Page One

Wise Council vote on Derby playing fields 

At its May 23rd meeting, the Berkeley City Council, by a six-to-two vote, reaffirmed the city’s commitment to long-standing Berkeley values. 

With little need for debate, Councilmembers Shirek, Woolley, Maio, Spring, Breland, and Worthington said no to the Berkeley Unified School District’s bid to reexamine closing the 1900 block of Derby Street in order to build a $2,000,000 plus sports facility. One by one, with clear and concise statements, they assured Berkeley citizens that their rights will be upheld, and valued institutions will not be threatened. 

Two plans for playing fields at Berkeley High School’s East Campus have already been studied in the existing Environmental Impact Review (EIR). One plan offers a regulation soccer/softball field combination and leaves the 1900 block of Derby Street open. The second option recommends closing the street to build a regulation-sized hardball field. The closed street option would cost an additional million dollars to construct. On May 23rd, the school district asked the Berkeley City Council to consider a third sports facility plan that would also permanently close Derby Street. 

In addition to costing more money than the open street variant, both closed street plans have risks attached. The quality and/or survival of the popular Tuesday Farmers’ Market, the integrity of the intended Milvia Street Bicycle Boulevard as a “safe route to school,” and the potential to expand the East Campus gardening program would all be jeopardized. 

The council’s vote encourages pursuing the less expensive alternative field plan which keeps Derby Street open. It indicates support for building a softball and superior soccer field configuration that will not threaten the above mentioned programs valued by most Berkeley residents. The major demand for field use by Berkeley youth sports teams is for soccer and softball. By promoting the open-street variant, the council commits to serving the majority of youth. 

Please acknowledge these six council members. Their fiscally responsible votes are also responsive to community values. I encourage all Berkeley citizens to thank them. 

Pamela Webster 

Berkeley 

Unwise Council vote on Derby playing fields 

For voting against the Derby Street Field, Councilmembers Shirek, Maio, Spring, Woolley, Worthington and Breland are a fine example of partisan, weak-minded politics bowing to a small constituency with short-sighted vision – a disgrace to our community. The council’s constituency includes families whose children have been left out in the cold. It’s a slap in the face to this generation of baby boomers as large or larger than the post-war baby boomers, as the “Six” voted for the status quo, with little regard for Berkeley’s families who work hard, pay their taxes (paying more taxes for education than any other Bay Area city), and want only for this community of children to enjoy their short young childhood. Childhood passes quickly, and clearly, the “Six” have forgotten theirs. 

There’s a direct relationship between the “Six” actions and the chaos and dysfunction at Berkeley High – a school trying to educate a diverse student population. Over the years teachers, educators and parents have put together programs celebrating all cultures and to educate the high-end learners and those who struggle academically, as well as provide sports programs (32 teams) to promote healthy minds and bodies. In spite of its efforts, this school has failed to bring educational equality across the board, not for want of trying but for lack of the full support of its community, where hidden agendas in its politics exist, most of which subvert common sense on a regular basis. I firmly believe we need six new councilmembers. 

Jahlee Arakaki 

Berkeley 

Wise Council vote on Derby fields, Pt. 2 

Thank you to the City Council members who had the courage and wisdom to reject another narrow vision for the East Campus site as proposed by Stephanie Allan and Bill Savidge. Although this project has been touted as community-oriented and for the “kids,” those of us who are able to look beneath the surface, realize it to be anything but. 

As a father of two students currently attending Berkeley public schools (including Berkeley High School), and as someone who works closely with children in our community, on many levels, my experience has taught me that our children have a variety of needs which are not being addressed; hard-ball fields should certainly not be a priority. We should remember that a majority of male, minority students drop out of Berkeley High School long before they graduate. The music and art programs available in our schools are poorly funded; they are always the first to take the cuts when the school district tightens it’s belt. The $150,000 spent so far, simply studying the various options for East Campus, could have been much better spent to address these shortcomings, rather than to focus on a small minority of BHS students who play hardball. In this light, it seems unreasonable for Ms. Allan to continue to insist that these fields must be built here... now. I am not insisting, mind you, that East Campus be the future site of a music/arts complex. 

I would also like to address the use of the word “community” and how it relates to the events surrounding these proposals for East Campus projects. Those of us who live in the area surrounding East Campus have sat back and watched as several groups of sports-enthusiasts (including this latest group) met, behind closed doors, to plan these playing fields. We have been left out of the planning process for a good reason; it is clear that a large majority of people living here oppose closing Derby Street for a myriad of reasons (which I will not address here). We had to learn of these plans through gossip and by reading newspaper editorials. Community, however, is an inclusive term. It includes all groups, especially neighborhood groups and communities already established here. It was not until two weeks before the City Council vote, after the plans had already been drawn, was I contacted by Ms. Allan, who expressed, in the last paragraph, interest in “working” with us. Days later, in an editorial in these pages, and at the City Council meeting, neighborhood input was hilariously characterized as a few neighbors “standing in the way.” This terminology is typical of the us vs. them mentality that has fueled this debate from the start. These tactics have not only effectively divided our community, but revealed the winner-take-all game plan which was rightly rejected by so many. 

Michael Bauce 

Berkeley 

Unwise Council vote on Derby fields, Pt. 2 

The Berkeley City Council’s vote to not consider a compromise that would accommodate a both a baseball diamond and the farmers’ market now makes it clear that the issue is closing Derby St. and the issue of the farmers’ market was a red herring. The arguments used in opposition to the baseball diamond, such as Ms. Woolley’s, “Berkeley is a small place, so if you want to have lots of play fields move to the suburbs.” or Ms. Maio’s canard about fences, which would be needed for a softball field in any case, were rank nonsense. 

Recently the Ecology Center has introduced a ‘green herring’ into the debate – that the whole space be devoted to gardens. Thinking that organized sports are going to go away is like thinking that plastic bottles would go away if we didn’t recycle them – wishful. The school district is going to build sports fields on the property and closing Derby St. certainly won’t decrease the space available for gardens. 

Your reporter assumed that those present at the council meeting to oppose closing Derby St. represent neighborhood sentiment. At meetings in the neighborhood there has been strikingly minimal neighborhood resistance and as much support. The real source of resistance is individuals from the Ecology Center who live nearby the project site and are orchestrating the opposition. The council’s (expect Olds & Dean’s) votes were based on political expediency, not the furtherance informed and reasonable public policy. 

Mark Petrofsky 

Berkeley 

Here’s a project for kids that you can agree on 

Well, the time is here at last. Berkeley is about to get a creative play space for our kids that is like no other. With fanciful wooden towers to inspire the imagination and physically challenging features to entertain even the most energetic, it will be an instant attraction the moment the ribbon is cut Sunday evening. 

But this “Dream Land for Kids” needs your help right now – because it’s all being done by volunteers! 

Construction for this innovative playground began Wednesday morning and continued throughout the day until dark. We’ll be back every day through the weekend. Lunch and dinner are served and child care is provided onsite for workers. 

The setting is magnificent. Surrounded by mature trees, the structure commands a view of the nearby meadows and lagoon. With its environmental theme, it is a fitting addition to Berkeley’s original shoreline with the bay. Just go to the foot of Bancroft Way in Aquatic Park and head one block south. 

I went on Friday of phase one and found it so rewarding and fun that I went back the next day as well. If I hadn’t had to go to my cousin’s wedding on Sunday, I’m sure I would have been there again! 

So even if you can spare only half an hour, make sure you come chip in some time. I guarantee it’s an experience you’ll remember for a very long time to come. 

And those kids will thank you, too! 

Jodi Laures 

Berkeley