or otherwise. Since female spiders are so much larger than males in many species, it’s even hard to buy the dietary-bonus model of female advantage. There’s just not that much meat on a male spider. 

I’m sure the debate will go on, though. Which is fine. Having just read a brace of books on the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial and watched Randy Olson’s film Flock of Dodos, I’m aware that opponents of evolution-old-line creationists or Intelligent Design advocates-like to exploit disagreements among evolutionary biologists as evidence that the whole concept of evolution is fatally flawed. If these scientists can’t agree among themselves, why should we take them seriously? 

But that’s the way science works. The debates continue until one side or another amasses conclusive evidence. Someday, one way or another, the sexual cannibalism question will be resolved, just like the ones about phlogiston, or mesmerism, or whether swallows hibernate underwater. 

In the meantime, the fact that individuals like Gould and the arch-adaptationist Richard Dawkins can disagree about how the evolutionary process works doesn’t negate the scientific consensus that the process exists—and that there’s no place in it for a designer’s hand. There are, and will continue to be, legitimate controversies among scientists. Evolution versus Intelligent Design is not one of them. 

Our Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, which Tom Bates and his pro-development backers are so eager to emasculate via Measure LL, was enacted in 1974 as a direct response to the rampant wave of demolitions that overtook Berkeley in the 1960s. 

Organized citizens’ efforts to preserve and protect our historic resources began in 1965, with the establishment of the non-profit Urban Care. In January 1968, the Architectural Heritage Committee of Urban Care held its first meeting. This group would later evolve into the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association (BAHA), which currently numbers about 1,400 members. 

In January 1971, as St. John’s Presbyterian Church (Julia Morgan, 1908) was threatened with demolition, a new committee was formed that included planning commissioner Shirley Dean and BAHA co-founder Lesley Emmington. This body—the Committee on Architectural Heritage and Urban Beautification—wrote our Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, lobbied for its passage, and helped in the selection of the first LPC commissioners. 

The first nine City of Berkeley Landmarks were initiated in February 1975 and designated in December of that year. They included St. John’s Presbyterian, as well as three other churches (First Church of Christ, Scientist, Church of the Good Shepherd, and Westminster Presbyterian), Old City Hall, two historic clubs (Town & Gown and Berkeley City Club), Rose Walk, and the Thorsen House on Piedmont Ave. (Greene & Greene, 1908-1910). 

These nine cultural treasures are still standing--a fate that hasn’t been shared by all designated structures in Berkeley. Over the past two decades, eleven landmarks have been lost to fire or demolition, including the Napoleon Bonaparte Byrne House (more on that later), the Art Deco Alta Bates Hospital, the Berkeley Inn, Byron Jackson Iron Works, and Cowell Memorial Hospital. Six others have been significantly altered-some beyond recognition (e.g., Harmon Gymnasium). Another ten are threatened, including the two Warren Cheney houses on the U.C. campus, the Blood House, Kenney-Meinheit Cottage, The Copra Warehouse of Durkee Famous Foods, Cal Ink, U.C. Press Building, Berkeley High School Old Gym, and Memorial Stadium. 

Still, thanks to the LPO, many historic buildings that might have been demolished survived. In the mid-1970s, the Berkeley School District proposed to raze five school buildings. One of the five, the former Jefferson Elementary School at Rose and Sacramento, was designated in May 1976. Designed by the distinguished architects Henry H. Gutterson and William C. Hays, the building is now the home of the Crowden School. 

In June 1976, South Berkeley Community Church and a group of five historic homes were designated. The latter included three famous Victorians, Maybeck’s Pompeian villa for geologist Andrew Lawson, and the Art Deco house of haberdasher Joseph “Call Me Joe” Harris. Of the three famous Victorians, the oldest—the Napoleon Bonaparte Byrne House (1868)—is gone and replaced by the neighborhood-incompatible Temple Beth El, whose rear elevation on Spruce St. resembles a supermarket loading dock. The Byrne grounds, designated along with the house, have been largely stripped bare and covered with asphalt. 

More successful was the campaign to save the Naval Architecture Building on the UC campus. This graceful shingled 1914 structure, designed by John Galen Howard to accommodate drawing classes, was assigned to the College of Engineering in 1964. Ten years later, the College proposed to raze the building and replace it with the Bechtel Engineering Center. In September 1976, councilmember Shirley Dean wrote a memo to the City Council, moving to initiate a landmark designation. The building was designated the following month, and the Bechtel Engineering Center was constructed on a nearby site. 

In 1977, a Bicentennial project that sent neighborhood volunteers to survey their own blocks turned into the Urban Conservation Survey. To expand the scope and effectiveness of the survey, BAHA applied for and received a matching grant from the State Office of Historic Preservation, and Berkeley became one of the first cities in California to conduct a State Historic Resources Inventory. 

In 1978, a grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation and two grants from the San Francisco Foundation helped fund a survey of Downtown Berkeley. The State Historic Resources Inventory was completed in 1979, and BAHA published the Downtown Survey in 1987. Susan Cerny, one of the Survey’s authors, described it as a comprehensive list of all buildings in the downtown plan area. The Downtown Survey provided the core material used in the preservation element of the City of Berkeley’s Downtown Plan, which was adopted in 1990 with a strong Preservation Element and recommended Design Guidelines. In 1991, Downtown Berkeley was chosen by the National Trust for Historic Preservation as a Main Street Project. The Design Guidelines were adopted by the Planning Commission in 1994 and are partially paid for by a grant from the National Trust. 

Shattuck Avenue has been spared rampant demolitions thanks to dense landmarking over the past thirty years. Susan Cerny points out that Downtown’s side streets have not had the same protection and are being intensely rebuilt on a much larger scale and in incompatible styles. Still, she says, the Design Guidelines help mitigate some of the overdevelopment. 

Among the best examples of adaptive reuse in Downtown Berkeley is the Golden Sheaf Bakery on Addison St. (Clinton Day, 1905). Derelict and threatened, its designation in 1977 paved the way to an eventual restoration. The handsome brick building is now the Nevo Educational Center, a lynchpin of the Arts District and serving two theatre companies. 

Like the Golden Sheaf Bakery, the Charles W. Heywood House, a fine 1878 Italianate at 1808 Fifth St., was in an advanced state of deterioration when it was designated in 1979. Twenty years later it was beautifully restored and stands as a proud testament to West Berkeley’s early days. 

Unfortunately, a landmark designation is no guarantee of respectful maintenance. The Anna Head School on the corner of Channing and Bowditch was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1980 and the following year was designated a Berkeley Landmark. Its main building, constructed in 1892, is one of Berkeley’s earliest brown-shingle structures. Yet this important collection of academic buildings has been a victim of protracted demolition by neglect at the hands of its owner, the University of California. 

An even worse fate was visited upon the Bartine Carrington House, a charming Seth Babson shingled cottage dating from 1893. Designated in 1982, it was moved from its original location, which had become part of the Hotel Durant parking lot, to 1029 Addison St., west of San Pablo Avenue. For the move, the two-story house lost its lower floor. Its subsequent “restoration” removed practically all the historic fabric, leaving an irredeemable travesty. The Planning Department, whose charge it is to enforce the LPO, turned a blind eye to what was happening. 

Among the successes of preservation one can count the Captain Maury House at 1317 Shattuck Ave. Constructed in 1885 and remodeled by John Hudson Thomas in 1922, this distinctive double-peaked house was empty, dilapidated, and owned by the City in the 1980s. The landmark designation assured correct restoration that has turned the wreck into one of the most attractive homes in Berkeley. 

Were it not for a landmark designation, the marvelous Zigzag Moderne Howard Automobile Showroom on the corner of Durant and Fulton might have been torn down long ago. After languishing for many years, the building has finally found a compatible owner, albeit one exempt from property tax. 

The Manasse-Block Tannery at Fourth and Gilman was closed in 1986, and its 81,180 sq. ft. complex abandoned. Designated the same year, it was preserved, rehabilitated, and reused as the Tannery, a collection of offices, retail, and live-work units. Next door, the old Cal Ink plant has fallen into disuse; vandalism has turned it into an eyesore. And while the Kawneer Bldg. is now home to many artisans and artists, the fate of the Copra Warehouse of Durkee Famous Foods is all but sealed. 

Our mixed success-and-failure record is not so much a measure of the LPO as of how it’s been implemented by the City. Among the various undesirable elements of the Bates LPO revision currently before the voters there is a positive one: “Good repair and maintenance required.” If Measure LL passes, will the City begin to enforce this requirement? Given its track record, the outcome is doubtful. 

On the other hand, Measure LL has plenty of elements to dislike, chief among them “Requests for Determination--No Application pending.” This clause was written especially for the benefit of developers, who would pay consultants to opine on the historic and architectural merit of a property targeted for development. With the neutralized Landmarks Preservation Commission we currently have in place, the results would be predictable. Hand-picked by pro-development councilmembers, the majority of LPC commissioners would pass on these properties, giving the developers a safe haven for two years. If new information were to emerge during that time about a property’s significance, tough luck. 

Ultimately, our laws are only as good as our government. Measure LL was tailored by Bates and his pro-development cronies to help accelerate the transformation of Berkeley into a denser city of highrises, minimizing public participation in the process. With a few exceptions, the LPC commissioners appointed by the Bates council aid and abet this transformation. 

If elected, a preservation-oriented mayor and city council could reverse the tide, returning the LPO to its original mission: to be a tool for preservation rather than annihilation. 

A client called me this evening to talk about a house he was in contract to buy and we became engaged in a rather long, intricate and complex conversation involving all the things that he and his wife were now facing that had formerly been a foggy and insubstantial tissue of details beyond their attention. The house was exciting and new a week ago and no thought of the finer issues had intruded into their reverie of the Dream Home. The inspection was fun and exiting and we chatted happily for hours about all the things that might be done and some harsh realities about what should be done. A water heater from the 1930’s (yes, no joke) was long overdue for replacement and genuinely unsafe. Some foundation issues were demanding attention and the need for seismic work also loomed harshly.  

Then came the hard part: the money. An engineer had been retained and he further confused things with a range of fresh issues that seemed to orbit around our concerns without actually lighting upon any of them. One thing was horrifically clear, however: a price tag of twenty grand. Last but not least, a sewer camera video (the colon-oscopy of home inspection) showed a need for a $7,500 repair. To be sure, my client was feeling the bottoms of his pockets being unsewn and he hadn’t even reached the end of escrow. 

And this is where our story begins. The client says, “Well, the seller should be paying for the sewer, shouldn’t he?” 

The truth is that the connection between the things a buyer cares about and the financial incentive these items will have for the seller is a tenuous at best. Even the saintliest of sellers will rarely care much about the condition of a sewer on the home that they’re leaving. This is not to say that the seller is necessarily dishonest or conniving. That’s the less-frequent case, but the relationship between these disparate concerns (those of the seller vs the buyer) and a direct financial link to obligation is hard to discern (if not altogether impossible). 

In my career I’ve met a few sellers that I would describe as obsessive-compulsive who felt that they had to fix anything that was wrong with their house prior to transfer of ownership. But such as these are very few and far between and I pity the poor souls. If I sell a broken palm pilot on e-bay and I tell you it’s broken in the advert, I don’t feel a bit of remorse when I ship it off. It’s the buyer’s informed choice. I only hope that they offer me a lot of money for it. 

This is precisely the situation that the sellers of our house are in. They are selling a broken house. Everyone is selling a broken house. There are always things that could be fixed, upgraded, or modernized. There is always a more efficient heater or better bolting that can be done, but to do it just isn’t in the interest of the sellers. It is very much in their interest to honestly and fully disclose all that they know, plainly and simply so that they don’t get sued six months after the sale of the house. It’s also very much in their interest make sure that the house gets well inspected by all the relevant parties, whether that gets done by them or by the buyer they have chosen. Same reason: it will keep everyone happy in the end because they will buy with relatively accurate expectations. But this does not mean that the sellers have any reason to provide any particular improvement which has been pointed out as desirable or even vital to the buyer.  

The buyer says, “I’ve offered you $740,000 for your house and now I discover it needs a new water heater. Don’t you think that you should buy me one? You’re taking every penny I’ll ever earn in this deal!”  

To this, the seller retorts “Well, I’m really sorry that you need a water heater. This one has worked fine for me for years. I certainly wasn’t attempting to deceive you. I assure you that I have at least one other buyer waiting in the wings who will take the house for the same thing who will not want anything back or anything fixed. I really like you, your wife, your dog, your child and your realtor but this is my final offer.” 

