The Berkeley City Council has received a letter from City Attorney Zach Cowan saying that he believes that the Berkeley Post Office might already been sold or at least the United States Postal Service (USPS) is in contract with a potential buyer. Pursuant to previous authorization from the Council, the city of Berkeley has authorized attorney Antonio Rossmann to file a lawsuit, hoping to prevent the sale. 

Cowan's letter: 

We were recently informed of a rumor that the USPS was under contract to sell the Berkeley Main Post Office, or that it was perhaps already in escrow. 

When I inquired about this with the USPS, its response was that the USPS would not respond to questions on this issue. 

Further, the USPS stated (for the first time) that it has reached an impasse with the City and the National Trust as to the terms of a preservation covenant. Not long before this communication, we had been promised a revised preservation covenant for our consideration, and had been assured that negotiations were continuing. 

It is my conclusion that at a minimum a buyer has been chosen, and that it is likely that there is at least a letter of understanding in place, if not a contract and perhaps an open escrow. 

Accordingly. pursuant to the authority granted by the Council in May 2013, I have directed our outside counsel, Tony Rossmann, to initiate litigation against the USPS to prevent the sale of the Berkeley Main Post Office. We are working closely with the National Trust and have asked them to participate in the litigation as well. 

I will keep you informed of significant developments. 

Zach Cowan 

Berkeley City Attorney 

On Thursday afternoon, Bay Area residents and visitors will be able to view a partial eclipse of the sun in the southwestern sky, but experts warn that looking at the sun for more than a glance without proper protection or a filter can damage eyes. 

Many observatories, science centers and colleges in the Bay Area are holding viewing parties where people can view the eclipse using a filter or other protective equipment. 

"It's really a fun event," said Foothill College astronomer Andrew Fraknoi. 

He said the eclipse will look "like a giant black bite being taken out of the sun." 

The best time to view the eclipse locally is between 3 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. At 3:15 p.m., about 40 percent of the sun will be covered, the maximum amount that will be covered in this event. 

The eclipse will begin in the Bay Area at 1:52 p.m. and end at 4:32 p.m., according to astronomers. 

An eclipse of the sun happens when the moon gets between the sun and Earth and covers up some or all of the sun. 

"They don't happen every day," said Ben Burress, staff astronomer at the Chabot Space & Science Center in Oakland. Burress added that most eclipses are partial eclipses and Bay Area residents and visitors may see the earth's sunlight dim Thursday. 

Other eclipses go without notice among a majority of the population, Burress said. 

The Foothill College Observatory in Los Altos Hills will open at 2 p.m. for an eclipse party and safe viewing. The Chabot Space & Science Center will be open to viewers at 1:45 p.m. 

On their own, viewers can use special glasses or create a way to project the sun to view the eclipse. 

The best way, Fraknoi says, is to make a pinhole projector by taking two pieces of thick paper or cardboard and making a clean pinhole in one. Facing away from the sun, people can hold the cardboard or paper with the hole in it and allow the sun to project an image through the pinhole onto the other paper. 

To get a sharper image, people can cut a square in one of the pieces of paper or cardboard, tape a sheet of aluminum foil over the square hole and poke a pinhole in the foil. Allow the sun to pass through the hole in the foil. 

Nowhere on earth will the eclipse be total, Fraknoi said.

Alarmed readers report that the envelope that Alameda Count absentee ballots came in says on the front, right above the address, that Election Day is November 5.

WRONG: Election Day is the first Tuesday in November, just like always, and that’s NOVEMBER 4! The 5th is a Wednesday.

Says indignant reader Chris Adams: 

Today's mail brought a supplemental ballot pamphlet from the State Secretary of State with background info and arguments about Prop 1 which were completely missing from the first pamphlet, with no explanation whatever as to why this was missing from the first pamphlet with argument for all other proposition. And it brought cards from the Alameda County Registrar of Voters correcting a notice on our Vote by Mail envelopes that gave the election day as Nov. 5. (The correct day is November 4, and since absentee ballots must be returned by the end of election day, this is not a trivial mistake.) The correction notice was printed on oversize postcards that required first class letter postage, presumably paid for with county general funds. 

We don't vote for a city council member this election cycle; the only only city office we are voting for is auditor where Anne-Marie Hogan is running unopposed. There is plenty of space on the second card for this race, but instead it is printed all by itself on a third card which adds enough weight that the return postage is 91 cents? Maybe there is some bureaucratic reason though none is apparent. 

These are not huge issues, but they make me wonder what is going on in the world of election officials? The Secretary of State has a few other jobs, but the Registrar of Voters has only one task and one would think he could do it right. 

The table below shows who's endorsed which candidates and/or ballot measures. It is intended to be a relevant list rather than an exhaustive one. There are a number of organizations who made endorsements for a single race or measure which are not included. It includes only those organizations that publicly posted their endorsements on their websites, except for the school board endorsements of both of the school employee unions.  

Links: 

Berkeley Democratic Club 

Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club 

Stonewall Democratic Club 

Alameda Cty. Democratic Party 

Alameda Cty. Green Party 

Berkeley Citizen’s Action 

Sierra Club 

Berkeley Federation of Teachers 

Alameda Labor Council 

League of Women Voters 

Berkeley Grey Panthers 

Berkeley Council of Classified Employees (no website, queried by email) 

Berkeley Tenants Union

SAN FRANCISCO – A measure on the November ballot would reclassify six non-violent felonies to misdemeanors, a move that observers say could help California finally comply with a federal mandate to reduce its overcrowded prison system.

Under Proposition 47, those who commit certain low-level offenses – check fraud, drug possession, forgery, petty theft, receiving stolen property and shoplifting – would receive lighter sentences as long as they had no serious or violent crimes on their record. The reclassification would apply to property crimes involving amounts less than $950, and it would apply retroactively. 

The change is expected to reduce the number of prisoners in state facilities, and state savings would be funneled into mental health and drug abuse treatment, K-12 education, and victims’ services.

Prop. 47 would move California closer to meeting a looming deadline to shrink its prison population under a federal-court mandate, according to a new study by the California Budget Project.

For the last three years, the state has been attempting to address overcrowding in state prisons by shifting nonviolent offenders -- and funding -- to local county jails, a process known as realignment.

But while the policy has succeeded in reducing the state prison population, it hasn’t been enough.

In 2011, a panel of three federal judges found that California’s severe prison overcrowding was the main reason it was failing to provide prisoners with adequate medical and mental health care, in violation of the U.S. Constitution. It set a prison population benchmark that the state was supposed to have met this year, to reduce the number of inmates in the state’s 33 prisons to 137.5 percent of design capacity. California still has not met the threshold and court judges have extended the deadline by another 17 months.

According to the Budget Project analysis, state prisons housed 115,972 individuals as of August. It still needs to shrink that number by about 2 percent –roughly 2,300 individuals – to comply with the federal-court mandate, and it has to do this by February 2016.

Barry Krisberg, a senior fellow at UC Berkeley, says Prop. 47 will help the state achieve that goal, without having to release violent offenders.

“Frankly, the only way you could bring the prison population [down] even further, you’d have to start releasing more lifers…you’d have to go to the violent population,” said Krisberg, who researches juvenile justice issues at UC Berkeley’s School of Law.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that Prop. 47 could impact 40,000 people and generate savings in the low hundreds of millions annually.

According to the Budget Project report, the measure, if passed, would reduce prison overcrowding in two ways: Going forward, fewer individuals would be sent to state prison for the reclassified crimes; and those already in state prison for those offenses would be resentenced and sent to county jails.

Some county jails are already experiencing their own overcrowding problems as a result of realignment. But San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, a sponsor of the measure, says the change wouldn’t worsen conditions in county lock-up. Shorter sentences for individuals convicted of the reclassified crimes, he says, could ease overcrowding in the county jails.

And because misdemeanors carry shorter sentences than felonies, he says, “there will be a reduction in the time that people will spend in custody.”

But not everyone affected by Prop. 47 would be sent to county jails. Instead of jail time, someone who was convicted of a misdemeanor could receive supervised probation or court-ordered drug treatment.

“Prop. 47 will help, not hinder, counties working to reduce any pressures they are experiencing in their jails,” said Lenore Anderson, who directs Californians for Safety and Justice. The group has a 501 c4 Vote Safe that is a sponsor of Prop. 47.

The measure grows out of an idea that began with realignment, explains Rev. Ben McBride of PICO California. The question both are trying to address, he said, is: “How do we get non-violent offenders closer to getting home, building relationships with families?”

“When folks are closer to family…visitation of clergy…they keep more connected [and it helps] the process of rehabilitation,” McBride said. “The further they are from what PICO calls the ‘lifeline to healing’…the worse they will be.”

These community-based practices, the Budget Project analysis found, help lower crime rates and save money. For example, mental health courts that prescribe therapy instead of jail time for non-violent offenders has lowered re-arrest rates in San Francisco.

Similarly, drug courts that mandate drug treatment in the city reduce recidivism by up to 26 percent.

“Most people agree we have a challenge because a lot of crime incidents are connected to drug addiction and mental issues and yet our communities don’t have resources to really address those issues,” said Anderson. “A lot of those problems get much worse in the criminal justice system.”
 

