Cody’s Books, which closed down forever on June 20 and is currently in the process of liquidating all its assets, will not provide any books or refunds to customers with store credit, according to company officials. 

Books and furniture belonging to Cody’s will be sold this week to pay off a Uniform Commercial Code lien to Summit Bank. 

Mindy Galoob, the store’s former general manager, told the Planet that the bank will be conducting the lien-foreclosure sale of its collateral today (Thursday), and the store premises will be returned to the landlord later in the week. 

Cody’s landlord, San Francisco-based Townsend I LLC and Townsend II LLC, put up a three-day notice to pay rent or quit outside the Shattuck Avenue bookstore on July 25, which claimed that the store owed $6,877.88 (for June 1 to July 31) in rent.  

Robert Kidd, the attorney representing the corporation’s current owner, IBC Publishing, told the Planet Wednesday that the bookstore was not declaring bankruptcy and would not be repaying its creditors, which included a number of schools, libraries and public agencies. 

Following the story, several readers called the Planet inquiring whether they could exchange store credit for books. 

“Cody’s Books regrets to advise you that the collapse of its business will make it impossible to honor any of its gift certificates or gift cards,” the statement said. “While Cody’s is currently in the process of liquidating its assets, it anticipates that all of the resulting proceeds will be turned over to its secured creditors, and that none of these proceeds will be available to make refunds to you or other holders of gift certificates/gift cards.” 

Cody’s, which closed its flagship store on Telegraph Avenue and branches in Fourth Street and San Francisco in recent years, moved to Shattuck Avenue in April after the rent for its Fourth Street location almost tripled. It closed down two months later due to dwindling sales. 

The business of building is still booming, at least for the moment, in the heart of downtown Berkeley. 

Four major projects are currently underway downtown, and several others are on the drawing boards. 

One of them, the nine-story, 145-unit condo mid-rise named the Berkeley Arpeggio, is precisely the kind of building a city-funded economic feasability study said can’t happen under current market conditions and building codes. 

It also includes one considerable public amenity in the form of 10,000 square feet of rehearsal and performance space to be operated under the aegis of the Berkeley Repertory Theater. 

The long-delayed structure once known as the Seagate building will provide both market rate and lower-priced condo units, the latter considered another improbability in today’s economy. 

Questioned during Wednesday night’s Planning Commission meeting, Matt Taecker—the staffer hired by the city to ramrod the new downtown plan—said that the Arpeggio only works because the property had been assembled long before. 

But Jim Novosel, an architect and planning commissioner who also questioned the study, said other buildings now rising in the Bay Area also challenge the study’s assumptions. 

Oxford Plaza, Brower 

Taecker has said that one project now underway in Berkeley, the six-story, 97-unit Oxford Plaza affordable housing complex along Fulton Street, near the corner of Kittredge Street, works because it’s a subsidized project built by a non-profit. 

The building’s apartments are for low-income tenants, including units of up to three bedrooms for larger families—very difficult to find for those who earn as little as 20 percent of the area’s median income. 

Dan Sawislak, executive director of project developer Resources for Community Development (RCD), said the structure is about half complete, with marketing of the units to begin on Aug. 18, with an Oct. 1 deadline for submitting applications. Tenants who have meet the necessary qualifications will be selected by lottery, and will be able to move when the building opens in February, Sawislak said. 

The RCD executive said his non-profit company is also seeking commercial tenants to occupy ground floor spaces in the building. 

The underground parking garage, which covers the site once occupied by the city’s Oxford parking lot, has already been completed and hasn’t experienced any water leaks, he said. 

The garage is also under the David Brower Center, a “green” building going up adjacent to Oxford Plaza. 

That 50,000-square-foot building will house a gallery and restaurant on the ground floor, as well as an auditorium and theater, with office space for non-profits on the floors above. For more, see www.browercenter.org/node/19 

While the grand opening is slated for next May, tenants will begin moving in during March, said Amy Tobin, the center’s executive director. The building’s only commercial tenant will be Back to Earth, a seven-year-old business that will provide dine-in and take-out locally produced organic food as well as catering. 

Earth Island Institute, the last organization founded by the building’s namesake, will be one of the tenants, along with International Rivers (formerly, International Rivers Network) and the Center for Ecoliteracy. 

The Brower Center is also negotiating a lease with the Union of Concerned Scientists. 