The seller’s position is completely reasonable. I have no idea whether there actually is a back-up offer but it’s at least plausible. 

Now the buyer wants out. “That blasted sellers don’t care that the water heater might blow up or leak or stop heating my bathwater the day after I move in!” 

But why should they? It is reasonable to expect them to provide accurate information on the sale but not for them to bear the burden of any particular choices, no matter how objectively necessary, as a part of the sale. 

The buyers might do better to take the following approach. Figure out what the repairs which they deem essential will cost; look at their budget (including the cost of the home and projected expense), then determine if the house is affordable. Compare this with other “realistic” options, remembering that the grass always seems greener at the next open house-- especially before you’ve inspected it. Consider the likelihood that the seller will accept a lower offer and how you will feel when you’ve been back in the market shopping three months hence. Will you regret not having taken the offer on the table?  

This is not to say that one should not negotiate, but ideas of what is righteous and fair and the notion that the seller should adopt a caretaking position in your future may create false imperatives. These can override otherwise objective decisions and cool negotiations. It’s not about the seller: it’s about getting the house you want at a price you can live with. The subsequent choices of what to fix, how and when should rightly be the buyer’s alone. 

THURSDAY, OCT. 30 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Nesta Rovina reads from her book “Tree Barking” at 7 p.m. at Barnes and Noble, 6050 El Cerrito Plaza, El Cerrito. 524-6813. 

R. J. Ruppenthal discusses “Fresh Food from Small Spaces: The Square-Inch Gardener’s Guide to Year-Round Growing, Fermenting, and Sprouting” at 7:30 p.m. at Mrs. Dalloways, 2904 College Ave. 704-8222. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Acrisia, Beef Donut, and The Violet Hour at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $5. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Vanessa Lowe at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Khalil Shaheed Group at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Valerie Jay, folk/rock at 7 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

Eclair de Lune, gypsy jazz, at 7 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Forrest Day, Harry and the Hitmen at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

The Sacred Profanities at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Tierney Sutton at 8 and 10 at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $10. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

FRIDAY, OCT. 31 

THEATER 

Actors Ensemble of Berkeley “Doctor Faustus” Fri. and Sat at 8 p.m. at Live Oak Theater, 1301 Shattuck Ave., at Berryman, through Nov. 22. Tickets are $10-$12. 649-5999. www.aeofberkeley.org 

Altarena Playhouse “Bat Boy: The Musical” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at Altarena Playhouse, 1409 High St., Alameda, through Nov. 1. Tickets are $17-$20. 523-1553. www.altarena.org 

Central Works “Blessed Unrest” by Paul Hawken, Thurs, Fri, Sat at 8 p.m., Sun at 5 p.m. at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave. through Nov. 23. Tickets are $14-$25. 558-1381. centralworks.org 

Fusion Theater “The Piano Lesson” with Donal Lacy Thurs.-Sat. at Laney College Theaater, 900 Fallon St., Oakland, through Nov. 1. Tickets are $5-$10. 464-3543. 

Oakland Opera Theater “Histoire du Soldat” and “Renard” Thurs.-Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at Oakland Metro Operahouse, 630 3rd St., Oakland, through Nov. 2. Tickets are $25-$32. 763-1146. www.oaklandopera.org 

Ragged Wing Ensemble “The History of the Devil” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m. at Central Stage, 5221 Central Ave., Richmond, Through Nov. 1. Tickets are $10-$30. www.raggedwing.org 

FILM 

Silent Movie Classic “Phantom of the Opera” starring Lon Cheney with live organ accompaniment by Jim Riggs at 8 p.m. at Paramount Theater, 2025 Broadway. Tickets are $5. 625-8497. 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Al Young, poet, with the Susan Muscarella Trio at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $20. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

“Farewell to the Thief” Celebrate the end of the Bush years with a concert by Jon Fromer, Francisco Herrera, George Mann and others at 7 p.m. at Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists, 1924 Cedar St. Suggested donation $10. www.bfuu.org 

Bay Area Classical Harmonies “Dance with the Spirits” at 7:30 p.m. at Pro Arts Gallery, 550 Second St., Oakland. $12-$18. 868-0695. www.bayareabach.org 

Jesus Diaz y su QBA at 9:30 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $15. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

The Medicine Ball Band at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Workingman’s Ed, classic rock, at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $10-$13. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Alabama Waterfall & The Cowlicks at 8 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

Reilly & Maloney, contemporary folk, at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Santero Deuce Eclipse, Dos For, Mr. E at 9 p.m. at Shattuck Down Low, 2284 Shattuck Ave. Cost is $10. 548-1159.  

Jeff Rolka, Tobela at 7:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

Murder Ballads Bash at 9:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Guns of Sebastian at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Jerry Kennedy, acoustic soul, at 7:30 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

SATURDAY, NOV. 1 

CHILDREN  

Los Amiguitos de La Peña with Octopretzel at 10:30 a.m. at La Peña. Cost is $5 for adults, $4 for children. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Owen Baker Flynn “Act in a Box” with juggling, fire-eating Sat. and Sun. at 1:30 and 2:30 p.m. at Children’s Fairyland, 699 Bellevue Ave., Oakland. Cost is $6. 452-2259. www.fairyland.org 

THEATER 

The Strangefellowes Collective “Dog-Ear” A play about readers, rebel, and writing your own ending, Sat. at 8 p.m. and Sun. at 7 p.m. at the Willard Metal Shop Theater, 2425 Stuart St. Free. http://strangefellowes.com 

Stone Soup Improv Comedy at 8 p.m. at Temescal Arts Center, 511 48th St. at Telegraph, Oakland. Cost is $6-$9. www.stonesoupimprov.com 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Peter Matsukawa and his Muses” Photographs of rabbits. Wine and carrot reception at 5 p.m. at RabbitEars, 377 Colusa, Ave. Kensington. 535-6155. 

“Balancing Persepctives: East Asian Influences in Contemporary Art” Opening reception and Asian-themed costume party at 6 p.m. at JFK University Arts & Consciousness Gallery, 2956 San Pablo Ave., 2nd Floor. Enter at Ashby Ave. Exhibition runs through Nov. 22. 649-0499. www.jfku.edu/asian  

“Unexplored Territory: A Day of the Dead Celebration” Opening reception at 7 p.m. at 4th Street Studio, 1717D 4th St. www.fourthstreetsrudio.com 

“October 9, 1969” by Scott Reilly. Opening reception at 6 p.m. at The Compound Gallery, 6604 San Pablo Ave., Oakland. 655-9019. 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Watershed Environmental Poetry Festival with Robert Hass, Al Young, Jane Hirshfield, Brenda Hillman and many others, from noon to 4 p.m. at Civic Center Park. 526-9105. www.poetryflash.org 

Bay Area Poets Coalition open reading from 3 to 5 pm. at Strawberry Creek Lodge, 1320 Addison St. Park on the street. 527-9905. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Young People’s Symphony Orchestra performs Berlioz, Gershwin and Beethoven at 8 p.m. at First Congregational Church of Berkeley, 2345 Channing Way. Tickets are $12-$15. 849-9776. www.ypsomusic.net 

Amy Brodo, cellist, and LaDene Otsuki, pianist, perform music of Britten, Ginastera and Franck at 8 p.m. at Trinity Chapel, 2320 Dana St. Tickets are $8-$12. 549-3864. www. 

trinitychamberconcerts.com 

“Love Song Waltzes & Wild Dances” Piano, flute, and vocal octet at 8 p.m. at Unitarian Universalist Church of Berkeley, One Lawson Road, Kensington. Tickets are $15-$20, includes a dessert reception. 525-0302. 

The Distaff Singers ”A Parody Home Companion” at 2 p.m. at Oakland Mormon Temple Auditorium. Tickets are $12-$15. 547-8083. www.distaffsingers.org  

Clifron Burton’s “Upsidedown & Backwards” at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Dia de los Muertos Celebration with Renee Asteria & 7th Street Sound at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $8-$10. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com  

The Gateswingers, traditional jazz, at 7:30 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Sotaque Baiano, Brazilian, at 9 p.m. at Shattuck Down Low, 2284 Shattuck Ave. Cost is $5-$10. 548-1159.  

Wake the Dead at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $22.50-$23.50. 548-1761.  

Tribute to Chabuca Granda at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $13-$15. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Tammy Hall at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $15. 845-5373. 

Annie Sampson at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790.  

Jonathan Douglas, Kevin Burdick, Kat Downs at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $8. 841-2082.  

Blacklisted, Ceremony, Have Heart, Let Down at 8 p.m. at 924 Gilman St. Cost is $10. 525-9926. 

Bettye Lavette at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $26. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

SUNDAY, NOV. 2 

THEATER 

The Strangefellowes Collective “Dog-Ear” A play about readers, rebel, and writing your own ending, at 7 p.m. at the Willard Metal Shop Theater, 2425 Stuart St. Free. http://strangefellowes.com 

The Cooking Show con Karimi y Comrades at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10. $5 with donation of canned goods. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

“Citizen Josh: the quixotic adventures of an unlikely Berkeley activist” with Josh Kornbluth in a benefit for Darfuri children at 7 p.m. at Congregation Netivot Shalom, 1316 University Ave. Tickets are $36. www.netivotshalom.org 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Charles and Louise Keeler: A Collaboration of Literature and Art, Inspired by Love” Opening reception from 3 to 5 p.m. at the Berkeley History Center, 1931 Center St. 848-0181. 

“Loss” Group show. Reception at 2 p.m. at Berkeley Art Center, 1275 Walnut St. 644-6893. 

FILM 

African Diaspora Film Society “The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow” at 2 p.m. at Parkway Theater, 1834 Park Blvd., Oakland. Cost is $5. 814-2400. 

Talk Cinema Berkeley Preview of new independent films with discussion afterwards at 10 a.m. at Albany Twin Theater, 1115 Solano Ave., Albany. Cost is $20. http://talkcinema.com 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

“Full Circle” Artist talk with JoeSam in conversation with René de Guzman, Senior Curator of Art, Oakland Museum of CA at 4 p.m. at Joyce Gordon Gallery, 406 14th St., Oakland. 465-8928. 

Poetry Flash with Jan Beatty and Molly Fisk at 3 p.m. at Diesel, 5433 College Ave., Oakland. 653-9965. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Holdstock & McLeod at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Jolly GIbsons at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Don Neely’s Society Jazz Orchestra at 5 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $20. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Wayne Wallace Latin Jazz Quartet at 4:30 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $15. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com  

Dia de los Muertos with Boom Boom Kid, Eskapo, Venganza at 5 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $8. 525-9926. 

MONDAY, NOV. 3 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Dear Delhi and Rajasthan” Black and white photographs by Ilona Sturm opens at the Berkeley Public Library, 2090 Kittredge St. and runs through Jan. 4. 981-6100. 

“Tapestries” fiber art of Boisali Biswas at Christensen Heller Gallery, 5829 College Ave., Oakland, through Jan. 15. 655-5952. www.christensenheller.com 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

“Afghanistan: Hidden Treasures from the National Museum, Kabul” with Jo Anne Erickson, docent at SF Asian Art Museum will talk about the current exhibit at 12:30 p.m. at Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. Brown bag lunch. 526-3720. 

Bill Kelter and Wayne Shellabarger on “Veeps: Profiles in Insignificance” at 7:30 p.m. at Moe’s Books, 2476 Telegraph Ave. 849-2087. 

“How to Type Fast and Influence People” with artist, composer and performer R. Luke DuBois at 7:30 p.m. at 160 Kroeber Hall, UC campus. Sponsored by Berkeley Center for New Media. 642-0635. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Dafnis Prieto Quartet at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $10-$16. 238-9200.  

Trovatore, traditional Italian music, at 7 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave. 548-5198.  

TUESDAY, NOV. 4 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Motordude Zydeco at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cajun dance lesson at 8 p.m. Cost is $11, with $2 discount for voting sticker or receipt. 525-5054.  

Barbara Linn & John Schott, jazz, at 7 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 5 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Kenneth Baker discusses his new book “The Lightening Field” at 6:30 p.m. at University Press Books, 2430 Bancroft Way. 548-0585.  

Kayhan Irani on “Telling Stories to Change the World” at 7 p.m. at Revolution Books, 2425 Channing Way. 848-1196. 