Commuters driving across the Bay Bridge may face longer than normal traffic delays in the coming days due to the start of a two-month construction project on the bridge's western span. 

Caltrans spokesman Bob Haus said the department is replacing six expansion joints on the bridge's upper deck and will be placing steel plates on the roadway to accommodate the work. 

The one-inch plates are in place in lanes this morning and are causing significant delays on the bridge. 

Haus said drivers going over the tapered plates would likely slow down or come to a complete stop until they are used to driving over the plates. 

"We've done this before, and usually people become accustomed to them after a few days," Haus said. 

Haus said people do generally slow down when going over the plates, but there is no need to come to a complete stop before driving over them. 

California Highway Patrol officials said there were delays reported this morning near the toll plaza, but there was no official estimate of how long the delays were. 

Haus said the project is scheduled to go for 60 days and should be completed by the end of December. 

Caltrans has activated changeable message boards to alert drivers of the project, and officials are advising motorists to expect some delays for the duration of the project and to allow for additional travel time.

The demise this week of what was left of the San Francisco Bay Guardian came as no surprise to anyone who understands the trend toward corporate concentration which has accelerated in the last three or four decades. The mechanisms go under a variety of names—merger, acquisition, leveraged buyouts, private equity—but the ultimate effect is similar. Eventually, the operation of capitalism reduces or eliminates the very competition which its fans boast that it promotes.

And sometimes whole markets disappear. The Guardian was the prime example of what we used to call the alternative press. It was positioned as the voice of the counter-culture back when there was a dominant culture to be counter to.

Back in the day, to be sure, married founders Bruce Brugmann and Jean Dibble were unlikely defenders of the counter-culture. They were quintessentially Midwesterners, clean-living straight-ahead exponents of the classic small-town American version of the free press, almost like Martians who were unexpectedly transported to the 60s San Francisco scene. It was a mom-and-pop-shop from the beginning, with the kids joining the operation as they got old enough.

You could imagine Bruce aspiring to be played in the movie by Jimmy Stewart as the kindly old newspaper editor, though in reality he was considerably larger and louder than life. The masthead motto was “print the news and raise hell”, and nothing, at least in the early days, was allowed to get in the way of that goal. 

When I came back from the Midwest in the early 70s, Bruce and Jean were publishing in a narrow old wood frame structure south of Market, at least five stories top to bottom. I had a year or so to fill between applying to law school and actually entering. I’d never tried any newspaper journalism, just editing and writing for academic journals, but that didn’t stop Bruce and the editor of the moment from giving me a chance to show what I could do . (Editors came and went with some regularity in those days, so it’s hard to remember who was in charge then.)  

Most if not all of the reporters were freelancers like me—paid , though poorly, and only, it turned out, when cash flow smiled on Jean’s check writing. Once when I asked for my pay (which was in Calvin Trillin’s classic high two figures) Bruce, whose desk was on the top floor, told me Jean had it the basement. I trooped down five flights of stairs, only to be told that Jean was actually in the attic. Up again, and of course then they told me she’d gone for the day. Another time, when I suggested that I needed compensation for a piece I’d turned in, he said to “do it for your cause” (whatever that might have been). 

On the other hand, I never had to pay them a penny for the experience. Working for the Bay Guardian at that time was a better education than any expensive journalism school would have been. (In the process I also learned a lot about mom-and-pop entrepreneuring, which stood me in good stead in later endeavors.) 

Bruce had an uncanny instinct for identifying stories which in many cases were a couple of decades ahead of their time. Like Cassandra, he was derided for his efforts. 

He was roundly ridiculed for his crusade against PG&E, but now what’s left of the San Francisco Chronicle is dining out regularly on the power company’s many sins, just coming to light in the mainstream media. 

He coined the term “Manhattanization” to denounce the avaricious attempt by real estate developers to devour the San Francisco skyline. His campaign against them was not completely successful, but things would be a lot worse without it. Citizen-sponsored ballot measures in San Francisco and Berkeley have been holding the line lately, since the remaining “alternative” newspapers have shifted their allegiance to the side of Big Property. 

Bruce assigned me to cover the newly-formed California Coastal Commission and we did stories on the many problems with the San Onofre nuclear power plant proposed for a Southern California beach town. Despite our best efforts, the plant was eventually built, but last year it was closed for good because of serious safety issues. Told ya so! 

I reported on that era’s scheme to demolish the Transbay Terminal for the benefit of developers, since I commuted on the bus through that terminal every day myself. I’d picked up a rumor from Lowell Bergman that the newsstand in the terminal was run by an organized crime front, and I added it to my story. The Guardian ran the piece, including this accusation, without hesitation. 

The day it appeared, however, the manager of the stand found me at my bus stop, summoned me into his office, locked the door behind us, and warned me never to say anything like that again. I was glad to be able to tell him a friend was waiting for me outside the door. Unfortunately, I didn’t know anything else to report. 

Along with death and taxes, however, development plots never go away. Eventually, just recently, the Transbay Terminal was indeed demolished, and at the moment the unseemly shenanigans of the developers who got ahold of the site are front page news once again. As far as I know, the Mafia is not involved this time around. 

These days most of the free newspapers which still litter urban street corners aren’t much more than thinly disguised shopping rags, if what you’re shopping for is cheap commercial sex. Insofar as they editorialize on the political scene, they’re as likely as not to applaud the actions of the moneyed interests in the urban landscapes they inhabit—e.g. the current incarnation of the East Bay Express, the successor in name only to a former excellent alternative weekly, whose editor seems never to have met a real estate developer he didn’t admire. 

The 70s and early 80s were the heyday of the effective alternative press. After that things went downhill, not just in San Francisco but everywhere, largely for economic reasons, as print advertising lost out to online competition. 

Editor Tim Redmond provided a kind of stability to the Guardian, working hard for low pay for thirty years while Bruce Brugmann’s windmills of choice gradually became the monopolistic practices of his San Francisco competitors. He won a key legal victory in a predatory pricing lawsuit against the New Times chain which owned the rival S.F.Weekly, but he and Jean, in their seventies, eventually decided that they needed to sell the paper to an umbrella corporation which subsequently bought the Weekly and turned the venerable San Francisco Examiner brand into a free tabloid . 

It was obvious that one of the papers would have to go. Redmond quit or was fired, depending on who you ask, and the ax fell a few months later. 

Bruce Brugmann’s lasting legacy may be his lifelong devotion to freedom of information. Investigative reporting these days consists mainly of non-profits which data-mine public records for shocking statistics. This useful activity was made possible by the efforts of people like Bruce who worked hard to defend and maintain the California Public Records Act and founded groups like the California First Amendment Coalition.  

It’s harder and harder these days for interested citizens to figure out what’s really going on. The San Francisco Chronicle is even more of a joke than it used to be, with acres of front page space devoted to splashy photos and soft features. A single suburban monopoly, the Bay Area News Group arm of the Media News empire, now rings the city of San Francisco with a welter of seemingly different locally named publications which repeat identical copy in an endless echo chamber.  

Many bloggish outlets (some of which prefer to be called online news sources) have sprung up in San Francisco and environs, but none has become a dominant information provider. Each online publication has its own coterie of readers, but no one reads all of them. 

When the San Francisco Bay Guardian was freely distributed in boxes everywhere, everyone who cared about progressive causes had a chance to pick it up, and mostly they did. The Guardian’s endorsements were golden—my mother in her nineties always checked them at election time even though she never read the paper. They were not infallible, of course. I remember once, back in the paper’s heyday, standing in the newsroom as endorsements were being crafted, and hearing the editor-du-jour hollering “Anyone here know anybody in Marin?”. The editors in recent years were often confused by Berkeley’s incumbent faux-progs, whose stance on Manhattanization was the opposite of the position the Guardian espoused in San Francisco.  

Over 40 years there was much to criticize and much to praise in the San Francisco Bay Guardian. Its gradual demise, with the parallel disappearance of the counter-culture and the genuine alternative press, has left the Bay Area a place that is ever more vulnerable to the abuses of uncontrolled capital, and also, a duller place. We’ll miss it, warts and all. 

Early this Sunday morning as I was drinking my coffee I got a call from a neighbor who lives just off Ashby/Tunnel.

“Did you see all those signs on the telephone poles?” she asked indignantly.

Did I see them? Yes, and I’ve already pulled down four of them which were all on one telephone pole in front of my house on Ashby.

Folks, these signs are blatantly illegal.

It’s not only illegal to post campaign signs on wooden telephone poles, but the law requires, if I remember correctly, that campaign signs must be identified with the name of whoever paid for them. And nope, these signs don’t do that either, unless you count the URL at the bottom: www.YesOnBerkeleyMeasureS.com.

For those of you (most of you I’m sure) who don’t remember or never knew what Measure S is, it’s a referendum on the gerrymander promulgated this spring by the Tom Bates machine’s Berkeley City Council faux-prog majority as an attempt to knock off Progressive District Seven Councilmember Kriss Worthington.

If you oppose this gerrymander, therefore, you will vote No on Measure S. It’s confusing, I grant you, but you can remember it if you think “S is for Stupid”. Vote No on stupidity, every time. 