The building is on track to qualify for a Platinum rating—the highest available—from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, Tobin said. 

Another major new downtown construction is the new home for Freight & Salvage, which is giving a multi-million dollar renovation and rebuild to its new quarters at 2020 Addison St. Housed in the shell of a 70-year-old historic building, the new 18,000-square-foot venue will have a 440-seat performance space, and an additional venue with seating for up to 70 as well as a restaurant and six classrooms. 

For more information, see www.thefreight.org/newhome.html. 

Height issue 

The city’s economic consultants, Dena Belzer of Berkeley’s Strategic Economics group and Hixson & Associates, an Oakland development consulting firm, contend that current cost factors block any non-subsidized construction between 85 feet and 180 feet high. 

Key is the cost of the building core, which includes elevators, as well as additional costs imposed by fire and building codes imposed for safety reasons on buildings in that range. 

The consultants contend that projects cited by commissioners that are being built at intermediate heights are viable only because of subsidies. 

Planning commissioner Gene Poschman called the report an “infeasibility study,” and two of his fellow planning commissioners said projects already underway in Berkeley refute its basic assumptions. 

But city staff and proponents of downtown high-rises cite the study’s conclusions to justify a call for 180-foot “point towers” downtown. 

Meanwhile, the Arpeggio building is rising in the city center, proof, Commissioner Jim Novosel said, that refutes the central contention of the controversial study. 

One building that would rise well above the consultants’ designated viability height would be the Berkeley Charles Hotel, Conference Center & Residences—a 205-foot-high complex that would rise at the northeast corner of Shattuck Avenue and Center Street. 

While the building wouldn’t be owned by UC Berkeley, it was the university which has pushed for the project, contending it needs a first class hotel in the city to accommodate visitors to conference and campus events. 

After a lengthy negotiation process, the university selected as their developer Carpenter & Co. of Cambridge, Mass. The 110-year old firm develops and operates hotels, retail and mixed use projects and owns a golf club on Martha’s Vineyard. 

While the university had stressed the need for hotel rooms and meeting space, all of the uppermost floors would be devoted to condos. 

The project’s status remains in question, with the latest entry on its web site a November 2006 presentation to the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC). 

Calls to the Massachusetts developer weren’t returned, and Jennifer McDougall, the university’s planner handling downtown issues, referred a reporter to Berkeley publicist Caleb Dardick, who is representing the developer. He hadn’t called back by deadline. 

But Dan Marks, Berkeley’s Planning and Development Director, said the project is still alive, though complicated by the economic downturn, as well as other factors.  

“Clearly, there is a horrendous set of economic issues,” he said. “They’re still pursuing it on a lot of different levels.” 

Among the complications are the difficulties inherent in negotiating a complex land deal that involves two property owners—the university and Bank of America—as well as the city. 

“Changes in the condo market have also clearly affected the project,” Marks said. “But I am still fairly confident the project is going to move forward.” 

Other projects 

The would-be project’s next door neighbor to the east would be another university project, the proposed new Berkeley Art Museum/Pacific Film Archive structure designed by Toyo Ito, a Japanese architect renowned for his highly individualistic creations, each a unique creation. The university has already issued a call for contractors for the project. 

Another high-rise is also in the preliminary planning stages at the Shattuck Hotel, where a major internal remake could be paving the way for another high-rise suite and condo tower—a project given a thumbs up by DAPAC in their proposed limits on new downtown construction heights. 

Trader Joe’s strikes oil  

Yet another building is underway at the downtown periphery—the controversial “Trader Joe’s building” at the northwest corner of the University Avenue/Martin Luther King Jr. Way intersection. 

Construction was halted for about 10 days but resumed at the end of last week after the discovery of three underground oil tanks and areas of contaminated soil delayed construction at site where the five-story apartment complex is slated to rise with the grocery outlet as its commercial anchor. 

Meridith Lear, the city’s hazardous waste manager while Nabil Al Hadithy is on vacation, said the city and the developer were aware of the possibility of both the tanks and the soil. 

“We knew there was a likelihood they would find something,” she said, given the site’s past history as the home of a gas station. 

Surface contamination had been cleaned up years earlier under state oversight. With the most recent discoveries, Lear said, “We made sure the tanks were properly removed and that the soil was properly disposed of.” 