Gregg Shapiro will read from his new poetry collection, “Protection” at 3 p.m. at the Cal Student Store, UC Berkeley campus. 642-9000, ext. 654. 

Berkeley Poetry Slam with host Charles Ellik at 8 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $7. 841-2082. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Music for the Spirit with Ron McKean on harpsichord at 12:15 p.m. at First Presbyterian Church of Oakland, 2619 Broadway. 444-3555. 

Jeremiah Clarke: Trumpet and Marches at 12:30 p.m. at St. Alban's Episcopal Church, 1501 Washington Ave., Albany. Free, donations accepted. 525-1716. 

Rosalie Sorrels at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Vive Le Jazz! at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Zoyres at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Balkan dance lesson at 7:30 p.m. Cost is $10. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Kami Nixon, Americana, at 7 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Whiskey Brothers, old-time and bluegrass at 9 p.m. at Albatross, 1822 San Pablo Ave. 843-2473. www.albatrosspub.com 

Avance at 9:30 p.m. at Shattuck Down Low, 2284 Shattuck Ave. Salsa dance lessons at 8:30 p.m. Cost is $5-$10. 548-1159.  

Rosalie Sorrels at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

THURSDAY, NOV. 6 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Bay Area Landscape” Works by Vladimir Berberov, Francesca Giorgi, Michael Grove, Britt Marie Pazdirek, David Platford, opens at the Giorgi Gallery, 2911 Claremont Ave. 848-1228. giorgigallery.com 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Composer Colloquium with Merce Cunningham Dance Company musicians and composers at 4 p.m. at 125 Morrison Hall, Bancroft at College. Free. 642-9988. 

Artist Talk with Merce Cunningham at 7 p.m. at Wheeler Auditorium, UC campus. Free. 642-9988. 

Raj Patel describes “Stuffed and Starved: The Hidden Battle for the World Food System” at 7:30 p.m. at Pegasus Books Downtown, 2349 Shattuck Ave. 649-1320. 

Mark DeWitt discusses “Cajun and Zydeco Dance Music in Northern California” at 6 p.m. at University Press Books, 2430 Bancroft Way. 548-0585. www.universitypressbooks.com 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Chris Caswell at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Kelly Park & Friends at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Daughters of Zion International Reggae Tour at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $13-$15. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

The Sonando Project, Latin funk, at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $5-$7. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Broadcast Live, hip hop, indie rock, and spoken word at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $tba. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

The Courtney Nicole Trio at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Jacob Fiss-Hobart Ensemble at 7 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

FRIDAY, NOV. 7 

THEATER 

Aurora Theatre “The Devil’s Disciple” Wed.-Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 and 7 p.m. at 2081 Addison St. through Dec. 7. Tickets are $40-$42. 843-4822. www.auroratheatre.org 

Actors Ensemble of Berkeley “Doctor Faustus” Fri. and Sat at 8 p.m. at Live Oak Theater, 1301 Shattuck Ave., at Berryman, through Nov. 22. Tickets are $10-$12. 649-5999. www.aeofberkeley.org 

Berkeley Rep “Joe Turner’s Come and Gone” at 8 p.m. at the Roda Theater, 2015 Addison St, through Dec. 14. Tickets are $13.50-$71. 647-2949. berkeleyrep.org 

Central Works “Blessed Unrest” by Paul Hawken, Thurs, Fri, Sat at 8 p.m., Sun at 5 p.m. at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave. through Nov. 23. Tickets are $14-$25. 558-1381. centralworks.org 

Masquers Playhouse “Do I Hear a Waltz?” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2:30 p.m. at 105 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, through Dec. 20. Tickets are $20. 232-4031. www.masquers.org 

Youth Musical Theater Company “Fiddler on the Roof” Fri. and Sat. at 7:30 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at Julia Morgan Center for the Arts, 2640 College Ave. Tickets are $8-$20. 800-838-3006. 

FILM 

Movie Classic “North by Northwest” at 8 p.m. at Paramount Theater, 2025 Broadway. Tickets are $5. 625-8497. 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Veteran’s Voices” Art by Bay Area veterans. Opening reception at 6 p.m. at K Gallery, 2513 Blanding Ave., Alameda. Runs to Nov. 30. 865-5060. www.rhythmix.org 

“Rabblerousers: the Art of Reuse” Opening reception at 7 p.m. at Oakopolis, 447 25th St., Oakland. 663-6920. 

“Portals” A paired show of painting and installation by Robin Kuypers-Witte and Lisa Rasmussen. Opening reception at 6:30 p.m. at The Warehouse, 416 26th S.t, Oakland. http://reddoorgalleryandcollective.blogspot.com 

“Nature Speaks: Art from the Heart of Nature” Photography by Marianne Hale. Reception at 5 p.m. at Awaken Café, 414 14th St., Oakland. 836-2058. 

“Double Exposure” Works by Kevin Chen, Eleanor Harwood, Nicole Neditch, Narangkar Glover, Pete Glover, Carrie Lederer, Michelle Mansour, Jen Elia, Daniel Healey, and Margaret Tedesco. Reception at 7 p.m. at Blankspace, 6608 San Pablo Ave., Oakland. 547-6608. www.blankspacegallery.com 

“Rejoyce!” Group show of works by painters, photographers, and sculptors. Opening reception at 5:30 p.m. at Joyce Gordon Gallery, 406 14th St., Oakland. 465-8928. 

“Suenos Mensajeros/Dream Messengers” Works by Luz Marina Ruiz. Reception at 6 p.m. at NoneSuch Space, 2865 Broadway at 29th St., 2nd flr., Oakland. 625-1600. 

“October 9, 1969” by Scott Reilly. Reception at 7 p.m. at The Compound Gallery, 6604 San Pablo Ave., Oakland. 655-9019. 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Gallery Talk with Peter and Maureen Langenbach on “Evolution of a Sacred Space: Dias de los Muertos 2008” at 4 p.m. at Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak Sts. Cost is $5-$8, free for teachers. 238-2200. www.museumca.org 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

The Blind Boys of Alabama in a fundraiser for Ever Widening Circle and World Institute on Disability at 7 p.m. in the Main Ballroom, Oakland Marriott City Center, 1001 Broadway, Oakland. Tickets are $75. 800-838-3006. 

Nina Haft & Company “One Becomes Two” A dance installation, Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m. at Shawl-Anderson Dance Center, 2704 Alcatraz Ave. Tickets are $12-$15. www.shawl-anderson.org 

Big Moves Bay Area “Dance At Large” featuring the Phat Fly Girls at 8 p.m. at Laney College Theater, 900 Fallon St., Oakland. Tickets are $8-$12. www.bigmoves.org 

Candido Oye Oba and Friends at 5 p.m. at Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak Sts. Cost is $5-$8. 238-2200. www.museumca.org 

Merce Cunningham Dance Company at 8 p.m. at Zellerbach Hall, UC Campus. Tickets are $26-$48. 642-9988. www.calperformances.net 

Starry Plough 35th Anniversary Kickoff with The Buffalo Roam Reunion Show at 9:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Happy Hour Jazz ensemble at 8 p.m. at the Hillside Club, 2286 Cedar St. Cost is $10-$15. 845-1350.  

Peter Anastos & Iter at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $12. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Hurricane Sam & The Hotshots at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Bay Area African Drum & Dance Festival with Ousseynou Kouyate at 9 p.m. at Shattuck Down Low, 2284 Shattuck Ave. Cost is $10-$112. 548-1159.  

Locura and Dgiin, Latin, flamenco, reggae at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is tba. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Ray Cepeda at 8 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

Femi at 9 p.m. at Maxwell’s, 341 13th St., Oakland. Cost is $15. 839-6169. 

Opa Cupa at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Insect, The Holy Kiss, Swann Danger at 8 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $5. 525-9926. 

3rd Date at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Jerry Kennedy, acoustic soul, at 7:30 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Will Squared at 8 p.m. at Jupiter. 843-8277. 

D’Wayne Wiggins at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $25. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

SATURDAY, NOV. 8 

CHILDREN  

Los Amiguitos de La Peña with Alphabet Rockers at 10:30 a.m. at La Peña. Cost is $5 for adults, $4 for children. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Maggie the Clown Sat. and Sun. at 1:30 and 2:30 p.m. at Children’s Fairyland, 699 Bellevue Ave., Oakland. Cost is $6. 452-2259. www.fairyland.org 

Storytelling & Puppet Theater from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at Habitot Children's Museum, 2065 Kittredge St. 647-1111. www.habitot.org 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Plein Air Watercolors” by Anne Poley, Annetta Fox, and Linda Oppen. Reception for the artists at 2 p.m. at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. Open Tues.-Sun. from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. through Dec. 28. 525-2233. 

“Dear Delhi and Rajasthan” Black and white photographs by Ilona Sturm. Reception at 2 p.m. at Berkeley Public Library, 2090 Kittredge St. Exhibit runs through Jan. 4. 981-6100. 

“Walls” Paintings by Joel Isaacson on contemporary social and political concerns, at Flora Lamson Hewlett Library, 2400 Ridge Rd. Exhibition runs to Jan. 30. 649-2500. www.gtu.edu 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

“East Asian Influences in Conptemporary Art” A symposium with with Jacqueline Baas, curator and former director of the University Art Museum, William T. Wiley, artist, Fred Martin, artist, writer and Dean Emeritus of the San Francisco Art Institute, Mark Levy, professor and author, and others, from 1 to 5 p.m. at JFK University Arts & Consciousness Gallery, 2956 San Pablo Ave., 2nd Floor. Enter at Ashby Ave. 649-0499. www.jfku.edu/asian  

Works in Progress Women’s Open Mic, hosted by Linda Zeiser, features Jan Steckel. Potluck at 6:30 p.m. at The Home of Truth, 1300 Grand St., Alameda. Cost is $7-$10. 238-7344.  

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Big Moves Bay Area “Dance At Large” featuring the Phat Fly Girls at 8 p.m. at Laney College Theater, 900 Fallon St., Oakland. Tickets are $8-$12. www.bigmoves.org 

Nina Haft & Company “One Becomes Two” A dance installation at 8 p.m. at Shawl-Anderson Dance Center, 2704 Alcatraz Ave. Tickets are $12-$15. www.shawl-anderson.org 

Merce Cunningham Dance Company at 8 p.m. at Zellerbach Hall, UC Campus. Tickets are $26-$48. 642-9988. www.calperformances.net 

The Berkeley Baroque Band “Ground Round” at 8 p.m. at St. Alban’s Episcopal Church, 1501 Washington Ave., Albany. Suggested donation $15.  

Starry Plough 35th Anniversary with The Unreal Band, The Naked Barbies, Pat Nevin’s Ragged Glory and many others from 3 p.m. on at The Starry Plough. Free. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

University Chorus & Chamber Chorus “Zigeunerlieder: Gypsy Music” at 8 p.m. at Hertz Hall, UC Campus. Tickets are $5-$15. 642-4864. http://music.berkeley.edu 

Alex Calatayud’s Brasil! at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Oscar Reynolds & Karumanta at 8 p.m. at Wisteria Ways, Rockridge, Oakland. Not wheelchair accesiible. Cost is $15-$20. Reservations required. info@WisteriaWays.org 

Tito y su son de Cuba at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cuban dance lesson at 8:30 p.m. Cost is $13. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com  

Eric & Suzy Thompson, Disciples of Markos with Hank Bradley and Cathy Whitesides at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Frank Jackson Trio at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $20. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Dave Ridnell & Friends, Brazilian jazz, at 7:30 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Larry Stefl Jazz Quartet at 9:30 p.m. at Albatross, 1822 San Pablo Ave. Cost is $3. 843-2473. www.albatrosspub.com 

Charlie Wilson’s War at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Dave Matthews Blues Band at 8:30 p.m. at Royal Oak Pub, 135 Park Place, Pt. Richmond. 232-5678. 

Corrupted, Asunder, Amber Asylum at 8 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $10. 525-9926. 

D’Wayne Wiggins at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $25. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

SUNDAY, NOV. 9 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Merce Cunningham Dance Company “Craneway Event” a site-specific performance at the landmarked Ford assembly plant in Richmond, at 1 and 3 p.m. Tickets are $40. 642-9988. www.calperformances.net  

Chalice Consort “Manchicourt's Requiem” at 4 p.m. at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, 114 Montecito Ave, Oakland. Tickets are $10-$20. www.chaliceconsort.org 

Inti-Illimani at 7:30 p.m. at La Peña. Cost is $35-$40. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

The Austin Lounge Lizards at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Com Voce at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

The Everlovin’, Americana, at 3 p.m. at 33 Revolutions, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Bandworks at 1 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $5. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Tyler Johnston and Jazzschool alums at 4:30 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $12. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Austin Lounge Lizards at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Fireworks, The Time Next Year, First to Leave at 5 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $7. 525-9926. 