One of the signs does list three machine politicos as supporters: Berkeley Mayor-for-Life Tom Bates, his wife State Senator Loni Hancock, and their protegee Asm. Nancy Skinner, plus “most City Councilmembers”, names and/or cities not specified. The website lists as endorsers only these individuals plus one U.C. professor and two of the most conservative Democratic organizations in the county. But that’s not enough disclosure to meet the requirements of Berkeley’s election law, I’m pretty sure. I’ll check with the Fair Campaign Practices commission on Monday and let you know. 

Will Bates, Hancock and Skinner or their allies be cited for breaking the law? Don’t hold your breath.  

Why do I call this “The Department of More Money Than Sense”? It must have cost someone a pretty penny to print up all of these non-biodegradable plastic-coated signs and pay someone to nail them to telephone poles. And you can be sure that outraged citizens (including me) will pull them down in no time! 

The first report of the Yes on Berkeley’s Measure S campaign committee, covering the period up to September 30, said that District 8 lameduck Councilmember Gordon Wozniak had contributed $1,000, his aide (and niece) Kristin Hunzicker (a major backer of the disputed ordinance) gave $900, and someone named Linda Swift gave $200.  

No other contributors were listed. But you can be sure that more cash will have come in by the time of the final report. Meanwhile, Wozniak’s constituents (including me) have to put up with (or pull down) these unsightly and illegal signs posted at their front doors. 

After the previous election some readers complained that they couldn't locate the Planet's endorsements when they went to vote. To make it as easy as possible, between now and the election we're going to maintain this corner of the front page where you can always find our endorsements along with links to editorial material with more detail about specific candidates and issues.

Berkeley Measure S (district gerrymander): NO

Berkeley Measure R (green downtown regulations):Yes

Measure D (tax on sugar in soda pop) : no endorsement

Alameda County Measure BB: Yes

Then, click here for the candidates: Which Berkeley City Council Candidates Should You Support?

Short Answers: District 1, Alejandro Soto-Vigil; District 4, Jesse Arreguin (unopposed); District 7, Kriss Worthington; District 8, Jacquelyn McCormick (rank her first, followed by George Beier, second, and Lori Droste, third. Skip fourth place. )

Finally , check out this May editorial with a self-explanatory title: Tony Thurmond is the Best Choice for California Assembly ...

We're pleased to see that Berkeley Councilmember Jesse Arreguin has added his endorsement to Tony's long list of fans.

In the video below you can see Tony explain his campaign in person at a Berkeley house party: 

More to come on the ballot measures and propositions.

Dan O'Neill

What’s going on in the race for California Assembly District 15? Elizabeth Echols is running perhaps the nastiest campaign I have ever seen—a nearly 100% negative campaign based on the insinuation that her opponent, Tony Thurmond, is backed by “big oil, tobacco, and predatory lenders”—perhaps the three industries most guaranteed to bring rage into the hearts of liberal Bay Area voters (surpassing even Big Soda).

And on what is this insinuation based? Has Tony Thurmond done anything in his public career to give grounds for it? Not that I have so far been able to dig up—nor Echols either, presumably, since she has provided no instances. Rather, it is based completely on the mysterious direct mail we have been receiving on Thurmond’s behalf from The Alliance for California’s Tomorrow and, apparently (I have not personally received any of these), from Keep CA Strong PAC.

So what are these entities? They are independent expenditure committees, which have been proliferating like cancer cells, particularly in the aftermath of Citizens United. Essentially they are political money laundering operations designed specifically to make the connection between the donor and the beneficiary untraceable. Even the recipient of the largesse does not know—by law cannot know—who is spending the money. So the source of the mailers is a mystery. Thurmond does not know who paid for them and Echols does not know either.  

Mal Warwick, long-time Berkeley political operative and current supporter of Elizabeth Echols, wrote, in his Berkeleyside op-ed of October 16, “There’s no way to know why these groups [big tobacco and big oil] are spending so much money here. We can only assume that something about Thurmond, or his opponent, Elizabeth Echols, has moved them to support one and oppose the other.” 

I agree—with two provisos. One, we have no reason to conclude that the donors are “big oil etc.” since we don’t know which entity or entities from published donor lists which include a broad array of California organizations, labor as well as business, are actually paying for the mailers. And two, since every mailing may well be doing more harm than good to Thurmond—this is rather Machiavellian—we don’t even know which candidate is being supported, which opposed. It’s possible that someone is mailing them specifically to give Echols, one of the weakest candidates to come down the pipe in a long time, something to campaign about. 

I have a guess about that, but it’s pure guess. I will return to it in a moment. But first, a reminder. 

This assembly race is not the sort of race that we are used to and that, at first glance, it appears to be—a race between two more-or-less equal Democrats, each with his or her own group of supporters. This is a race which was not supposed to be happening, because Elizabeth Echols is the Chosen One of Berkeley’s own Bates-Hancock machine which has controlled the assembly seat for the past 38 years (and the mayoralty of Berkeley for 20 and counting). 

Remember that Echols won the primary back in June, and, if California hadn’t changed to the bizarre top-two rule, she would have faced some hapless Republican in the general election and won handily. The contest with Thurmond was unexpected and, I am sure, deeply resented. As we know from long experience, Tom Bates does not like to be thwarted. 

In the 2002 election, for example, he removed free papers that endorsed his rival from boxes on the U.C. campus; after first denying it, he paid a $100 fine. In 2008, Nancy Skinner, described at the time in the Daily Cal as “part of the dominant political organization in Berkeley” and “connected to the Bates-Hancock faction,” entered the race belatedly amidst some confusion as to whether she had been planning to run at all, going on to defeat Bates’s enemy, Berkeley city councilmember Kriss Worthington. So in the Berkeley half of the assembly district, there’s a history of not completely nice campaigning. 

Note that I said “Berkeley half.” The Warwick op-ed is entitled “Big Tobacco and Big Oil have no place in Berkeley Politics,” and the op-ed decries the entry of outside interests into a “Berkeley” race. Nothing could better demonstrate my contention that, after 38 years, the assembly seat is considered a “Berkeley” (i.e., Bates-Hancock) seat. Because wait! There is another medium-sized city in the district—Richmond. And from the point of view of Richmond politics, “big oil” is hardly an outside interest. As long-time Richmond city council member and current mayoral candidate Tom Butt remarked in 2007: “There’s an old saying here, that Richmond’s a plantation, and Chevron’s the plantation owner.” 

Butt should know. As of early October Chevron had spent $1.26 million through three campaign committees, all with the same address and slightly differing versions of another of those vaguely progressive sounding names—Moving Forward—to defeat him and three potentially troublesome candidates for the Richmond city council. That’s a lot of money to spend on a municipal election. Why? 

Because (1) in the last decade, for the first time in 100 years, a progressive faction that actually stands up to Chevron managed to get elected to the Richmond city council and the mayoralty, and (2), they did so at the worst possible time for Chevron, which desperately needs to upgrade its Richmond refinery to process heavy crude, which—let’s face it—is the crude of the future. 

How did Tony Thurmond vote on Chevron’s upgrade/expansion during his years on the Richmond city council (2005-08)? He voted with the progressive faction against it, and the plan remains in limbo at this time. In the 2007 SF Gate article quoted above, activist Juan Reardon remarked, “If it’s a matter of serious economic concern to Chevron, they’re going to get their way. Everyone knows that taking on Chevron jeopardizes your chances of getting re-elected to the council or of running successfully for higher office.” 

I think it’s possible that Warwick is right about “big oil” but wrong about who is the target and who the beneficiary. It might seem a little crazy that Chevron would be trying to keep Thurmond out of the assembly by funding direct mail for him—including the gorgeous 16-page booklet “resembling a corporate report” to which Warwick refers. I certainly have no proof of this and many other options are on the table. But if Chevron wants to punish Thurmond for his city council votes, it seems to me that it would be counterproductive for them to attack him directly. There’s hardly anything more likely to encourage liberal Bay Area voters to support a candidate than a perception that “big oil” is out to get him, while obviously expensive mailers resembling corporate reports are likely to push us in the other direction. In addition, I can’t imagine why a “good” person or organization which truly wanted to support Thurmond wouldn’t clearly self-identify, instead of going through a money-laundering IE that raises troubling questions and hands his opponent her one and only issue. 

There is at least one prior instance of The Alliance for California’s Tomorrow attempting to game the system in a California race, when, in a primary, they supported a Republican candidate who could not possibly win in November, in an apparent attempt to keep a progressive Democrat out of the top two. And with respect to Chevron’s current three similarly named IE committees in Richmond, Sarah Swanbeck of California Common Cause remarked that, “This is a good way, and I’m using the word good ironically, for corporations to obfuscate where funding actually comes from,” adding that the creation of multiple campaign committees with similar names is unusual. 

All of which is to say that we’re still in the early days of independent expenditure committees and the process is only going to get more sophisticated, more strategic, more subtle, more ruthless, and more confusing to the voter. The best defense, I believe, is to pay no attention to anything that comes from anywhere other than a candidate’s own campaign committee. 

Meanwhile, I’ve made up my mind about Elizabeth Echols. Anyone who would run such a dirty campaign—not only negative, but based completely on innuendo with respect to mailings the source of which is unknown and which her opponent cannot control—is a person of bad character. I wouldn’t vote for her under any circumstances. 