City Manager Phil Kamlarz talks about belt-tightening and eliminating vacant positions in these hard budget times. Still, city workers-many of them, at least-won't be dining on bread and water, according to reports received by the Daily Planet. 

The Planet has been informed by several people, who won't permit their names to be revealed since the contract is not yet public, that the contract ratified by the Service Employees International Union gives the 950 workers a 5 percent salary hike the first year of a four-year contract, a 2 percent increase the second year, a 2.5 percent increase the third year, and two different 2 percent increases the fourth year. Moreover, there's a bonus 3 percent the second year for employees who have worked for the city for 25 years or more.  

Deputy City Manager Christine Daniel refused to comment on the SEIU contract, other than to say that the city has the revenue to pay for the raises. 

The contract won't go into effect until it's approved by the City Council when councilmembers come back from their two-month summer break in September.  

While managers are not part of SEIU and are still at the bargaining table, they typically get the same raises as SEIU workers. Under these terms, City Manager Phil Kamlarz, who now earns $207,564 per year, would end up in four years with a salary of almost $250,000.) 

Barbara Gilbert, a resident who scrutinizes the budget and is often critical of expenditures, told the Planet she was surprised at the 14 percent police and fire raises approved earlier in the year and now was surprised to hear about similar pay hikes for other staff.  

“In general, I'm kind of stunned at the fire and police contracts,” Gilbert said, underscoring the decline of city sales tax and transfer tax. 

“There's nothing left for the infrastructure,” she said, accusing Berkeley of being a “two-bit” city trying to act like San Francisco. 

Several of those who spoke anonymously to the Planet criticized the way pay raises are made.  

Needed employees are being cut back, said one critic, pointing in particular to a fee-generating housing inspector slot which is one of about eight vacant positions which would be eliminated.  

Another believes that it is unfair to give the same rate of salary increase to people earning vastly different salaries. A health analyst earning more than $80,000 annually would get 5 percent more in September, as would a library aide earning $33,000, if the council approves the contract. 

One commentator suggested giving increases of the same dollar amount to all employees, eliminating the large differential between well paid and more poorly paid workers. 

“It's really disgusting that the people at the top are getting so much more,” said another. 

Berkeley has long had a law mandating skateboarders to helmets and other protective gear, but it has been ignored, largely due to enforcement limitations. 

But the city’s Parks and Recreation Department is stepping up efforts to provide effective enforcement to change that. 

At a meeting last week, Scott Ferris, manager of the city’s recreation division, presented the Parks and Recreation Commission with a report outlining costs for additional staff who would enforce helmets at the 18,000 square foot Berkeley Skate Park on Fifth and Harrison streets. 

The city, Ferris said, adopted state law which requires all skatepark users to wear a helmet, elbow pads and kneepads, before it opened the Berkeley Skate Park in 2003. If they don't, they can be cited. 

The law also requires the city to post signs informing people about wearing helmets,. 

“When some commissioners toured the Berkeley Skate Park on June 28 they were concerned that most skateboarders were not wearing helmets or other safety equipment,” Ferris told the Planet. “Questions were raised about liability for the city and about the safety of park users. The report gives an idea about how much it would cost to bring in more staff to enforce [wearing] helmets.” 

The city spends $69,000 on monitoring the park two to four hours every day and to run skateboard camps, lessons, contests and movie nights. 

Additional staffing could cost the city anything between $209,917 and $247,555, Ferris said. The park is open every day 7 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. 

“The majority of the users don’t wear helmets,” Ferris said. “Some of the younger kids do. The Berkeley Skate Park is the busiest skate park in the East Bay. It’s not uncommon for the park to have over 200 skaters per day and have 40 or more skaters in the park at any given time.” 

Ferris said park staff recommend but don’t require participants to wear protective gear. 

“Right now we don’t do anything if park users don’t listen to us,” he said. 

Lisa Caronna, deputy city manager and former parks and recreation director, said that although she was not aware of any serious injuries at the park, it was “clearly in the best interest of the city to enforce the rules.” 

“I have heard of one kid fracturing his forearm when I was director,” she said. “Clearly the rules say you have to wear helmets and we expect people to wear them.” 

When the park first opened, safety concerns led the city to fund part-time staff who monitored the park 18 to 20 hours every week to enforce state law, informing the police in case of illegal activities and calling the authorities when someone was injured, the report from Ferris stated. 