This is the first time in its 38 years that the Berkeley Art Museum has devoted almost its entire space to a single exhibition. This wide-ranging show of almost 150 works comprises paintings, sculptures, photographs, videos and installations by 96 artists exploring the history of art in China from its Social Realist propaganda paintings of the ’70s through its explosive changes in Chinese cuLture. 

Some of the installations are very large indeed. In low Gallery B there is Wanda Du’s 33-by-33-foot “Stratégies en chambre” (1998), consisting of tons of old newspapers in all languages thrown on the floor and there are are plastic portraits of Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin in silent conversation; plastic toys are scattered about, a boy terrorist aims a plastic gun at the statesmen and plastic airplanes and bombs are overhead. 

Zhou Xiaohu’s “Parade” (2003) is about 30 feet long and comprises 3,300 clay figures—soldiers, tanks, in military formation marching in front of the Gate of Heavenly Peace (Tianamen Square).  

The first installation the visitor encounters is Yue Minjun’s “2000 AD” (2000) of 25 identical polyester men, with silly grins. The same artist appropriated Delacroix’s famous painting in his “La Liberté guideant le peuple.” Regimentation is signal to the exhibited works as is an egalitarian uniformity of multitudes.  

There is a photograph made by Shuan Hui in 1997 of some 200 artillery soldiers and officers who all look exactly alike, similar to Hai Bo’s photographs of women, whose poses, dresses, hair styles are all the same. There is a color photo by Yang Zhenzhong, showing a hen and rooster with not less than 26 identical chicks. He calls it “Lucky Family” (1999), surely comment to the one-child-per-family law in the Peoples’ Republic.  

Liu Jianhua’s “Obsessive Memories” (2003) is an installation of 25 porcelain women, in erotic poses, lacking heads or arms, but exposing their charms—women as sex objects, as china dolls. On the main floor there is a group of 132 look-alike Neolithic pots, arranged in marching order; several of them do stand out, because Ai Weiwei, has whitewashed them. (I hope that this water-based pigment can be removed from the ancient vases). The poster of the show, as displayed on the building is by Geng Jianyi and presents four cloned faces—all smiling. 

Many of these pieces are sardonic observations about the centralized state power, going back to Mao, which still prevails in the Peoples’ Republic. This principle can be traced back to the third-century B.C. philosopher Han Fei, an Asian predecessor of Machiavelli. The most evocative work in the show is Shi Jinsong’s “Office Equipment-Prototype No 1,” a pristine stainless steel desk, computer, chair—all fearsome instruments of torture, a memorable metaphor on oppressive authoritarianism—high tech going to harrowing extreme. 

But there is also the Confucian tradition of morality, virtue and harmony. An example of this philosophy can be seen in Gu Wenda’s “Myths of Lost Dynasties” (1999), which is a giant calligraph suggesting an imaginary landscape. Also Feng Mengbo’s horizontal landscape which suggest time-honored Chinese landscape painting, but, instead of ink and brush, Feng used acrylic and Veeljet, and in place of a scroll, the artist’s painting is almost 30-feet wide.  

Liu Wei’s beautiful “It Looks like a Landscape” (2004) is not a brush painting but a digital print of naked human haunches and thighs, arranged to resemble a Chinese painting of mountains. Finally, Li Songsong’s “Wonderful Life” (2004) is an exquisite picture, done with thick mostly white pigment on canvas of a group of young people listening to a violinist under a Ming Dynasty arch with barely visible mountains as a background—A truly successful fusion of Asian and western traditions.  

Mahjong: Contemporary Chinese Art from the Sigg Collection 

Berkeley Art Museum 

2621 Durant Ave. 

Wed.–Sun. 11 a.m.-5 p.m. 

through Jan. 4, 2009 

When Stravinsky and opera, or Stravinsky and theater, are mentioned in the same breath, the first things coming to mind would probably be Rake’s Progress or the theatricality of the ballets as produced by Diaghilev. Or maybe the Oedipus Rex he did with Cocteau.  

Oakland Opera Theater is staging two somewhat lesser-known Stravinsky works at their Oakland Metro Operahouse, a couple blocks north of Broadway at 630-3rd St. off Jack London Square: L’histoire du soldat (A Soldier’s Story) and Renard, pieces where the music shares, in different ways, the stage with actors, a narrator or singers—and most certainly, acrobatic dancers. 

L’histoire du soldat, the later piece (1918), plays first, and by far longer. A story by the sadly forgotten Swiss writer Ramuz (Stravinsky sat out the War in Switzerland) about the fantastic fate of a soldier off the battelefields of World War One, this production uses a text and staging updated to the Iraq War, in couplets, by British playwright Rebecca Lenkiewicz. It’s meant to be narrated and acted out, sometimes like a pantomime to narration, which mix was originally expressed “lue, jouee et dansee,” read, played and danced. There’s no singing, a casual fact that confused some of the audience opening night, coming to the opera and forced to wait till after intermission for the first trill of the evening. 

It’s a wry account, in between tall tale and morality play, of a soldier on his way home (an excellent Ben Jones, later singing in Renard), who trades his fiddle to the devil (a slick, cunning Matthias Bossi as Nick), who comes sliding out, back to audience, at his Baghdadi bazaar stand, piled with pewter cups, skulls and bones, which veiled dancers examine and caper with. In return he gets a book, which reveals the future—the economic future. War and buying and selling; so far a familiar scenario, with a little folk supernatural thrown in. Beats what’s playing around the block onscreen in the multiplex.  

Nick entices Joe the soldier to a three-day spree at his well-stocked house. When Joe emerges and makes it home, he finds himself unrecognized, shunned; it’s been three years, not three days. His girl’s married another and become a mother, thinking he was dead. And his own mother’s gone crazy with grief, a madwoman. 

Joe tries out Nick’s book, becoming an inspirational speaker on personal wealth, but can’t cut it. He wanders back to the theater of war, into a bar in the Green Zone, where he hears a brigadier general (David Hunt, the anxious Rooster of Renard) offer the hand of his daughter to anyone who can awaken her from a strange malaise. Joe does it with his fiddle, won back from Nick, followed by an extraordinary long dance, sometimes a wry pas de deux, in a pastiche of different styles, featuring deft Abrigal Munn as “Princess,” brilliantly choreographed by Shannon Gaines. Joe fends off Nick with his fiddle. They’re happy, but is being stuck in the Green Zone really OK? 

RENARD’s an earlier (1916) piece, opening with a short, smart addition of melismatics to chamber orchestra by sparkling soprano Kimarie Torre, Stravinsky’s brief “Printemps,” grafted on as matins for the barnyard, as the Rooster juggles blades, posing like a samurai in a kabuki mie, poised over the henhouse, a sliding coop. This’s asimpler tale from Russian folklorist Afanasyev, played out with every sideshow gimmick by a great team of chickens, vixens, an acrobatic cat and goat, and an amazing ribbon-dancing aerialist Fox, Breanna Noack, while a fine ensemble of male vocalists (tenors Jones and Darron Flagg, baritone Igor Vieira, bass Richard Mix) wax lyrically with the valiant chamber orchestra. Throttled, gnawed, chased across a slack rope, the Rooster finally triumphs over the Fox with the help of his friends, the pistol-packing, knife-wielding Cat and Goat. (Erin Schrader and Jodi Power). Artistic director Tom Dean’s stage direction and Gaines’ choreography carry the day, the talented performers—many of those onstage with circus background—showing charm and skill, all giving the evening that rare taste, rare in the theater itself, of theatricality, of trouping. 

There’re difficulties. The accoustics of the newer venue, in so many ways an improvement over its predecessor on Broadway, sometimes made a stalwart Kirya Traber (from BULRUSHER)—and even Jones—inaudible when the band played. There was a feeling of a lag, somehow, throughout L’HISTOIRE, with the music, which alternates with, occasionally overlapping, the action sometimes seeming like incidental music rather than a shifting, contrapuntal agent which sets the acted scenes off, even driving them.  

Maybe RENARD, the real opera—though short, sweet and to the droll point—should’ve gone first, to relax the audience for the leaner, less pyrotechnic and more complex mix of music and staging of L’HISTOIRE. As was noted in the program, these are both from an intermezzo in Stravinsky’s career, RENARD looking back and L’HISTOIRE forward, to the composer’s famed Neo-Classical period. 

Oakland Opera Theater 

Metro Operahouse, 630 3rd St., Oakland  

Thurs.-Sat. 8 p.m., Sun. 2 p.m.  

through Nov. 2  

736-1146, oaklandopera.org 

On the eve of an international trade conference, its convener, Simon Primo (Marvin Greene), finds himself unusually alone in his palatial mansion outside Geneva, his depleted domestic staff seeming to melt away as a big storm’s brewing. Alone, that is, except for a mysterious visitor, who interrupts Primo’s fractious telephoning and heart pill-popping: a woman in an elegant serape who introduces herself as Maria de Arroyo (Catherine Castellanos), but more insistently as his friend, asking to speak to him about the trade agreement to be signed the next day—and demanding he rescind the global accord he regards as the crowning work of his career. 

Alternately prepossessing and feverish, faint, De Arroyo insists on telling Primo the Inuit story of the Skeleton Woman. Then the visitor turns into a guide, taking her reluctant listener on a tour of past and present scenes, from the primeval beauty, then desolation, of Tierra Del Fuego just before and just after the European arrival, to the anti-WTO Riots in Seattle—to inner space, where in every human body “there are as many molecular reactions every day as there are stars in the sky.” 

Blessed Unrest, Central Works’ new play at the Berkeley City Club was adapted by Gary Graves from the work of environmentalist Paul Hawken. Graves directed and designed the lighting as well, making the play a pas de deux for its two well-cast actors, employing every inch of the intimate chamber theater as this conversation expands to be, quite literally, talking about the whole world. 

This is very much in Central Works’ tradition, just as the play itself was developed by the ensemble and production team, working together. It’s marked by Castellanos’ characterization of De Arroyo, a sense of determination underpinned by a vulnerable tenderness, Greene’s deadpan portrayal of the mannerisms of a challenged entrepreneur of economic diplomacy and Graves’ wit and skill as an adaptor, bringing more than Hawken’s material to the stage. 

Blessed Unrest is a parable, a kind of combo Christmas Carol and It’s a Wonderful Life for the environmental and anti-globalization movement. In this case, it’s not so much a glimpse of his own mortality that converts the (business) man, but the mortal danger his guide and guardian spirit, Maria de Arroyo as a kind of Gaia figure, is in. 

Among the many projections (Terry Lamb’s, with Gregory Scharpen’s sound design) are supertitles attributing the many quotes to everyone from Walt Whitman, John Muir and Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Gandhi, U. Utah Phillips—and Paul Haw-ken. Even Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz gets a credit.  

The p.o.v. tends toward a reading of Emerson and Thoreau, though not Nietzche. It’s a little ironic that a movement which often questions the anthropomorphisms of Humanism should be represented by such a personification. It would be interesting to see something onstage that dealt with these same themes, but based on different homegrown voices, those often lumped together uncritically as prophets of environmentalism—like Whitman’s dark heir Robinson Jeffers, or Melville, who was critical, even satiric, of Emersonian thought, believing it to be a spiritualized form of the American cult of progress.  

Blessed Unrest 

Central Works at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave.Thurs.-Sat. 8 p.m., Sun.  

5 p.m. through Nov. 23. 

Tickets $25-14 sliding scale at door, $20 online (pay what you can Oct. 30, Nov. 6)  

558-1381, brownpapertickets.com 

“Once upon a time in Berkeley, two incredibly stubborn men decided to go into business together.” So begins Cometbus #51, The Loneliness of the Electric Menorah, opening like a fractured—or fractious—fairy tale with a title in hipster kabbalah tacked on. 

What follows, spinning out for almost 100 pages, is an ambling narrative that proves to be a combined oral history (as related by its raconteurish collector and author) of, and bittersweet love letter to, Telegraph Avenue—at a moment, a very long moment, when hardly anybody else has a good word to say about it, at least in public. 