Unlike Chris Adams, I have not yet received my vote-by-mail, ballot by Tuesday, October 21, two weeks before the election. I've already telephoned the Alameda County Registrar of Voters twice. The last phone call was Monday, October 20, and the woman who answered informed me my ballot was mailed "at the end of last week." End of the business week is usually Friday. By coincidence, a letter from San Francisco was mailed to me from San Francisco on Friday, October 17 and I received it Monday October 20.  

Tuesday's mail was chock full of campaign ads, but no letter yet telling me the date on the ballot is Nov 4, not Nov 5, nor the supplemental information about Proposition 1. 

I've voted by mail as soon as it became possible. In past elections, I've received the ballot much earlier. After all, the ballot must be mailed back, with more than ample time to arrive before the end of election day. Please do not ask me to hand deliver it. My polling place is a very long distance from my residence, and of course, parking anywhere near the polls is virtually impossible.  

I have no idea who is to blame. But something is truly rotten. 

Dear Malala and Mr. Satyarthi,

I want to congratulate both of you as a Nobel Peace Prize laureates for your perseverance and accomplishment to bring equal access to higher education. As a student sometimes I do not appreciate the privilege of education I experience in the United States. For instance I am still complaining when I carry heavy books in my backpack or when I walk long distances to get to my classrooms. But I realize I should not be complaining because the students in the remote areas of Pakistan and India do not take education for granted like I do. 

Malala, you are the second Pakistani Nobel laureate after Dr. Abdus Salam. While the extremist group in your country dislikes your effort to empower young female students to pursue higher education, the tombstone of Dr. Salam which had the words “First Muslim Nobel Laureate” was defaced and the word ‘Muslim’ was erased because as an Ahmadi Muslim he was considered a non-Muslim according to the definition provided in the II Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan. But you showed the world that even bullets will never hinder your determination to bring peace by educating young female students. Your struggle is the true reflection of Jihad which itself means ‘struggle’ and to do the right thing. You are indeed doing the right thing by sacrificing your life for the sake of seeking knowledge. 

Mr. Satyarthi, I also applaud your effort and perseverance because you were willing to sacrifice your career as an electrical engineer to protect Indian children from child labor and slavery and providing them the freedom to receive education. 

Both of you also apply Mahatma Gandhi’s famous quote “Be the change you wish to change” by inspiring all of us, especially knowledge seekers, to utilize and share our knowledge to create a peaceful world. So next time when I wake up in the morning, I will not complain anymore even if I have to walk uphill to my classrooms with a heavy backpack because I want to join both of you in spreading peace in the world through education. 

Sincerely, 

Khalida Jamilah 

The massive US bombing has not stunted the expansion of ISIS. Contrary to President Obama’s stated goal to ‘degrade and destroy ISIS’, they appear to be very much alive and only six miles from the Turkey border town of Kobani. If Kobani falls, ISIS will be in control of more than half of Syria’s border with Turkey. If this is allowed to happen it will be a massive military victory.  

ISIS is a guerrilla organization and has no central ‘Pentagon’ and is therefore relatively immune to US bombing. Contrary, to the facts on the ground the Pentagon PR machine continues to debunk civilian casualties and exaggerate its bombing successes. ISIS has demonstrated its effectiveness by appealing to extreme religious fanaticism combined with military expertise drawn from disaffected Sunnis who were margined by our 2003 invasion and the highly sectarian former Prime Minister, Maliki.  

Despite Obama’s claim of cobbling together a collation of 44 of counties, our allies seem to be hopelessly divided. Saudi Arabia is playing a double game – sending weapons and millions of dollars to their Sunni ISIS friends while outwardly supporting US efforts. Turkey is likewise seriously conflicted, reluctant to support the US coalition. Turkey and Jordon are also overburdened with tens of thousands of refugees fleeing from Syria. There appears to be no close liaison between the US and the people who are actually fighting ISIS, such as the Syrian Kurds and the Syrian army and other groups in Iraq and Syria.

If your neighborhood is inundated with gas-powered leafblowers, don’t just sit there! Go outside, walk down the street and write down the license plate of the maintenance crew’s vehicle, the address where they’re using the gas-powered leafblower, and the date and time of the violation. If the maintenance vehicle has a company name, write that down, too, including any address or phone number. 

Send a letter documenting the violation to the city of Berkeley Environmental Health Department, a copy to the home or business owner where the violation is taking place, and a copy (or make a call) to the maintenance company if there is one painted on the truck or van. 

This is the effective approach. Gardeners and maintenance workers generally know about Berkeley’s leafblower law, but if nobody reports them they often go ahead and use them. But their employers, who may not be home at the time of use, rarely wish to employ people who violate the law, annoy the neighborhood and pollute the air.

It appears that Ebola is now a major threat to the world human population. Ebola can be as contagious as the common cold (it can be contracted from a person sneezing on you), but more deadly with a mortality rate of up to 90%. This outbreak is occurring in one of the most densely populated and underdeveloped parts of the world, namely Western Africa. 

A newly infected person can fly to the USA within 18 hours. The USA's response to containing the virus is to provide travelers with a questioner, and to check for fever. This policy is reckless and warrants consideration for more severe travel restrictions. 

I wish to share with you my experience in dealing with African viruses. I am the owner of B Bryan Preserve Conservation and Breeding Center which is located on the north coast of California. We have rare African Hoof Stock, which include the Rothschild's Giraffe, Grevy's Zebra, Hartmann's Mountain Zebra and several Antelope species. Four years ago I explored importing the rare Cape Mountain Zebra. The species numbers only 400 and are only found in South Africa. What I ran into was a mountain of federal government regulations which ultimately prevented us from importing the animals because of cost. The USA government required us to quarantine the animals not once but twice. We were told to quarantine the animals in Europe and New York for 30 days each. The quarantine was required for the Brucellosis, Tuberculosis and African Horse Sickness. 

When we apply my experience with requirements for people coming into the USA from Western Africa I am baffled as to the lack of uniformity. I can only conclude that we are dealing with either politics, economics and/or incompetence on the part of our government. I recommend we require quarantine of all humans coming in from infected parts of Africa until the virus is contained. My position is not alarming but more pragmatic in regards to risk, and I recommend all concerned persons contact their government representatives.

Christopher Columbus was allegedly the first ‘illegal immigrant’ to arrive into the “New World” in 1492.The day evokes a great deal of sadness and anger among Native Americans, who object to honoring a man who opened the door to European colonization, pestilence and the slave trade. Bucking the prevailing holiday, Seattle City Council unanimously adopted a resolution to celebrate the second Monday in October as Indigenous Peoples’ Day. Socialist City Council member Kshama Sawant stated that "we’re making sure that we acknowledge the absolute horrors of colonization that happened in the Americas at the hands of the European so-called explorers, and Columbus was one of the primary instigators."  

He was a prolific slave owner. The European mission launched a war of terror to plunder and pillage, and was responsible for mass enslavement and a genocide, which reduced the population of the indigenous communities within a few decades from about 150 million to a few thousand. Hollywood bears much of the responsibility for their negative stereotyping of native Indians as wild natives who deserved to be killed by handsome cowboys giving rise to the hideous, deplorable slogan, “the only good Indian is a dead Indian.” It is time to acknowledge the sins of Christopher Columbus, revoke Columbus Day, and construct a holocaust museum as a living testament to our dark history. Finally, let us reach out to a native brothers and sisters whose great culture is rapidly fading.

The Sierra Club Bay Chapter made a big mistake when it endorsed incumbent Linda Maio for Berkeley City Council. In 2013, Maio led the move to gut a proposed ordinance that would have improved the information that dental patients receive about mercury dental amalgam fillings. She killed the mandates that two Berkeley commissions had spent six months crafting, which included informed consent for dental patients and signage requirements for dental offices. Pro-environment Councilmember Arreguin and others tried to continue the issue for further study, but Maio, in her leadership role as Vice-Mayor, convinced the majority to drop it. 

Mercury is an environmental problem that will continue to grow, like carbon dioxide, even if all releases were halted today. Dental offices are the second largest consumer of mercury in the US. Crematoria are major sources of mercury air pollution. Mercury dental amalgam fillings, which are 50% mercury, continuously off-gas mercury vapor, a potent neurotoxin that is especially dangerous for fetuses, children, and people with genetic susceptibilities. Our residents deserve this information upon any visit to a dental office. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, the American Dental Association (ADA) is a “heavy-hitter on the Washington political scene,” armed with revenues from its “Seal of Acceptance” program for consumer goods like toothpaste. The California Dental Association, the state arm of the ADA, is a similar force in Sacramento, powerful enough to convince our state legislators and their friends at city hall to leave dentists alone.  

Yard signs touting the Sierra Club endorsement currently give voters the false impression that the incumbent is the best environmental candidate. In fact, the challenger, Alejandro Soto-Vigil, is endorsed by socially and environmentally conscious groups including the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, the Alameda County Green Party, and the California Nurses Association. 

The mercury issue will likely arise again next year, pending an Attorney General report on how cities can protect the health and welfare of their residents without encroaching on state jurisdiction. Cities will need elected officials with enough integrity to withstand Sacramento politics and to put public health ahead of the powerful but backward dental industry.

