Public Comment

Mayor and Councilmembers:

I cannot be at the emergency meeting you have scheduled for 3 PM tomorrow, but I want to register my strong opposition to the proposed ordinance regarding unpermitted street events.

We have seen in this country the disastrous consequences of rushing to pass laws in response to perceived dangers without taking time to consider whether those laws are necessary and their possible unintended consequences. It’s really unfortunate to see the Berkeley City Council about to fall into that trap.

Is the proposed ordinance necessary?

If White Supremacists come to Berkeley and stage an unpermitted event in a park and if that event spills over into the street, they will be breaking multiple laws (I’m sure the city attorney would have no trouble developing a very long list.) If they break existing laws and are unruly and disruptive the Berkeley Police can use the authority of Penal Code section 726 to declare the event and unlawful assembly. This is what that section says:

Where any number of persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully or riotously assembled, the sheriff of the county and his or her deputies, the officials governing the town or city, or any of them, must go among the persons assembled, or as near to them as possible, and command them, in the name of the people of the state, immediately to disperse.

If the event continues and the participants do not disperse Penal Code section 727 states that “officers must arrest them.” Everyone who participates in an unlawful assembly is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal Code section 408.)

Penal Code section 727 is a powerful tool. Police in the Bay Area have had plenty of experience using it. The proposed new ordinance is unnecessary.

The proposed ordinance is flawed, and will have unfortunate consequences.

One of the ways in which Berkeley progressive politics expresses itself is spontaneous street demonstrations against war and injustice at home and abroad. These demonstrations fulfill the need people feel for an immediate response to terrible and tragic events. They are a way for the community to come together in grief and outrage.

They are a vivid way to protest. They can be healing and inspiring.

It would be truly unfortunate if Berkeley, in response to threat of white supremacists in our midst, passed an ordinance that would give the City Manager authority to shut down this form of political expression. The ordinance grants her broad and unspecified powers to “issue such regulations [unspecified] and take such other actions [unspecified] as “are necessary to preserve public health, public safety and property.” There is nothing in the ordinance to constrain her discretion in deciding what is “necessary.” She can prohibit scertain items [unspecified. Signs? Effigies?] and activities [unspecified. Singing? Chanting?], simply because she thinks it “necessary.” She can restrict “activities” and “items” to certain times and/or locations, because it is “necessary,” regardless of whether the “time, place, and manner” restrictions she imposes comport with the First Amendment.

When we pass legislation in a rush we don’t have time to think. The ordinance goes into the books and we have to live with it.

This ordinance is unnecessary, ill-conceived, and flawed. I urge you to reject it.