The lens—or should I say perspective?—for this curious piece, at once ambitious and modest, takes as its focal point the break-up of the doomed partnership touted above, between Moe Moskowitz and Bill Cartwright for the founding of Rambam bookstore in 1963, and telescopes out from there, in time and (mostly) down the line of sight of The Ave. between Dwight and Bancroft, showing the evolution of this fabled and decried neighborhood through the generation of newer and often innovative enterprises—bookstores, poster shops, underground comix publishers, used record emporia and pizza “parlors” (more like dens) alike—that descended from the chaotic primal scene, the Big Bang of break-up on Telegraph. 

Cometbus goes back to that crucial moment via the reminiscences of its principals, verses 2 and 3 of chapter “Rambam,” the Genesis of this Telegraphic screed:  

“Morris ‘Moe’ Moskowitz later de-scribed it as ‘one of my briefer, poorer partnerships.’” 

Bill Cartwright said, “I’d just as soon not talk about it.” 

(Somehow, mixing Scriptural and Darwinian similes seems just right—perfectly outlandish, that is—for the tribal procession named and enumerated that trooped in and out of Moe’s doors, up and down the sidewalk, through changing times and finally into the prose of Cometbus.) 

The successive foundation of Moe’s Books (and Cody’s), of Shakespeare and Co., the (Re)Print Mint, Shamballah, Lhasa Karnak Herb Co., Black Oak Books, Berrigan and Brown’s jazz records (to name a couple of off-Ave. spinoffs), Rasputin’s Records, Leopold’s, Amoeba, Blondie’s Pizza ... and the tag teams of proprietorship, from founder to employee (or the miniature Pandemonia created when rebel angels were expelled and took up their stock-in-trade a few doors or blocks away), is told of with a reasonable alacrity, which touches on (rather than dwells in) acrimony, coming across with a few funny impressions, expressions and obsessive digressions—nothing unusual, as it comes itself from the impressionistic, expressionistic and completely digressive streetlife that is the water these fishes sport in. 

Perhaps the biggest obsessive digression is a kind of shaggy dog story in homage to the SLA, a shaggy tale indeed for those who recall that gang’s trumped-up start as the subject of surveillence of prisoners in the state pen and the women who wrote to them.  

The wryest impression, at least for booksellers and bibliophiles, past and present, is the sanguine description of the various figures of this history, black and white and red all over, like the old Hearst papers, physiognomies rendered either glowingly or gloomily. (One lifelong veteran of the scene intoned, “It makes Fred Cody seem like he was just some capitalist!”) 

These takes will be argued over well into tomorrow, I’m sure, grist for the mill of Telegraph gossip. But that’s where the author went to refine his his own thoughts. If it came out as a course meal, maybe that’s what our daily bread is made of.  

More apropos to its point of view, sometimes the telling of the tale seems to jump off the tracks and into personal outburst or sour grapes. But the author’s trying to speak both for himself and his generation. When one shop proprietor puts him off by snapping that he doesn’t care about the past, the previously whimsical folklorist buckles. “Maybe even a refreshing sentiment from someone of a generation so consumed in nostalgia and their own legend ... [with] a future, a stage, real estate. For the rest of us, the only thing we’ll ever own—especially on the Ave.—is our stories ... it [has] been a lifetime of dealing with these smug, self-centered hippie entrepreneurs ... I thought, ‘There was a reason for punk, and you are it.’”  

He goes on: “The bookstores whose story I was trying to tell had never been welcoming when I tried to tell mine—Cody’s had refused to even consign Cometbus for the first sixteen years, Shakespeare & Co. the first eighteen, and Moe’s the first twenty-five.” 

Cometbus is named after its eponymous founder Aaron, nee Elliott—or isit the other way around? Drummer, lyricist, “punk anthropolgist,” Aaron was born not long after New Year’s ‘68, and started his ‘zine at 13. “I publish because I don’t know anything else. I grew up with it,” he said at 27, and: “As you get older, you realize punk is folklore and oral tradition and myths. I went from that to writing about people’s lives, but I still see the zine as a part of a looseknit community.” 

His genial note to The Planet with a review copy: “Perhaps you’ll find it newsworthy ... Thanks—from one local paper to another.” 

This engaging issue’s decorated with stencil art by Caroline Paquita and retails for $3.  

The round-about sketch of The Ave’s equally elliptical history returns to Moe for the final word: 

“I like this street,” he said, “Even though it makes me sad.” 

With an unusual—and unusually good—idea for a community theater Halloween show, Actors Ensemble of Berkeley’s staging a lively production of Christopher Marlowe’s Elizabethan masterpiece, Doctor Faustus, in a cranked up, vaudevillized version, directed by Jeremy Cole and produced by Jennifer Rice at Live Oak Theatre, that plays like ‘Faustus, Hellzapoppin’. 

Seldom has selling one’s soul to the devil for magical knowledge and adventure been rendered onstage with such a spirit of fun. 

There’s plenty of vernacular comedy in the late 16th century original, too, exploited to the hilt by Cole & Co. as, among other things, street buddies Robin and Dick (Matt Gunnison and Tavis Kammet) yuk it up, making schooners of sack fly through the air after Robin filches one of the not-so-good Doctor’s magic tomes, much to the amazement of a lady Vintner (Meira Perelstein). They inadvertantly summon up a crabby Mephistopheles (Stanley Spenger), brought all the way back from soulcatching in Constantinople for childsplay—and the frightened “children” scatter. 

Harold Pierce is a brash, hellbent-for-leather Faustus. With a drolly melancholic Spenger excellently impish as his infernal correspondent, the rest of the kaleidoscopic dramatis personae are well rendered by an ensemble of eight which also does duty as chorus, including April Bennett and James Tantum. Particularly good are Theresa Adams, as everyone from the Deadly Sin of Pride to the Holy Roman Emperor to an illusory horse of straw, and Kerry Godjohnson as both Lechery and the Doctor’s Good Angel’s puppeteer, as well as multitudes more. 

They stand out, in part, for their mellifluous voices, delivering Marlowe’s marvellous verse with style and alacrity. Pierce, who is often fine in his presence and movements, is a bit too brash with Faustus’ lines, rushing them instead of letting the words work the magic. Popple and Spenger—in particular the devilish Stan—also excel in delivery. 

Most contemporary productions of Marlowe confound his plays with the dregs of Shakespeare festival-itis, either too pious with the text or throwing the kitchen sink at it. Marlowe was a funny mix of classicist and provocateur. His “real-life” job was, in fact, an agent provocateur, to smoke out Catholics and other suspected dissidents to the British Crown. To this day, no-one really knows where Marlowe himself stood, ideologically, his violent end in a brawl at 29 very probably his handlers offing their loose cannon undercover man. 

What Marlowe had in common with his rather anticlassical admirer Shakespeare was Mannerism, virtuoso tricks of perspective and ambiguity, that could, as Cole mentions in his notes, “embrace ... inconsistencies and contradictions.” Cole & Co. “exaggerate them at times” with the stuff of carnival sideshows, shadowplay, puppetry and stage magic. 

But, dressed up by Maria Graham’s costumery on Norm De Veyra’s spare set lit by Cole with sound by Karen Oakley and Natasha Gruber, the gorgeous lines ring true: “I will wound Achilles in the heel/And return to Helen for a kiss.”  

Unlike Goethe’s later magisterial play, Marlowe’s Faustus is dragged off to perdition by a squad of devils—who, unmasked, take a bow as the valiant ensemble, joined by Mephisto and the Doctor. You can’t say he didn’t ask for it. But it’s Mephistopheles whose horns all the women stroke at the reception afterwards. 

DOCTOR FAUSTUS 

Live Oak Theatre, 1301 Shattuck Ave 

Fri.-Sat. 8 pm, extra showing Nov. 20. 

through Nov. 22. 

841-5580, www.aeofberkeley.org

Our Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, which Tom Bates and his pro-development backers are so eager to emasculate via Measure LL, was enacted in 1974 as a direct response to the rampant wave of demolitions that overtook Berkeley in the 1960s. 

Organized citizens’ efforts to preserve and protect our historic resources began in 1965, with the establishment of the non-profit Urban Care. In January 1968, the Architectural Heritage Committee of Urban Care held its first meeting. This group would later evolve into the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association (BAHA), which currently numbers about 1,400 members. 

In January 1971, as St. John’s Presbyterian Church (Julia Morgan, 1908) was threatened with demolition, a new committee was formed that included planning commissioner Shirley Dean and BAHA co-founder Lesley Emmington. This body—the Committee on Architectural Heritage and Urban Beautification—wrote our Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, lobbied for its passage, and helped in the selection of the first LPC commissioners. 

The first nine City of Berkeley Landmarks were initiated in February 1975 and designated in December of that year. They included St. John’s Presbyterian, as well as three other churches (First Church of Christ, Scientist, Church of the Good Shepherd, and Westminster Presbyterian), Old City Hall, two historic clubs (Town & Gown and Berkeley City Club), Rose Walk, and the Thorsen House on Piedmont Ave. (Greene & Greene, 1908-1910). 

These nine cultural treasures are still standing--a fate that hasn’t been shared by all designated structures in Berkeley. Over the past two decades, eleven landmarks have been lost to fire or demolition, including the Napoleon Bonaparte Byrne House (more on that later), the Art Deco Alta Bates Hospital, the Berkeley Inn, Byron Jackson Iron Works, and Cowell Memorial Hospital. Six others have been significantly altered-some beyond recognition (e.g., Harmon Gymnasium). Another ten are threatened, including the two Warren Cheney houses on the U.C. campus, the Blood House, Kenney-Meinheit Cottage, The Copra Warehouse of Durkee Famous Foods, Cal Ink, U.C. Press Building, Berkeley High School Old Gym, and Memorial Stadium. 

Still, thanks to the LPO, many historic buildings that might have been demolished survived. In the mid-1970s, the Berkeley School District proposed to raze five school buildings. One of the five, the former Jefferson Elementary School at Rose and Sacramento, was designated in May 1976. Designed by the distinguished architects Henry H. Gutterson and William C. Hays, the building is now the home of the Crowden School. 

In June 1976, South Berkeley Community Church and a group of five historic homes were designated. The latter included three famous Victorians, Maybeck’s Pompeian villa for geologist Andrew Lawson, and the Art Deco house of haberdasher Joseph “Call Me Joe” Harris. Of the three famous Victorians, the oldest—the Napoleon Bonaparte Byrne House (1868)—is gone and replaced by the neighborhood-incompatible Temple Beth El, whose rear elevation on Spruce St. resembles a supermarket loading dock. The Byrne grounds, designated along with the house, have been largely stripped bare and covered with asphalt. 

More successful was the campaign to save the Naval Architecture Building on the UC campus. This graceful shingled 1914 structure, designed by John Galen Howard to accommodate drawing classes, was assigned to the College of Engineering in 1964. Ten years later, the College proposed to raze the building and replace it with the Bechtel Engineering Center. In September 1976, councilmember Shirley Dean wrote a memo to the City Council, moving to initiate a landmark designation. The building was designated the following month, and the Bechtel Engineering Center was constructed on a nearby site. 

In 1977, a Bicentennial project that sent neighborhood volunteers to survey their own blocks turned into the Urban Conservation Survey. To expand the scope and effectiveness of the survey, BAHA applied for and received a matching grant from the State Office of Historic Preservation, and Berkeley became one of the first cities in California to conduct a State Historic Resources Inventory. 

In 1978, a grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation and two grants from the San Francisco Foundation helped fund a survey of Downtown Berkeley. The State Historic Resources Inventory was completed in 1979, and BAHA published the Downtown Survey in 1987. Susan Cerny, one of the Survey’s authors, described it as a comprehensive list of all buildings in the downtown plan area. The Downtown Survey provided the core material used in the preservation element of the City of Berkeley’s Downtown Plan, which was adopted in 1990 with a strong Preservation Element and recommended Design Guidelines. In 1991, Downtown Berkeley was chosen by the National Trust for Historic Preservation as a Main Street Project. The Design Guidelines were adopted by the Planning Commission in 1994 and are partially paid for by a grant from the National Trust. 

Shattuck Avenue has been spared rampant demolitions thanks to dense landmarking over the past thirty years. Susan Cerny points out that Downtown’s side streets have not had the same protection and are being intensely rebuilt on a much larger scale and in incompatible styles. Still, she says, the Design Guidelines help mitigate some of the overdevelopment. 