“Our record in defeating state smoking restrictions has been reasonably good. Unfortunately, our record with respect to local measures…has been somewhat less encouraging…Over time, we can lose the battle over smoking restrictions just as decisively in bits and pieces-at the local level-as with state or federal measures.” -Raymond Pritchard, Brown & Williamson. US Tobacco & Candy Journal, July 18, 1986.

The fight for smokefree air, robust at local levels of government, is more precarious at the state level where well-paid lobbyists can dangle funding in front of strapped politicians’ re-election campaigns. Big Tobacco, like Big Soda, knows the way around all the state capitols and watches closely for any opportunity to pre-empt local laws with state restrictions limiting local cities’ right to initiate local protective measures. 

The pioneering local fights for clean air which are creating behavioral and cultural shifts nationwide are also creating unmistakable political shifts at some state levels, but state politics at the state level remains vulnerable to corporate wealth and political pressure. The state level is the corporate lobbyist’s playground. 

That is where Berkeley comes in. Berkeley’s support for Measure D despite Big Soda’s avalanche of deceptive advertising won’t just help fund local health programs; it will send a message nationwide that our community values children’s health, can’t be shaken by corporate lies, and can help set a standard at the local level which other communities can emulate. 

Walker Merryman of the Tobacco Institute said it best in 1991 “It’s barely controlled chaos [at the local level]. We can’t be everywhere at once.” 

The Daily Planet’s editor hasn’t endorsed Measure D, sidetracked by the idea that sugary soda is only one factor in the current health crisis for kids, which is an excellent point. But the larger issue, as Big Soda’s waterfall of campaign materials proves, is local control.

As a long-time Berkeley resident, I have had my share of disappointments with local politicians, yet I have never been moved to write an opinion to urge the public to vote against a politician until now. Unfortunately, my experiences with Josh Daniels, incumbent candidate for the Berkeley School Board, have made it clear to me that he does not effectively serve the public’s or our youth’s best interests. My experiences with Josh Daniels have shown him to be ineffectual, hypocritical, and yet another public servant who does not believe in accountability. 

In March of 2013 I wrote to Mr. Daniels when new construction at Berkeley High and the athletic facilities between Dwight and Carleton was just getting underway. I alerted him to a golden opportunity to provide health and fitness opportunities to our youth and the community at large. I informed him that installation of pull-up bars and other durable outdoor exercise equipment could be done at very low cost at this point during construction, would require very little maintenance cost, and would provide not only our youth, but all members of the public health and fitness options. His first response was to provide a number of excuses for not taking action, the principal reason being that he and the School Board’s main responsibility is to provide students with a high quality education and not to spend the taxpayer’s money wisely. 

I took that opportunity to educate Mr. Daniels about the importance of physical activity as part of a well-rounded education and that good exercise habits at a young age can positively affect health outcomes for a lifetime. I invited him to speak with p.e. teachers, coaches, and athletic directors to see if they were opposed to the installation of exercise equipment for student use. I pointed out again that this would be a chance to use public funds wisely because not only would such equipment directly benefit students, it could also directly benefit other members of the community, the people who are actually paying for the schools. How often is it that public money for schools can also directly benefit other community members? I pointed out that everyone wins— students, community, taxpayers. I asked Mr. Daniels where he anticipated opposition to installation of equipment would come from.  

I was delighted when he responded on March 9, 2013, “You’re right. There’s no disagreement and nothing to oppose. I’ll talk with the facilities direct (sic) and see what we can do in terms working in things like that to existing and/or future projects.”  

Now, however, after construction has been completed, there is no outdoor exercise equipment for our youth and community to use at either site. As a result of Josh Daniel’s inaction and ineffectualness, our youth have been deprived of these important health and fitness opportunities. Our greater community has been as well, and that opportunity to provide great bang for the public buck for the tax payer was squandered.  

Mr. Daniels has jumped on the politically popular in Berkeley soda tax bandwagon, yet when he had a chance to take action to provide real health and fitness opportunities for our youth, he did nothing. It is time for the Berkeley voters to get rid of hypocritical politicians. 

I have asked Mr. Daniels on a number of occasions why there is no exercise equipment at the two sites. Where did the opposition come from? He has refused to answer. He is dismissive of the public who he is supposed to serve, and he feels no need to be accountable. I urge all Berkeley voters to dump this guy. We are already suffering from his ineffectualness and disregard for the public. We deserve and we pay for better.

I set aside time, leaving out going to Soto-Vigil's lovely gathering at James Kenney Park where I'd talk with neighbors as well as advance my campaign for the seat on the Berkeley school board. But tolerating the noise at Berkeley Streets WORE me OUT! I stood it for less than an hour - shouting at the top of my lungs to be heard, asking people about their interest relative the voting, and not being able to decipher most of what was said back to me.  

And just to be sure the noise was endless - huge volume from a rap-dance group - then, walking away from that, being effectively followed by a drum corps - they're very good, unspeakably loud, trying to dodge the noise, going back the other way another electrically amplified site countered my efforts. Meanwhile a bicycle with amplified 'music' rolled by several times topping off the intolerable noise-volume already going on, touting Meas. R. 

And NO decibel limit. After all, the higher the volume the more 'fun' we're having - right?!NOT. The more story people are telling themselves - that they're having fun - because the noise is great.

Six years ago, most progressives eagerly awaited the election of Barack Obama. Now many of us are unhappy with him. Indeed, Obama’s unpopularity has become the primary theme of the midterm elections. As a consequence, Republicans are more energized than are Democrats. Before November 4th, what can be done to revitalize progressives? 

Remember how we got here.  

After eight years of a catastrophic Bush Administration, in 2008 progressives were quick to embrace the optimism of a smart, optimistic presidential candidate, Barack Obama. Most of us knew how hard it is to change the Washington establishment. Nonetheless, we bought into the euphoria of “Change you can believe in.” 

The fact that President Obama wasn’t as liberal as we believed he was, and hasn’t accomplished as much as we expected, shouldn’t dissuade us from working for a better democracy. When you’re in the middle of a battle with the dark side, it’s discouraging to recognize that your leaders have flaws. But that shouldn’t keep progressives from soldiering on towards a better world. 

Reemphasize our values.  

1. While Barack Obama managed to stabilize the economy – which was in catastrophic disorder when he was elected – he did not make it more equitable. In his memorable 2004 speech at the Democratic Convention, Obama said, “It is that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sisters' keeper -- that makes this country work.” This belief, that to make Democracy work we have to practice the Golden Rule, is one that differentiates progressives from conservatives. 

Even though Obama hasn’t done what we hoped he would do, we cannot let go of our objective to build a just and equitable society. 

2. Since February 2009, after the passage of the economic stimulus package, Republicans have adopted the strategy of opposing President Obama at every turn. Republican Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell said, “The single most important thing [Senate Republicans] want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” As a result there has been record obstruction in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. In the Senate, Republicans blocked a record number executive nominations and filibustered hundreds of bills. 

Republicans say they don’t believe in government and act accordingly. Progressives believe that government can be a positive force. 

3. Republicans have not only opposed Obama’s legislative initiatives, they have attacked him personally. Beginning in 2008, Republicans spread rumors that Obama had not been born in America, was not a Christian but rather a Muslim, and was connected to terrorist organizations. After he was elected President, this became an unprecedented disrespect. It first flared openly, in September 2009, when Representative Joe Wilson yelled, “You’re a liar,” when Obama addressed a joint session of Congress. Every day a Republican politician or one of the talking heads on Fox News suggests the President cannot be trusted. 

If Obama was a Republican President, and Democrats engaged in this level of disrespect, we’d be labeled “un American.” Progressives believe the President of the United States deserves the respect of every American. 

4. When Barack Obama was first elected President, many of us took pride in the fact that an African-American had achieved the nation’s highest position. We hoped that this would diminish the amount of racial animosity in America. Sadly, the savage attacks on Obama appear to have inflamed racial tensions. Oprah Winfrey remarked, “There is a level of disrespect for the office that occurs. And that occurs, in some cases—and maybe even many cases—because [Obama’s] African-American.” 

In recent months, with the riots in Ferguson, and other events, the US has experienced increasing racial tension. Meanwhile, in many states Republicans have set out to disenfranchise people-of-color. The GOP has become the Party of elderly rich white men. Progressives seek an inclusive political movement. 

5. Underlying Republican hatred of government is a fear of change. They embrace the status quo. Republicans don’t want to break up big banks, or raise the minimum wage, or shutdown polluting industries, or provide women with access to health services, or close military bases, or feed and educate our children, because that would change the social order. Republicans like things the way they are: with rich white men calling all the shots. 

Most voters don’t accept the Republican message; they want an inclusive government working for all the people not just the rich and powerful. In a February speech, political columnist Jim Hightower identified the core problem: “[In] today’s America… too few people control too much of the money and power, and they’re using that control to grab more money and power from the rest of us.” Progressives stand for all the people not just the one percent. 

Suck it up.  

Martin Luther King, Jr., famously said, “the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice.” Democracy is worth fighting for. Regardless of the President’s popularity, progressives need to get involved in this election and fight for candidates that hold our values. 

The Patient Protection Act and the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) seems to be working. Admittedly, this is not a universal view. But as of September 18, 2014, 7.3 million are now enrolled. This is quite an achievement considering the computer glitches encountered by consumers along the way. Individuals of Hispanic American or Latino origin, one group of Americans at high risk of having no health insurance, are making remarkable gains under ObamaCare. This group historically was more likely to lack health insurance than any other ethnic or racial group. 

A recent Commonwealth Fund survey shows that at the end of the first open-enrollment period of ObamaCare, the uninsured rate for working-age Latinos dropped from 36 percent in the period July–September 2013, to 23 percent in April–June 2014. Meanwhile, the uninsured rate for low-income Latinos dropped from 46 percent to 28 percent. Low income was defined as below $32,500 for a family of four. 

Latinos in states that had expanded eligibility for Medicaid and had begun enrolling people by April 2014 have seen large gains in coverage, with the uninsured rate falling from 35 percent to 17 percent. In states that had not expanded Medicaid, the Latino uninsured rate remained statistically unchanged, at 33 percent. Twenty million Latinos live in non-expansion states, the majority in Texas and Florida. 

Beginning in 2013, as part of ObamaCare’s broader effort to ensure health insurance coverage for all U.S. residents, the federal government began to pay to expand Medicaid eligibility in every state. From 2014 to 2017, the federal government will pay for 100 percent of the difference between a state’s current Medicaid eligibility level and ObamaCare’s minimum. Federal contributions to the expansion will drop to 95 percent in 2017 and remain at 90 percent after 2020. 

The Supreme Court in June 2012 ruled that the federal government could not withhold all federal Medicaid funding for states that chose not to expand their programs. The decision effectively allowed state officials to opt out of the expansion, and 23 states have done so, while 28 states including D.C. have decided to expand Medicaid. However, Indiana, Tennessee, Utah, and Wyoming are expected to join the expansion list. Presently, this results in a “coverage gap” affecting 4.5 million Americans too poor to receive help to purchase private insurance on an exchange, but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. 

The GOP vigorously opposes ObamaCare. Thus it is no coincidence that except for Montana, Virginia, and Missouri, the states opting out of Medicaid expansion have Republican governors. I guess this is their way of opposing ObamaCare, but do so at the expense of their state’s uninsured. 

ObamaCare repeal is fading as a GOP campaign issue. Even if the GOP take the Senate and keep the House, President Obama can veto any attempts to repeal or weaken ObamaCare. Hopefully, the states opting out of expansion of Medicaid will see the inevitability of ObamaCare and decide to apply for expansion of Medicaid. 

Seniors have not fared well on the streets of Berkeley recently.  

72-year-old Nancy Jo McClellan was brutally stabbed in an attempted carjacking in South Berkeley on September 19. She died on October 8. 

A 62 year old male who collided with a car in Berkeley died Monday afternoon, September 22, 2014, after he was hit by a Volkswagen while riding his bicycle in the Berkeley hills, according to the Alameda County coroner's bureau.  

An 85-year-old woman from Oakland was walking with a family member on Shattuck Avenue near Allston Way at 9:31 P.M. on Sept. 23. She was violently pushed to the ground without provocation. The police sought assistance in locating the suspect, 58 year old Carol Freeman of San Francisco. 

For more information about these “incidents,” read the Planet, Daily Cal, and Berkeleyside. 

Anyone who may have information about such “cases” can call police at (510) 981-5741 or the BPD non-emergency line at (510) 981-5900. Anonymous tips may be given at Bay Area Crime Stoppers Tip Line at, 1-800-222-TIPS (8477). 

xxxx 

NEWS 

“Nearly 750,000 elderly Americans are spending their later years in for-profit assisted living facilities.” (July 2013) This loosely regulated, multi-billion dollar industry was dominated by a California company: Emeritus Senior Living. In a year-long investigation, Frontline and Pro-public raised questions about fatal lapses in care, understaffing, and a quest for profits. “Life and death in assisted living” (available as a DVD from the library) was broadcast on Frontline PBS on July 30, 2013. 

Seniors are considered a growing demographic in the senior living solutions industry. A year later (July 2014) Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (listed on the New York Stock Exchange) and Emeritus Corporation announced their merger, which they consider “the first national senior living solutions company.” Also announced was the appointment of Granger Cobb to Brookdale’s Board of Directors. Cobb has been serving as Emeritus president and CEO. In 1989, he founded Cobbco, Inc. a California-based assisted living company. Brookdale Senior Living-California lists 93 featured senior homes options: “Our mission is to enrich the lives of California seniors, who we serve with respect, integrity, excellence and compassion. Our commitment and attention to detail has helped us become one of the leading senior living community providers in both California and the nation. Brookdale Senior Living-California communities regularly receive high resident satisfaction ratings, demonstrating our strong commitment to serving California seniors.”  

OTHER CALIFORNIA NEWS: 

“Gov. Brown toughens rules on senior residential care facilities,” by Patrick McGeevey (Los Angeles Times, September 28, 2014).  

October is Disability Employment Awareness Month. Many senior citizens are disabled; moreover, many are women. The unemployment rate for persons with a disability continues to be almost double the rate for persons without a disability. A personal finance social network conducted an in-depth analysis of 2014’s best and worst cities for Americans with disabilities (http://wallethub.com/edu/best-worst-cities-for-people-with-disabilities/7164/). In order to ease the process of finding the best place to live and manage a disability, WalletHub analyzed the 150 most populated U.S. cities across 23 key metrics ranging from the number of physicians per capita to the rate of employed people with disabilities to park accessibility. Of the ten best and the ten worst cities for people with disabilities, the only California city to make either list is Los Angeles, the 142^nd worst. The percentage of the population with walkable park access in San Francisco, California is 4 times higher than in Charlotte, North Carolina.  

“Death-with-dignity movement springs back to life in California,” by Steve Lopez (Los Angeles Times, October 1, 2014).  

“In Protecting the Elderly, California at Last Takes Steps to Catch Up,” by A.C. Thompson (ProPublica, October 2, 2014). 

On Thursday, October 23, 2014, Legal Assistance for Seniors will hold a Cookbook Launch Party at College Avenue Galleries, 5241 College Avenue, Oakland, from 6 to 9 P.M. Light refreshments will be served. Planting Legacies is a collection of stories and recipes from Oakland seniors. It is a collaboration of Legal Assistance for Seniors and the California College of the Arts. This project is supported by Hand & Little, PC and by CCA’s Center for Art and Public Life. Admission is free, but an RSVP is necessary if you plan to attend. All book purchases will support free legal services, health insurance counseling, and community education for Alameda County seniors. If you are unable to attend, you may order books, to be shipped after the event. Legal Assistance for Seniors is located at 1970 Broadway, Suite 300, Oakland, California 94612 U.S.  

Thursday, November 6, 2014: Stagebridge: A Senior Theatre Company presents Storytelling. Senior storytellers captivate audiences with personal and fictional stories, showcasing the rich and varied experiences of older adults to a multigenerational audience. Program begins at 1:30 P.M. and end at 2:30 P.M. Albany Library, 1247 Marin Avenue.  

Supported housing on the face of it might seem like a humiliating concept for a mentally ill individual who is grappling with self-esteem issues who wants to feel "normal." 

However, the world is tough. And if you are dealing with a mind that churns out negative thoughts, and/or negative emotions (which would be considered depression) or if the mind is creating illusions that might be grandiose or bizarre (psychosis), these types of content would be a major distraction from getting done what needs to be done. 

Living in a manner which is as near to "normal" as possible has two sides. We can feel better about ourselves due to the independence, and we don't have to put up with being supervised in our home. On the other hand, living without much assistance can be daunting. 

Years ago, my wife and I chose to get away from semi-institutional housing, and it has been a challenge to get by since then. However, prior to moving to a "normal" apartment, when my wife and I were living in a large apartment complex set aside for persons with various disabilities, we were being harassed in various ways by other residents, and sometimes by staff. When living in housing set aside for mentally ill people, there is a lot of negative baggage due to the fact that others make their problems into your problems. 

("Board and Care" group housing comprises a very large chunk of the available housing for persons with mental illness. The conditions are often deplorable. There is no privacy, no freedom, few personal possessions, and the food is unhealthy and sometimes disgusting. There is often no regulation of how the residents interact, and thus, various types of victimization take place. Unfortunately, due to economic and other factors, many persons with mental illness have no choice but to live in one of these homes.) 

Maintaining a good credit rating and a good rental history are essential for living in a decent unit in a decent neighborhood. Thus, if you couldn't resist going hog wild on your Macy's card and then missed some payments, it will come up on a prospective landlord's computer and you will find it harder to rent. For several years my wife and I were renting in a less than ideal apartment building. When my credit rating became better, it became possible for my wife and I to rent in a good place. 

Thus, there is no easy way. Either we have to fend for ourselves among people who are mostly in mainstream society—in some cases in low-income neighborhoods—or we must put up with the supervised and often harassed situation of housing set aside for mentally ill people. 

Overall I would say independence is better even though there is not as much support. Of course when you're living in supported housing you do not have the sometimes daunting feeling that you are "going it alone." In supported housing there is often a feeling of safety that there are people there to help take care of you. This is assuming you are in a well-run place in which staff and fellow mental health consumers are behaving the way they ought to. 

However, if you can get affordable housing (living among non disabled people) in which there is no supervision (hopefully the residents don't require supervision) albeit no assistance, it can feel quite empowering. 