Among the best examples of adaptive reuse in Downtown Berkeley is the Golden Sheaf Bakery on Addison St. (Clinton Day, 1905). Derelict and threatened, its designation in 1977 paved the way to an eventual restoration. The handsome brick building is now the Nevo Educational Center, a lynchpin of the Arts District and serving two theatre companies. 

Like the Golden Sheaf Bakery, the Charles W. Heywood House, a fine 1878 Italianate at 1808 Fifth St., was in an advanced state of deterioration when it was designated in 1979. Twenty years later it was beautifully restored and stands as a proud testament to West Berkeley’s early days. 

Unfortunately, a landmark designation is no guarantee of respectful maintenance. The Anna Head School on the corner of Channing and Bowditch was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1980 and the following year was designated a Berkeley Landmark. Its main building, constructed in 1892, is one of Berkeley’s earliest brown-shingle structures. Yet this important collection of academic buildings has been a victim of protracted demolition by neglect at the hands of its owner, the University of California. 

An even worse fate was visited upon the Bartine Carrington House, a charming Seth Babson shingled cottage dating from 1893. Designated in 1982, it was moved from its original location, which had become part of the Hotel Durant parking lot, to 1029 Addison St., west of San Pablo Avenue. For the move, the two-story house lost its lower floor. Its subsequent “restoration” removed practically all the historic fabric, leaving an irredeemable travesty. The Planning Department, whose charge it is to enforce the LPO, turned a blind eye to what was happening. 

Among the successes of preservation one can count the Captain Maury House at 1317 Shattuck Ave. Constructed in 1885 and remodeled by John Hudson Thomas in 1922, this distinctive double-peaked house was empty, dilapidated, and owned by the City in the 1980s. The landmark designation assured correct restoration that has turned the wreck into one of the most attractive homes in Berkeley. 

Were it not for a landmark designation, the marvelous Zigzag Moderne Howard Automobile Showroom on the corner of Durant and Fulton might have been torn down long ago. After languishing for many years, the building has finally found a compatible owner, albeit one exempt from property tax. 

The Manasse-Block Tannery at Fourth and Gilman was closed in 1986, and its 81,180 sq. ft. complex abandoned. Designated the same year, it was preserved, rehabilitated, and reused as the Tannery, a collection of offices, retail, and live-work units. Next door, the old Cal Ink plant has fallen into disuse; vandalism has turned it into an eyesore. And while the Kawneer Bldg. is now home to many artisans and artists, the fate of the Copra Warehouse of Durkee Famous Foods is all but sealed. 

Our mixed success-and-failure record is not so much a measure of the LPO as of how it’s been implemented by the City. Among the various undesirable elements of the Bates LPO revision currently before the voters there is a positive one: “Good repair and maintenance required.” If Measure LL passes, will the City begin to enforce this requirement? Given its track record, the outcome is doubtful. 

On the other hand, Measure LL has plenty of elements to dislike, chief among them “Requests for Determination--No Application pending.” This clause was written especially for the benefit of developers, who would pay consultants to opine on the historic and architectural merit of a property targeted for development. With the neutralized Landmarks Preservation Commission we currently have in place, the results would be predictable. Hand-picked by pro-development councilmembers, the majority of LPC commissioners would pass on these properties, giving the developers a safe haven for two years. If new information were to emerge during that time about a property’s significance, tough luck. 

Ultimately, our laws are only as good as our government. Measure LL was tailored by Bates and his pro-development cronies to help accelerate the transformation of Berkeley into a denser city of highrises, minimizing public participation in the process. With a few exceptions, the LPC commissioners appointed by the Bates council aid and abet this transformation. 

If elected, a preservation-oriented mayor and city council could reverse the tide, returning the LPO to its original mission: to be a tool for preservation rather than annihilation. 

A client called me this evening to talk about a house he was in contract to buy and we became engaged in a rather long, intricate and complex conversation involving all the things that he and his wife were now facing that had formerly been a foggy and insubstantial tissue of details beyond their attention. The house was exciting and new a week ago and no thought of the finer issues had intruded into their reverie of the Dream Home. The inspection was fun and exiting and we chatted happily for hours about all the things that might be done and some harsh realities about what should be done. A water heater from the 1930’s (yes, no joke) was long overdue for replacement and genuinely unsafe. Some foundation issues were demanding attention and the need for seismic work also loomed harshly.  

Then came the hard part: the money. An engineer had been retained and he further confused things with a range of fresh issues that seemed to orbit around our concerns without actually lighting upon any of them. One thing was horrifically clear, however: a price tag of twenty grand. Last but not least, a sewer camera video (the colon-oscopy of home inspection) showed a need for a $7,500 repair. To be sure, my client was feeling the bottoms of his pockets being unsewn and he hadn’t even reached the end of escrow. 

And this is where our story begins. The client says, “Well, the seller should be paying for the sewer, shouldn’t he?” 

The truth is that the connection between the things a buyer cares about and the financial incentive these items will have for the seller is a tenuous at best. Even the saintliest of sellers will rarely care much about the condition of a sewer on the home that they’re leaving. This is not to say that the seller is necessarily dishonest or conniving. That’s the less-frequent case, but the relationship between these disparate concerns (those of the seller vs the buyer) and a direct financial link to obligation is hard to discern (if not altogether impossible). 

In my career I’ve met a few sellers that I would describe as obsessive-compulsive who felt that they had to fix anything that was wrong with their house prior to transfer of ownership. But such as these are very few and far between and I pity the poor souls. If I sell a broken palm pilot on e-bay and I tell you it’s broken in the advert, I don’t feel a bit of remorse when I ship it off. It’s the buyer’s informed choice. I only hope that they offer me a lot of money for it. 

This is precisely the situation that the sellers of our house are in. They are selling a broken house. Everyone is selling a broken house. There are always things that could be fixed, upgraded, or modernized. There is always a more efficient heater or better bolting that can be done, but to do it just isn’t in the interest of the sellers. It is very much in their interest to honestly and fully disclose all that they know, plainly and simply so that they don’t get sued six months after the sale of the house. It’s also very much in their interest make sure that the house gets well inspected by all the relevant parties, whether that gets done by them or by the buyer they have chosen. Same reason: it will keep everyone happy in the end because they will buy with relatively accurate expectations. But this does not mean that the sellers have any reason to provide any particular improvement which has been pointed out as desirable or even vital to the buyer.  

The buyer says, “I’ve offered you $740,000 for your house and now I discover it needs a new water heater. Don’t you think that you should buy me one? You’re taking every penny I’ll ever earn in this deal!”  

To this, the seller retorts “Well, I’m really sorry that you need a water heater. This one has worked fine for me for years. I certainly wasn’t attempting to deceive you. I assure you that I have at least one other buyer waiting in the wings who will take the house for the same thing who will not want anything back or anything fixed. I really like you, your wife, your dog, your child and your realtor but this is my final offer.” 

The seller’s position is completely reasonable. I have no idea whether there actually is a back-up offer but it’s at least plausible. 

Now the buyer wants out. “That blasted sellers don’t care that the water heater might blow up or leak or stop heating my bathwater the day after I move in!” 

But why should they? It is reasonable to expect them to provide accurate information on the sale but not for them to bear the burden of any particular choices, no matter how objectively necessary, as a part of the sale. 

The buyers might do better to take the following approach. Figure out what the repairs which they deem essential will cost; look at their budget (including the cost of the home and projected expense), then determine if the house is affordable. Compare this with other “realistic” options, remembering that the grass always seems greener at the next open house-- especially before you’ve inspected it. Consider the likelihood that the seller will accept a lower offer and how you will feel when you’ve been back in the market shopping three months hence. Will you regret not having taken the offer on the table?  

This is not to say that one should not negotiate, but ideas of what is righteous and fair and the notion that the seller should adopt a caretaking position in your future may create false imperatives. These can override otherwise objective decisions and cool negotiations. It’s not about the seller: it’s about getting the house you want at a price you can live with. The subsequent choices of what to fix, how and when should rightly be the buyer’s alone. 

THURSDAY, OCT. 30 

Berkeley Mayoral Candidates Debate Pacific Steel Issues and solutions to the plant’s pollution and health threats at 7 p.m. at the Building Education Center, 812 Page St. Sponsored by Global Community Monitor. www.gcmonitor.org 

BUSD Community Meeting on Selling Hillside School and Playground at 7 p.m. in the large conference room, 1720 Oregon St. For information contact Cynthia Cowgill at 549-3435, or cacowgill@aim.com 

“The 1868 Hayward Fault Earthquake” with Richard Schwartz at 7 p.m. at the Hillside Club, Cedar St. at Arch. Cost is $15. Sponsored by berkeley Architectural Heritage Assoc. 841-2242. www.berkeleyheritage.org  

Berkeley’s Climate Action Plan A town hall discussion with councilmembers Laurie Capitelli (District 5) and Betty Olds (District 6) at 6:30 p.m. at Northbrae Community Church, Parlor Room, 941 The Alameda. 

Berkeley School Volunteers Orientation from 3 to 4 p.m. at 1835 Allston Way. Come learn about volunteer opportunities. Bring photo ID and two references. 644-8833. 

Hallowe’en Stories and creepy songs from 6 to 7 p.m. at Richmond Public Library, Children’s Room, 325 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond. 620-6557. 

Baby & Toddler Storytime at 10:15 and 11:15 a.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Bayswater Book Club Dinner meeting at 6:30 p.m. to discuss “Obama Nomics” by John R. Talbott. RSVP to 433-2911. 

Three Beats for Nothing South Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Thurs. at 10 a.m. at the South Berkeley Senior Center, Ellis at Ashby. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

Fitness Class for 55+ at 9:15 a.m. at Jewish Community Center, 1414 Walnut St. 848-0237. 

World of Plants Tours Thurs., Sat. and Sun. at 1:30 p.m. at the UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. Cost is $5. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

FRIDAY, OCT. 31 

City Commons Club Noon Luncheon with Sherry Smith, League of Women Voters “State and Local Ballot Measures in the Nov. 2008 Elections” Luncheon at 11:45 a.m. for $14.50, speech at 12:30 p.m., at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant St. For information and reservations call 524-7468. www.citycommonsclub.org 

Harvest Festival at James Kenney Community Center with carnival games, arts and crafts, a spooky maze and more from 3:30 to 5 p.m. at 1720 8th St., between Virginia and Delaware. 981-6551.  

Halloween Costume Contest and Magic Show at 5 p.m. at Ray’s Pumpkin Patch, 1245 Solano Ave., Albany. Free. 527-5358. 

“Not-Too-Spooky” Halloween for ages 6 and under from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at Habitot, 2065 Kittredge St. Cost is $7-$8. 647-1111. www.habitot.org 

“Farewell to the Thief” Celebrate the end of the Bush years with a concert at 7 p.m. at Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists, 1924 Cedar St. Suggested donation $10. www.bfuu.org 

Compost Give-away at Berkeley Marina Free compost giveaway self serve after 11:45 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. at Berkeley Marina Maintenance Yard, 201 University Ave. 981-6660. 

Circle Dancing, simple folk dancing with instruction at 7:30 p.m. at Finnish Brotherhood Hall, 1970 Chestnut St at University. Donation of $5 requested. 528-4253. www.circledancing.com 

Berkeley Women in Black weekly vigil from noon to 1 p.m. at Bancroft and Telegraph. Our focus is human rights in Palestine. 548-6310. 

Three Beats for Nothing Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Fri. at 10 a.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, Hearst at MLK. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

SATURDAY, NOV. 1 

Watershed Environmental Poetry Festival Creek Walk Meet at 10 a.m. just inside UC campus at Oxford and Center St. Poetry Festival follows at noon at Civic Center Park. 526-9105. www.poetryflash.org 

Berkeley Path Wanderers Albany Walk Explore history, preservation, and restoration on Albany Hill, University Village, and Cerrito and Codornices Creeks. Meet at 10 a.m. at Albany Peet’s on San Pablo. 848-9358. www.berkeleypaths.org 

Reptile Rendevous Learn about the reptiles that live in Tilden Park, and meet some up close, from 2 to 3 p.m. at Tilden Nature Center. 525-2233. 

Sick Plant Clinic Dr. Robert Raabe, plant pathologist, and Dr. Nick Mills, entomologist, will diagnose plant illnesses and recommend remedies. Bring a piece of the plant in a securely sealed container. A zipperlock bag is ideal. From 9 a.m. to noon at Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Dr. 643-2755. 