I have met a man in his forties who still lives with his parents as of the last time I saw him. If I could have lived with parents I probably would have done so, but I was kicked out for good when I was in my early twenties. (At age twenty-four It was time to move on.) Since then, housing has often been a major issue. 

I think if you want to help persons with mental illness through legislation intended to make us take our medication, the same lawmakers shouldn't ignore that our quality of life is a factor in our willingness to comply with treatment. The availability and quality of our housing are major determinants of this.

Halloween is coming and that means pumpkins, goblins and this year's Monkey House Halloween Show. Tales from the Varley Mansion. A Musical Comedy for Smart Kids and Strange Adults opens October 18 at Ira Marlowe's legendary "speakeasy for the arts"—a full-service cabaret tucked into a secret location in the 1600 block of University Avenue. If you don't already know where Marlowe's hidden stage is located, the only way you can find out is to reserve a seat online. The experience is highly recommended. 

The Planet praised Marlowe's 2013 Halloween extravaganza, "Haunting School," as "a howling good time! An accomplished one-man show with an admirable mix of pre-recorded, rehearsed, and ad-libbed material...." This time, singer/composer/performer Marlowe has some help. Rounding out the cast are two Mime Troupe vets—Lisa Hori-Garcia as Millicent Varley, a "flamboyant ghost," and Rotimi Agbabiaka as Edward Z., a "soft-hearted zombie." 

(The Mime Troupe mojo is a good match for The Monkey House. Marlowe, who served as the composer/lyricist for the SF Mime Troupe's smash summer show, "Ripple Effect," recently hosted SFMT diva Velina Brown for a memorable evening of songs at The Monkey House.) 

Marlowe anchors this year's spooky tale as a failed-musician-turned-mad-scientist who moves into an empty mansion to build a mysterious "brilliant invention." Naturally (or rather, supernaturally) these plans go awry. In addition to dealing with the living dead and other ghostly leftovers, Marlowe will also have to face The Unknown because—like Haunting School—Tales from the Varley Mansion will be an interactive show. It incorporates members of the audience – the younger members, to be exact. 

As the playbill explains, the co-stars for the night are "a roomful of curious children--your children." So if you've got some tykes who might want to jump at the chance to become part of a live show, this is your chance to "find out what happens when the 'lucky ones' are invited onstage to serve as subjects for a strange and untested device." 

All ages are welcomed but a special invite is extended "to parents of elementary and middle school-aged kids." As Marlowe explains, "while kids will love this show, most of the jokes are aimed at grownups. If you appreciate Tim Burton, Mel Brooks, Rocky Horror, or Herman Munster, you'll love this original musical comedy!" One caveat: "This is a COMEDY, but is still not recommended for kids under six." You might say this show is meant to be "frightfully entertaining." 

The Schedule of Performances 

(Note: Special opening show tickets are only $5. The regular ticket price is $10.) 

October 18: 3 PM, 7:30 PM 

October 19: 3 PM 

October 25: 3 PM, 7:30 PM 

October 26: 3 PM 

reservations@themonkeyhouse.org>Click here to reserve seats. Please indicate which show you wish to attend and the number of people in your party. reservations@themonkeyhouse.org 

For more information, see: http://www.themonkeyhouse.org/MONKEY_HOUSE/VARLEY_MANSION.html 

"Umbrella People": A Bit of Ira Marlowe to Enjoy 

I have often said that when attending a Handel opera, even for the first time, as was the case when I heard Partenope on Wednesday, October 15, one comes out of the theater feeling one has heard the opera three times. This is because Handel followed the da capo pattern of his era, structuring each and every aria in an ABA pattern in which the aria is first sung all the way through, then developed with variation, and finally repeated “from the beginning” with or without further vocal embellishment. When listening to Handel, this ABA pattern can be extremely tedious. 

Handel’s Partenope, first produced in 1730 in London, at more or less a mid-point in Handel’s career as an opera composer, is a case in point. Especially, since even the impresario, Owen Swiney, who first introduced Partenope to the operatic stage in London in 1730, admitted that this opera “put me in a sweat… for it is the very worst book … that I ever read in my whole life.” Indeed, the anonymous libretto for Partenope, based on texts meant to serve previous operas, is more than a bit contrived and frivolous.  

Partenope has never before been seen here. In fact, this opera is rarely seen anywhere. Perhaps there’s a reason. However, Director Christopher Alden, who oversaw this staging, had created in 2008 an award-winning production of Partenope for English National Opera. Further, Alden had ties with San Francisco Opera, having previously directed productions, among others here, of Hans Werner Henze’s Das Verratene Meer (1991) and Stuart Wallace’s musically sophomoric (but locally celebrated) Harvey Milk (1996). So San Francisco Opera’s General Manager David Gockley chose, for better or worse—and ’m of two minds on this question—to bring to San Francisco Alden’s staging of Handel’s Partenope in this Fall’s season at the War Memorial Opera House.  

In his staging, Alden tried his best to make Partenope both interesting and relevant to our contemporary audiences. Handel set the plot in the Kingdom of Naples, where Partenope reigns as Queen. Director Alden set the opera in the Paris of the 1920s, in an era of artistic ferment enlivened by revolutionary movements in art and politics such as Dadaism and Surrealism. Alden makes Partenope a socialite hostess of a literary and artistic Parisian salon, where creative types gather around her and seek amorous favor from their “Queen Bee.” While Alden succeeded in some respects, he clearly overreached in others, alternately drawing laughs and trying our patience in an already long evening of listening to Handel’s musical repeats. (To their credit, San Francisco Opera made many musical cuts, shortening Partenope from a running time of over four hours to three hours and twenty minutes. However, even this shorter version seemed tedious and far too long, made only somewhat bearable by a number of sight gags thrown in by Director Alden to alleviate the tedium.) 

On paper, the cast seemed well-chosen. Internationally acclaimed soprano Danielle de Niese as Partenope and countertenor David Daniels as Arsace are both noted Handel interpreters. Mezzo-soprano Daniela Mack seemed—and was—an excellent choice for the role of Rosmira, who dresses as a man (Eurimene) to win back—and/or take vengeance—on Arsace, who has betrayed her before the opera begins. Countertenor Anthony Roth Costanzo was selected for the role of Armindo, who moons in vain (until the ending) after Partenope. However, none of these noted singers managed to project anything whatsoever of the Italian text, and several of them, most notably Anthony Roth Costanzo, couldn’t consistently project their voices adequately in the War Memorial auditorium. In this respect, only tenor Alek Shrader, who sang the role of Emilio, exhibited both the vocal power and diction to make the Italian text clearly heard whenever he sang. 

Countertenor David Daniels as Arsace had ample opportunity in this opera to sing melancholy laments and longing expressions of forlorn love. Danielle de Niese as Partenope had a variety of different moods to express in her many arias, all of them beautifully sung, with a few lapses in the high notes, but totally absent of clear diction in Italian. Daniela Mack sang beautifully, expressing a variety of moods; but she too failed to make the Italian text clearly heard. Counter-tenor Anthony Roth Costanzo had a pleasant voice but was simply not strong enough to make much of a vocal impression.  

As the opera gets under way, all the male characters (and one female disguised as a male) seek to court Partenope. For her part, Partenope initially declares Arsace her favorite. Arsace, however, finds a young man named Eurimene dis-turbingly similar in looks to a woman, Rosmira, he has very recently jilted. This ‘Eurimene’, it soon turns out, is Rosmira disguised as a man; and when Arsace dis-covers this fact he is both remorseful and sworn to secrecy by Rosmira/Eurimene. Armindo and Emilio also declare themselves infatuated with Partenope, who seems to have them all wrapped around her little finger. 

In Act I, Director Alden stages much extraneous hi-jinks, such as having Armindo crawl rather than walk up a flight of stairs, then hang by his fingertips from the stairs while continuing to sing, then falling down a whole flight of stairs. Mean-while, Partenope and the other guests playing cards at her salon inexplicably don gas masks—a totally random bit of stagecraft unless one checks out the photograph in the opera program by Lee Miller, Man Ray’s lover, of a man wearing a gas mask from World War I. At this point, Alden’s staging seems all too arch and strained. 

In Act II, the staging becomes even more arch and strained. The action, if one can call it that, is simply a battle by the men for Partenope’s affections. The set includes a bathroom where, first, Partenope, retires, closing the door behind her. Soon we hear a toilet flush. Meanwhile, Emilio, who doubles as the photographer Man Ray, projects on a wall an abstract bit of film (actual footage by Man Ray). While singing, he then uses the projector’s light to throw hand shadows on the same wall. When Partenope exits the bathroom, Armindo replaces her and is locked inside by Emilio, who wants Partenope for himself. Armindo opens the transom and sticks his head out, singing his indignation. Finally, Armindo kicks the door open, but now Arsace is locked in the bathroom; and when the door is finally opened by Partenope, Arsace, seated fully clothed on the toilet, has covered himself with toilet paper. In short, we have descended to toilet jokes. Of course, what can a stage director do to counter the static quality of Handel’s da capo repeats? Christopher Alden has undoubtedly gone overboard; but something— if not toilet jokes—was needed to alleviate the musical tedium. How much coloratura roulades can one take? I am sympathetic to Alden’s problems, if not to his solutions. 