Close the Farm Help us close the Little Farm and tuck in the animals for the night, from 3:30 to 4:30 p.m. at Tilden Little Farm, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

Wine and Carrot Reception for Peter Matsukawa and the photographs of his rabbits, at 5 p.m. at RabbitEars, 377 Colusa, Ave., Kensington. 535-6155. 

Human Rights in Chile A discussion on efforts to nullify the self-pardon law at 4 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Lead-Safe Painting & Remodeling A free introductory class to learn about lead safe renovations for your older home, from 10 a.m. to noon at Dimond Branch Library, 3565 Fruitvale Ave., Oakland. Presented by Alameda County Lead Poisoning Prevention Program. 567-8280. www.ACLPPP.org 

“Law School Admissions Workshop for People of Color” from 9:45 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Berkeley School of Law, Booth Auditorium. Open to all traditionally underrepresented groups such as people of color, people with disabilities, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people, and those from a disadvantaged socio-economic background. Please RSVP to coalitionfordiversity@gmail.com  

“The Joy of Writing” A workshop with Lynn Hammond from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Berkeley, 1 Lawson Rd., Kensington. Cost is $30. Bring a bag lunch. 525-0302, ext. 306. 

Free Internet Classes: Health and Medical Information from 10 to 11 El Cerrito Library, 6510 Stockton St., El Cerrito. 526-7512. 

Math and Science Classes from the Lawrence Hall of Science for families with children in kindergarten through fifth grade from 1 to 2:30 p.m. at Richmond Public Library, 325 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond. Free. 620-6557. 

Berkeley Property Owners Association Monthly meeting with Ted Levenson on “The Current Financial Melt-down and what it means to you and your investments” 10 a.m. at St. John’s Presbyterian Church, 2727 College Ave., Fireside Room. All welcome. bpoa@bpoa.org 

“The Current Situation in Afghanistan” at 7 p.m. at Revolution Books, 2425 Channing Way. 848-1196. 

Preschool Storytime, for ages 3-5, at 11 a.m. at Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720, ext. 17. 

Free Garden Tours at Regional Parks Botanic Garden Sat. and Sun. at 2 pm. Regional Parks Botanic Garden, Tilden Park. Call to confirm. 841-8732. www.nativeplants.org 

Around the World Tour of Plants at 1:30 p.m., Thurs., Sat. and Sun. at UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

Berkeley Lawn Bowling Club provides free instruction every Wed. and Sat. at 10:30 a.m. at 2270 Acton St. 841-2174.  

Oakland Artisans Marketplace Sat. from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sun. from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at Jack London Square. 238-4948. 

SUNDAY, NOV. 2 

East Bay Sanctuary Covenant Annual Fundraising Dinner with a silent auction and reception at 5:30 p.m., followed by dinner at 6:30 p.m. at St. John’s Presbyterian Church, 2727 College Ave. Funds support EBSC’s mission to provide a safe-haven for indigenous refugees and immigrants, educate the public and foster leadership development and human rights advocacy. 540-5296. www.eastbaysanctuary.org 

Art Hike “Sketching Through the Fog” Bring paper, pen or pencil and discover winter flora and fauna in the fog from 10:30 a.m. to noon at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

Spinning a Yarn Storytelling Watch wool being spun and listen to a tale at 2 p.m. at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

“Fall Harvest: Medicinal Roots, Barks, and Fruits of California” Learn identifying characteristics, medicinal uses, sustainable harvesting techniques, as well as various preparation methods from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at Tilden Regional Parks Botanical Garden Visitor Center, Wildcat Canyon Road and South Park Drive. Cost is $45. Partial work trade possible in cases of financial hardship. Inquire when registering. 428-1810. www.nativeplants.org 

EcoHouse Tour Learn about Berkeley’s first city-permitted wetland / greywater system, solar panels, on-demand water heater, water saving fixtures, natural and recycled building materials, water catchment strategies, ducks in the city, a living roof garden and more, from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. Registration required by Oct. 31. Cost is $10, sliding scale. 548-2220 ext. 242. 

Mask Making Techniques with Diego Rios at 4 p.m. at Eclectix Gallery, 10082 San Pablo Ave. www.eclectixgallery.com 

Berkeley Rep Family Series “Myths Come Alive” from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Nevo Education Center, 2071 Addison St. Free, but bring a book to donate to a school library. 647-2973. 

“Diwali: The Hindu Festival of Lights” with Asha Bajaj, at 10 a.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Berkeley, 1 Lawson Rd., Kensington. 525-0302, ext. 306. 

Dia de los Muertos with crafts and story-telling for children ages 0-6 from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at Habitot Children’s Museum, 2065 Kittredge St. 647-1111. 

African Diaspora Film Society “The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow” at 2 p.m. at Parkway Theater, 1834 Park Blvd., Oakland. Cost is $5. 814-2400. 

Organic Gardening: The Magic of Sheet Mulching from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. in North Oakland. Cost is $30-$50. 431-9016. 

Tibetan Buddhism with Santosh Philip on “Easy Ways to Release Tension” at 6 p.m. at the Tibetan Nyingma Institute, 1815 Highland Pl. 809-1000. www.nyingmainstitute.com 

Free Garden Tours at Regional Parks Botanic Garden in Tilden Park Sat. and Sun. at 2 p.m. Call to confirm. 841-8732.  

Lake Merritt Neighbors Organized for Peace Peace walk around the lake every Sun. Meet at 3 p.m. at the colonnade at the NE end of the lake. 763-8712. lmno4p.org 

Berkeley Chess Club meets every Sun. at 7 p.m. at the Hillside School, 1581 Le Roy Ave. 843-0150. 

MONDAY, NOV. 3 

“What Does It Take to Make a Jar of Jam?” A slide talk with June Taylor at 7:30 p.m. at the Hillside Club, 2286 Cedar St. at Arch. Free. 843-8724. www.hillsideclub.org  

“What Do Turkeys, Wild Boar and Bullfrogs Have in Common? Answer: They Did Not Ask to Come Here” A talk by naturalist Jim Hale at 7:30 p.m. at Montclair Presbyterian Church, Family Room, 5701 Thornhill Rd., Oakland. Donation $5, children in grades K-12 free. www.close-to-home.org 

“Racial Identity and the Census” with Michael Omi, Assoc. Prof. Ethnic Studies, UCB, at 12:15 p.m. at Room 150, University Hall, 2199 Addison St. Free for OLLI members, $5 others. 642-5254. 

“Facing Death ... with open eyes” A film and discussion with Dr. Michelle Peticolas at 7 p.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave., Kensington. 524-3043. 

Biodiesel 101 Presentation Learn about biodiesel emissions, homebrewing, types of vehicles and commercial availability at 7:30 p.m. at Biofuel Oasis, 2465 4th St., at Dwight Way. 665-5509. biofueloasis.com/bbc/ 

“Afghanistan: Hidden Treasures from the National Museum, Kabul” with Jo Anne Erickson, docent at SF Asian Art Museum will talk about the current exhibit at 12:30 p.m. at Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. Brown bag lunch. 526-3720. 

Berkeley School Volunteers Orientation from 3 to 4 p.m. at 1835 Allston Way. Come learn about volunteer opportunities. Bring photo ID and two references. 644-8833. 

Clowning Class for Adults with Jeff Raz, Cirque du Soleil and Pickle Family Circus veteran. Learn classic routines, cool moves and silly tricks. Meets Mon. at 6:30 p.m. for six weeks, at Stagebridge Theatre, 2501 Harrison St., Oakland. Cost is $75. 444-4755. 

East Bay Track Club for girls and boys ages 3-15 meets Mon. at 6 p.m. at Berkeley High School track field. Free. 776-7451. 

World Affairs/Politics Discussion Group, for people 60 years and over, meets at 9:45 a.m. at Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Ave, Albany. Cost is $3.  

Berkeley CopWatch organizational meeting at 8 p.m. at 2022 Blake St. Join us to work on current issues around police misconduct. Volunteers needed. For information call 548-0425. 

Dragonboating Year round classes at the Berkeley Marina, Dock M. Meets Mon, Wed., Thurs. at 6 p.m. Sat. at 10:30 a.m. For details see www.dragonmax.org 

Free Boatbuilding Classes for Youth Mon.-Wed. from 3 to 7 p.m. at Berkeley Boathouse, 84 Bolivar Dr., Aquatic Park. Classes cover woodworking, boatbuilding, and boat repair. 644-2577. www.watersideworkshops.org 

TUESDAY, NOV. 4 

“Reclaiming Indigenous History, Memory, Education & Language in El Salvador” A film and discussion at 7:30 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Music for Monotones An opportunity for non-singers to improve their skills at 7 p.m. at JCC of the East Bay, 1414 Walnut St. Cost is $10-$15. 528-6725.  

Family Storytime at 7 p.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Let’s Go Vote Day with activities for children ages 0-6 from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Habitot Children’s Museum, 2065 Kittredge St. 647-1111. 

Tuesday Tilden Walkers Join a few slowpoke seniors at 9:30 a.m. in the parking lot near the Little Farm for an hour or two walk. 215-7672, 524-9992. 

End the Occupation Vigil every Tues. at noon at Oakland Federal Bldg., 1301 Clay St. www.epicalc.org 

Street Level Cycles Community Bike Program Come use our tools as well as receive help with performing repairs free of charge. Youth classes available. Tues., Thurs., and Sat. from 2 to 6 p.m. at at 84 Bolivar Dr., Aquatic Park. 644-2577. www.watersideworkshops.org 

Fresh Produce Stand at San Pablo Park from 3 to 6 p.m. in the Frances Albrier Community Center. Sponsored by the Ecology Center’s Farm Fresh Choice. 848-1704. www.ecologycenter.org 

Berkeley Camera Club meets at 7:30 p.m., at the Northbrae Community Church, 941 The Alameda. Share your digital images, slides and prints and learn what other photographers are doing. Monthly field trips. 548-3991. www.berkeleycameraclub.org 

St. John’s Prime Timers meets at 9:30 a.m. at St. John’s Presbyterian Church, 2727 College Ave. We offer ongoing classes in exercise and creative arts, and always welcome new members over 50. 845-6830. 

Sing-A-Long Group from 2 to 3 p.m. at the Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Ave., Albany. 524-9122. 

Caribbean Rhythms Dance Class begins at 5:30 p.m. at Redwood Gardens, 2951 Derby St., and meets every Tues. eve. Donations accepted for Community Rhythms Scholarship Fund. 548-9840. 

Ceramics Class Learn hand building techniques to make decorative and functional items, Tues. at 9:30 a.m. at St. John's Senior Center, 2727 College Ave. Free, materials and firing charges only. 525-5497. 

Yarn Wranglers Come knit and crochet at 6:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 5 

Berkeley Path Wanderers A walk in the the Alvarado area of Wildcat Regional Park. Meet at 10 a.m. at the picnic area just past park office and just before the stone bridge. 528-3246. www.berkeleypaths.org 

Native Plant Nursery Workday Volunteer in Save the Bay’s native plant nursery from 1 to 3 p.m. in Oakland and learn about local, native plants. No experience necessary, all ages welcome. Gloves, tools and all instruction are provided. Space is limited, RSVP to bayevents@saveSFbay.org 

“Seeking Wisdom in Extremes: A year in Solitude on a Remote Island in Patagonia” with Robert Kull at 7 p.m. at REI, 1338 San Pablo Ave. 527-4140. 

American Red Cross Blood Services Volunteer Orientation from 10 a.m. to noon at 6230 Claremont Ave., Oakland. RSVP to 594-5165.  

Bonita Hollow Writers Salon meets at 7 p.m. at Bonita Hollow, 1631 Bonita Ave. 266-2069. 

“Awakening Joy: Buddhism as a Path of Happiness” A lecture by James Baraz at 7:30 p.m. at Northbrae Community Church, 941 The Alameda. Optional pasta dinner at 6:30 p.m. for $6 for adults, children free. RSVP to 526-3805. 

“Encountering the Sacred Feminine” A talk by Lana Nasser at 7 p.m. at The Dream Institute, 1672 University Ave. 

Walk Berkeley for Seniors meets every Wednesday at 9:30 a.m. at the Sea Breeze Market, just west of the I-80 overpass. Everyone is welcome, wear comfortable shoes and a warm hat. 548-9840. 

Theraputic Recreation at the Berkeley Warm Pool, Wed. at 3:30 p.m. and Sat. at 10 a.m. at the Berkeley Warm Pool, 2245 Milvia St. Cost is $4-$5. Bring a towel. 632-9369. 

Berkeley Peace Walk and Vigil at the Berkeley BART Station, corner of Shattuck and Center. Sing for Peace at 6:30 p.m. followed by Peace Walk at 7 p.m. www. 

geocities.com/vigil4peace/vigil 

Teen Chess Club from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the North Branch Library, 1170 The Alameda at Hopkins. 981-6133. 

Jump Start Entrepreneurs Network meets at 8 a.m. at Cuppa Tea, 3202 College Ave. at Alcactraz. Cost is $5-$6, includes breakfast. 899-8242. www.jumpstartten.com 

Morning Meditation Every Mon., Wed., and Fri. at 7:45 a.m. at Rudramandir, 830 Bancroft Way at 6th. 486-8700. 

Berkeley CopWatch Drop-in office hours from 6 to 8 p.m. at 2022 Blake St. 548-0425. 

Stitch ‘n Bitch at 6:30 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

THURSDAY, NOV. 6 

“Greening Your Historic Building” A talk by Billi Romain, City of Berkeley Sustainability Coordinator, and Thomas Dufurrena, Principal at Page & Turnbull on preservation and sustainable design at 7 p.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, 1901 Hearst. Sponsored by the City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission. RSVP to 981-7488. 

Berkeley Historical Society Walking Tour of South of Campus Churches from 10 a.m. to noon. Cost is $8-$10. For reservations and starting point call 848-0181. 

LiveTalk@CPS with Adair Lara, former SF Chronicle columnist, at 7 p.m. at College Prepatory School, Buttner Auditorium, 6100 Broadway. Tickets are $5-$15 at the door. www.college-prep.org/livetalk 

Human Rights Fellows Conference with reports on work with non-governmental organizations in 14 countries from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Toll Room, Alumni House, UC campus. 642-0965. 

Cheesemaking Learn how to make simple, healthy cheeses using organic goat and cow milks, at 7 p.m. at Women’s Cancer Resource Center, 5741 Telegraph Av., Oakland. Free, but registration required. 601-4040 ext. 111. www.wcrc.org 

“Tupperware: Building an Empire Bowl by Bowl” a film on the tupperware parties and the women who hosted them, at 1:30 p.m. at Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720. 

Away With All Gods Reading and discussion of the book by Bob Avakian at 6 p.m. at North Branch, Berkeley Public Library, 1170 the Alameda. 

Straight2Screen Writers’ Group monthly meeting at 7 p.m. at Kensington Circus Pub, 389 Colusa Ave., Kensington. straight2screen@yahoo.com 

Baby & Toddler Storytime at 10:15 and 11:15 a.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Three Beats for Nothing South Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Thurs. at 10 a.m. at the South Berkeley Senior Center, Ellis at Ashby. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

Fitness Class for 55+ at 9:15 a.m. at Jewish Community Center, 1414 Walnut St. 848-0237. 

World of Plants Tours Thurs., Sat. and Sun. at 1:30 p.m. at the UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. Cost is $5. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

Toastmasters Berkeley Communicators meets at 7:30 a.m. at Au Coquelet, 2000 University Ave. Rob.Flammia@gmail.com 

Avatar Metaphysical Toastmasters Club at 6:45 p.m. at Spud’s Pizza , 3290 Adeline at Alcatraz. namaste@avatar.freetoasthost.info  

FRIDAY, NOV. 7 

Golden Gate Audubon Society Walk at Jewel Lake in Tilden. Meet at 8:30 a.m. at the parking lot at the north end of Central Park Dr. for a one-mile, two-hour plus stroll through this lush riparian area. Berries are ripening and migrants are here. Sponsored by Golden Gate Audubon Society. 843-2222. ggas@goldengateaudubon.org 

City Commons Club Noon Luncheon with Howard Maccabee, MD on “Natural Global Warming and its Positive Consequences for Our Health” Luncheon at 11:45 a.m. for $14.50, speech at 12:30 p.m., at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant St. For information and reservations call 524-7468. www.citycommonsclub.org  

“Can Unarmed Civilians Break the Siege of Gaza?” with Paul Larudee of the Free Gaza Movement, Jewish Voice for Peace, Fr. Bill O'Donnell Social Justice Committee at 7 p.m. at St. Joseph the Worker Church, 1640 Addison St. Free, donations accepted. www.stjtwc.org 

New Deal Film Festival The Dust Bowl Years “Grapes of Wrath” with Peter Fonda at 1 p.m. at North Oakland Senior Center, 5714 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Oakland. Sponsored by the Berkeley-East Bay Gray Panthers. 548-9696. 

“Dare to Struggle, Dare to Win” A film about the strike at the Renault factory in France in May/June 1968 at 7 p.m. at Niebyl-Proctor Marxist Library, 6501 Telegraph Ave. 595-7417. www.marxistlibr.org 

“Healing Ourselves, Making Connections” A weekend gathering for adoptees and foster care alums of African descent in downtown Oakland. For details email afaadinfo@gmail.com 

Berkeley Women in Black weekly vigil from noon to 1 p.m. at Bancroft and Telegraph. Our focus is human rights in Palestine. 548-6310. 

Three Beats for Nothing Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Fri. at 10 a.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, Hearst at MLK. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

SATURDAY, NOV. 8 

Wildlife Rescue Training and Recruitment To help strengthen a community’s response to wildlife casualties WildRescue is offering this training class designed for wildlife rehabilitators and their volunteers, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Shorebird Park Nature Center, 160 University Ave, at the Marina. Registration required. Cost is $30-$40. 831-869-6241. http://wildrescue.org 

Quarry Lakes/Alameda Creek/Coyote Hills Bicycle Trip Meet at 8:20 on the east side of the Fremont BART Station in the parking lot. Trip lasts to 3 p.m. Sponsored by Golden Gate Audubon Society. 843-2222. ggas@goldengateaudubon.org 

Greywater Workshop at 10 a.m. at Magic Gardens, 729 Heinz Ave. 644-2351. www.magicgardens.com 

“Autumn in Asia” A tour of the Asian Area of the garden at 10 a.m. at UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. Registration required. Cost is $12-$15. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

“Mushrooms for Color” with dyer and artist Dorothy Beebee, learn how to identify mushrooms, extract dyes, and use them, from 1 to 4 p.m. at UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. Cost is $40-$45. Registration required. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

Orchid Society of California Show and sale. Sat and Sun. from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Lakeside Park Garden Center, Lake Merritt, 666 Bellevue, Oakland, just south of Children's Fairyland. Free. 

“The American Economy After the Elections: What Are the Causes of this Crisis and What Can We Expect from the New Administration?” A panel discussion at 7 p.m. at Alameda Free Library, Conference Room A, 1550 Oak St. at Lincoln, Alameda. Suggested donation $5. www.alamedapublicaffairsforum.org 

“The Elections: What Happened and What Now” A discussion with the Political Affairs Readers Group of the Communist Party at 10 a.m. at the Niebyl-Proctor Library, 6501 Telegraph Ave. 595-7417. www.marxistlibr.org 

NAACP Berkeley Branch meets at 1 p.m. at 2108 Russell St. Officers will be elected. 845-7416. 

Math and Science Classes from the Lawrence Hall of Science for families with children in kindergarten through fifth grade from 1 to 2:30 p.m. at Richmond Public Library, 325 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond. Free. 620-6557. 

Berkeley Lab Job Fair from noon to 4 p.m. at Berkeley Lab Cafeteria, 1 Cyclotron Rd. Job openings fro drivers, electricians, facilities managers, admin staff and others. Bring several copies of your resume. 486-5627. 

Red Cross: Alameda County Heros Awards Gala at 6 p.m. at Hilton Oakland Airport Hotel. Tickets are $150. 595-4460. 

“Ancient Tools for Successful Living” Workshops from 11:30 a.m. on, at Ausar Auset Society, 2811 Adeline St., Oakland. For details call 536-5934. 

Preschool Storytime, for ages 3-5, at 11 a.m. at Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720, ext. 17. 

Free Garden Tours at Regional Parks Botanic Garden Sat. and Sun. at 2 pm. Regional Parks Botanic Garden, Tilden Park. Call to confirm. 841-8732. www.nativeplants.org 

The Berkeley Lawn Bowling Club provides free instruction every Wed. and Sat. at 10:30 a.m. at 2270 Acton St. 841-2174.  

Oakland Artisans Marketplace Sat. from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sun. from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at Jack London Square. 238-4948. 

Car Wash Benefit for Options Recovery Services of Berkeley, held every Sat. from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Lutheran Church, 1744 University Ave. 666-9552. 

SUNDAY, NOV. 9 

Honoring Veterans Day 2008 from 3 to 6 p.m. at Chapel of the Chimes, 4499 Piedmont Ave. Oakland. 228-3207. 

Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge Workday Help us prepare habitat for California Least Terns. Meet at 9 a.m. at the main refuge gate at the northwest corner of former Alameda Naval Air Station, Alameda. Sponsored by Golden Gate Audubon Society. 843-2222. ggas@goldengateaudubon.org 

Little Farm Goat Hike Join a short hike with the Little Farm goats as we explore the historic connections between humans and our ungulate friends. For ages 6 and up, at 10:30 a.m. at Tielden Little Farm, Tilden Park 525-2233. 

Little Farm Open House Come grind some corn to feed the chickens, pet a bunny or groom a goat, from 1:30 to 3 p.m. at the Little Farm at Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

Purr-casso Art and Craft Sale with decorative, wearable and functional art pieces celebrating our feline friends from noon to 4 p.m. at Hollis Street Project, 5900 Hollis St., Emeryville. Benefits the Berkeley-East Bay Humane Society. 845-7735, ext. 13. www.berkeleyhumane.org 

“The Middle East in the Post Olmert/Bush Era” with Yakov Katz of the Jerusalem Post, at 7 p.m. at Congregation Netivot Shalom, 1316 University Ave. Donation $10. 525-3582. 

“Odessey: My Journey from Childhood Faith to a Universalist, Eclectic Spirituality” with Martha Helming at 10 a.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Berkeley, 1 Lawson Rd., Kensington. 525-0302, ext. 306. 

“May-June 1968: An Occasion Lacking in Workers’ Autonomy” A discussion with personal accounts at 1 p.m. at Niebyl-Proctor Marxist Library, 6501 Telegraph Ave. 595-7417. www.marxistlibr.org 

Red Cross Blood Drive from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. at United Methodist Church, 1188 12th St., Oakland. To schedule an appointment go to www.BeADonor.com 

Free Garden Tours at Regional Parks Botanic Garden in Tilden Park Sat. and Sun. at 2 p.m. Call to confirm. 841-8732. www.nativeplants.org 

Lake Merritt Neighbors Organized for Peace Peace walk around the lake every Sun. Meet at 3 p.m. at the colonnade at the NE end of the lake. 763-8712. lmno4p.org 

Berkeley Chess Club meets every Sun. at 7 p.m. at the Hillside School, 1581 Le Roy Ave. 843-0150. 

Tibetan Buddhism with Erika Rosenberg on “Relaxing the Mind” at 6 p.m. at the Tibetan Nyingma Institute, 1815 Highland Pl. 809-1000. www.nyingmainstitute.com 

Kol Hadash Community Reception Sunday, November 9, 2PM - 4PM at the Albany Community Center, 1249 MarinAvenue. Suggestion donation $5. To register, or for more info, email: info@kolhadash.org or call 510-428-1492. 

Sew Your Own Open Studio Come learn to use our industrial and domestic machines, or work on your own projects, from 4 to 8 p.m. at 84 Bolivar Dr., Aquatic Park. Also on Fri. from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Cost is $5 per hour. 644-2577. www.watersideworkshops.org 

CITY MEETINGS 

Planning Commission meets Wed., Nov. 5,, at 7 p.m., at the North Berkeley Senior Center. 981-7484. 

Community Environmental Advisory Commission meets Thurs., Nov. 6, at 7 p.m., at 2118 Milvia St. 981-7461.  

Housing Advisory Commission meets Thurs., Nov. 6, at 7 p.m., at the South Berkeley Senior Center. 981-5400.  

Landmarks Preservation Commission meets Thurs., Nov. 6, at 7 p.m., at the North Berkeley Senior Center. 981-7419.  

Public Works Commission meets Thurs., Nov. 6, at 7 p.m., at the North Berkeley Senior Center. 981-6406.