Act III brings about a resolution, of sorts, to the amorous goings on. There is a lovely trio involving Partenope, Rosmira, and Arsace, in which each protagonist expresses different and conflicting emotions. Eventually, realizing how steadfast Rosmira has been in seeking to win back Arace, Partenope renounces her infatuation with Arsace and quickly turns to Armindo, taking on a new lover as easily as she sheds the previous one. These characters are hardly believable! And we care not a whit about any of their amorous ambitions, with the exception of Rosmira and her deeply felt but conflicted feelings for Arsace who betrayed her. 

Finally, a word must be said about the conducting. Due to an illness, the scheduled conductor, Baroque specialist Christian Curnyn, had to be replaced at fairly short notice. Into the breach stepped Julian Wachner, music director of Trinity Wall Street in New York. Wachner has a conducting style that is all too flamboyant for my taste. In the overture to Partenope, Wachner swayed back and forth, flapped his arms, waved his hands, jabbed and pointed, jumped up and down, and lunged hither and yon. He continued in these exertions throughout the opera. While I cannot fault Wachner’s choice of tempos, except in an early aria by David Daniels, which I thought the conductor took too slow, I found myself irritated and distracted by Wachner’s antics. This was Wachner’s San Francisco Opera debut. I hope he will not be invited back.

The Hausmann Quartet, artists-in-residence since 2004 at San Diego State University, will play Four Diversions for String Quartet (1930) by Louis Gruenberg (composer of the opera of 'The Emperor Jones'), Credo (2007) by Kevin Puts (2012 Pulitzer Prizewinner for Music) and Robert Schumann's String Quartet, Opus 41, no. 2 at 8 p. m. Tuesday, October 21 in the Ballroom at the Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Avenue (near Dana). The Hausmann Quartet is comprised of Isaac Allen and Guillaume Pirard, violins; Angela Choong, viola and Alex Greenbaum, cello. A complimentary wine and cheese reception to meet the artists will follow the concert. $25. High school students, free; post-high school students, $12.50. 525-5211. berkeleychamberperform.org

--Inspired by Little Red Riding Hood to follow its main character "from girlhood to wolf hood," movement theater specialists Ragged Wing Ensemble's new play--and their first full-length production in their new performance space, The Flight Deck, 1540 Broadway in downtown Oakland between the 12th and 19th Street BART stations--was co-written by Ragged Wing co-founder and artistic director Amy Sass with noted playwright Anthony Clarvoe, opening this weekend. October 17-November 8, Fridays at 8, Saturdays at 2 and 8, Sundays at 7. $25-$40 (limited number of student/senior rush tickets available at the door a half amour before curtain). http://www.enetbrite.com/e/ragged-wing-ensemble-presents-redwolf-tickets-12968207257 

--Golden Thread Productions, which was the first theater company in the States dedicated to plays from and about the Middle East, is presenting 'Mahmoud,' a one-woman show that won Best of Fringe at the New York and Toronto festivals in 2012, co-written by Tara Grammy--who performs it--and Tom Arthur Davis, who directs, the story of three immigrants in Toronto, "an aging Iranian engineer-cum-taxi driver [who hasn't seen Iran for over 25 years], a fabulously gay Spaniard and a young Iranian-Canadian girl [who flies to Tehran frequently]," as Julio Martinez of Arts in La describes it, all trying to get through the grind of a big metropolitan city. 

Thursdays through Saturdays at 8, Sundays at 3, October 16-26, at the Thick House, 1695-18th Street near Connecticut Street, on Potrero Hill, San Francisco. $25; Student-Senior-TBA: $20 (-or $35 two-play pass, if combined with Golden Thread's presentation of 'Dear Armen' by Kamee Abrahamian and lee williams boudakian, on stage at the Thick House Thursdays through Saturdays at 8, Sundays at 3, October 30-November 9.) golden thread.org

Veteran pianist Garrick Ohlsson joined with the San Francisco Symphony under guest conductor Juraj Valčuha in three performances, October 10-12, of Sergei Rachmaninov’s Third Piano Concerto. Ohlsson, a longtime favorite of local audiences, played brilliantly, handling with apparent ease all the technical difficulties of this most challenging of all piano concertos. Ohlsson’s viruosity was everywhere apparent, in the stirring melody of the first theme as well as in the thunderous passages of the first movement’s cadenza. 

I must say, however, that my appreciation of Rachmaninov as a composer of piano concertos has come slowly and with some reservation. Rachmaninov, who was himself a great concert pianist, wrote gorgeous melodies, as for example the melody of the first theme in his Third Piano Concerto. But somehow Rachmaninov never, or rarely, integrated the orchestra effectively as anything like an equal partner, as, say, both Mozart and Beethoven did in their piano concertos by trading back and forth between piano and orchestra the introduction, variation and development of musical themes.  

Consider, for example, the beautiful melody which opens Rachmaninov’s Third Piano Concerto. Of this melody, the composer wrote, “ If I had any plan in composing this theme, I was thinking only of sound. I wanted to ‘sing‘ the melody on the piano, as a singer would sing it – and to find suitable orchestral accompaniment, or rather one that would not muffle this singing.“ Here, in a nutshell, is the source of my reservations regarding Rachmaninov. He generally thinks of the orchestra as a mere accompaniment to the piano, one, moreover, he seeks to limit lest it intrude unduly on the pianistic themes which are always the driving force of his piano concertos. 

Even on the few occasions when Rachmaninov allows a new theme to be intro-duced by the orchestra, as in the first movement’s second theme in the Third Piano Concerto, the orchestral introduction is cursory, “a mere twitch in a few wind in-struments,“ as Michael Steinberg wrote in program notes for this performance. Granted, when the second theme appears fully, there is a perfunctory dialogue between piano and orchestra, who very briefly trade portions of this theme. However, the piano quickly takes over and develops the theme in a long lyric melody with little or no orchestral accompaniment. Once again, all the heavy lifting is given over to the piano, with minimal contribution from the orchestra. For his part, Garrick Ohlsson shone in this development of the second theme, building it slowly but surely to a thundering climax, before the opening theme reasserted itself, this time very tenderly. 

Likewise, this concerto’s second movement, dubbed “Intermezzo,“ begins by totally separating the orchestra and the piano. A lengthy orchestral interlude opens the second movement with a melody introduced by woodwinds then taken up by strings. Even when the piano eventually makes its entrance, it is not to develop the orchestral theme but to disrupt it, wrenching the music away to new and distant harmonic ground. This theme is then developed by the piano in a series of solo variations with minimal accompaniment. When a second melodic theme is introduced, it is first heard in clarinet and bassoon over a waltz rhythm in the piano. Once again, this theme too is taken over by the piano in a dazzling set of variations, which leads almost without pause to the concerto’s “Finale.“ 

Using a “cyclical“ approach akin to that of César Franck, Rachmaninov gives a certain unity to this vast, expansive concerto by integrating elements of the first move- ment’s second theme into the ”Finale,” first in packed chords on the piano, then in an impassioned melody developed at length on piano. In addition, there is even a sug-gestive variation on the first theme that initially set this concerto in motion. A final re-capitulation, brilliantly played by Garrick Ohlsson, brings this challenging concerto to a close. Ultimately, in spite of my reservations about Rachmaninov’s unbalanced treat-ment of the relationship between piano and orchestra, this steely performance by Garrick Ohlsson, utterly devoid of Romantic indulgence, and led energetically by Slovakian conductor Juraj Valčuha, gave as impressive a reading of this difficult piano concerto as one could ever hope to hear. 

The first half of the program was given over to a short 4-minute piece by Steven Stucky, “Jeu de Timbres,“ and the complete score of Béla Bartók’s “The Miraculous Mandarin.“ Stucky’s piece jammed a vast variety of orchestral colors into too small a musical space to do anything noteworthy. As for Bartók’s “The Miraculous Mandarin,” originally written as a one-act ballet based on an Expressionist play by Melchior Lengyel, this lurid piece simply made its points over and over to exhaustion. It began with an orchestral sound-picture of dehumanizing city-life, what Bartók called “an awful clamor, clatter, stampeding and blowing of horns.” Then the music took us into a den of thugs and thieves, who employ a pretty girl to allure men into their basement room where they rough them up and rob them. Bartók’s music emphasizes the sensuous siren-call of the girl’s singing and dancing; but it also wallows in the musically dissonant brutality of the thugs. Eventually, a Chinese man – the Mandarin of the title -- is lured by the girl, beaten, tortured and robbed by the thugs but miraculously survives to consummate his passion for the girl, and only then mysteriously dies. Throughout, the score is un-relentingly dissonant. In spite of Juraj Valčuha’s energetic conducting, Bartók’s “The Miraculous Mandarin” seemed to go on far too long, and could easily be shortened by a third to make its lurid and violent subject matter, as well as its cacophonous musical score, at least digestible, if hardly appetizing. 

Incidentally, on the Saturday night concert I heard, Garrick Ohlsson played as encore Claude Debussy’s “Clair de lune.” Ohlsson’s delicate treatment of this atmos-pheric lunar meditation was a bracing contrast to the solar heat of the Rachmaninov Third Piano Concerto; and I left Davies Hall humming “Clair de lune” all the way home.