“Police often ticketed skaters who did not comply with the state law, but this resulted in numerous complaints from participants and parents and resulted in hostile conflicts between the police, city staff and skate park users,” Ferris said. 

A recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission to the City Council to stop enforcing the law followed in October 2005, but no action was taken. 

Complaints from parents and park users forced the Berkeley police to stop issuing tickets to skateboarders for not wearing safety gear, the report said, and the absence of police backup and sporadic staffing made it increasingly more difficult for park staff to enforce state law and remove BMX bikes . 

“Staff would try to remove skaters from the park who did not comply with the regulations,” Ferris said. “The results were mixed. Many skaters would simply wait outside the park and come back when the staff person’s two-hour-shift was over, or just ignore staff altogether.” 

Ferris said the Berkeley Skate Park turned into a “rogue park” over the next two years which was soon “plagued by drug use, BMX bikers and many older skate park attendees who often threatened or intimated younger skaters.” 

Parents and skaters started complaining to the Parks Recreation and Waterfront Department and the majority of the complaints centered around the BMX bikes in the park which often collided with skaters, the report said. 

Ferris said the Berkeley police department stepped up enforcement at the park over the last 16 months, assisting staff in removing bikers from the site. 

“We don’t have the money to police skateboarders,” Lisa Stephens, a parks and recreation commissioner told the Planet. “The amount of money we are putting into it is a quarter of what is required to staff it. It would be nice if skateboarders got together and enforced the helmet rule on their own. Right now with the lack of funds in the city we are in a tough spot.” 

Stephens said BMX bikes in the skate park were also a big problem. 

“The skate park is not designed for them.” she said. “Having skate boarders and bikes together is not a safe situation. It would take one serious injury to shut the place down.” 

Berkeley High graduates Dylan Carlone and Bantu Zuhir both said they did not wear helmets at the skate park. 

“It’s obvious that everybody is falling, but I don’t understand why people don’t see that and start wearing helmets,” Dylan, 18, said. “It’s more of a ‘cool’ thing’ I guess. Helmets are not cool. I remember when they started giving tickets people just sat down or stopped skateboarding. But now no one tells me to wear my helmet anymore, so I don’t.” 

Bantu, who has been using the skate park for the last four years, said enforcing helmets at the park made sense because of its many ramps and slopes. 

“I like how they have a sign saying, ‘Skate At Your Own Risk,’” he said. “I used to wear a helmet when I was younger. But a helmet is a big bulky thing that just gets in your way, so I don’t wear it anymore.” 

Nolo Press, which has operated out of a renovated clock factory in West Berkeley for the last 30 years, plans to move from its location at Ninth Street and might relocate from Berkeley altogether, company officials said Friday. 

The company has lost its lease and the building’s current owners—the Genn family—have put the property on the market, Bob Dubow, Nolo’s chief financial officer, told the Planet. 

Dubow added that Nolo had outgrown the 20,000-square-foot two-story brick building at 950 Parker St. and was looking for a bigger space. 

Nolo, which according to its website, is the nation’s oldest provider of legal information for consumers and small businesses, has been in Berkeley since 1971 and its staff has grown to more than 100 legal editors, software developers, customer service representatives, salespeople, web developers and others since then. 

“We might possibly leave Berkeley,” Dubow said. “We have been in this building for 30 years and in business in Berkeley for 37 years, but the building is being sold and we are in a kind of a strange situation. We are not in a lease right now and we are also pushing the boundaries for the building. The owner is selling the building and doesn’t want a long term lease in place.” 

Dubow, a graduate of UC Berkeley, also wrote for the student newspaper, The Daily Californian, a stint he said got him interested in the publishing business. 

He said Nolo had no idea of who the new owner might be or when the building would be sold. 

“The Genn family have been really great partners,” he said. “This is a great old building. We started out as a tiny bookstore in a 500 square foot space and have grown to 20,000 square foot.” 

Tom Genn, who developed the old warehouse building into offices, passed away two years ago. 

Nolo is looking at relocating to a suitable location between Oakland and Richmond. 

“At first we felt a little pressure to move but we found there was not much action on buying the property, so we are taking things at a leisurely pace,” Dubow said. “We have only seen a couple of buildings in Oakland and we haven’t seen one in Berkeley that made sense. We are looking for a facility that is big enough and affordable, and there doesn’t seem to be too many of those available in the city. We really like being in Berkeley and want to stay here but chances are less than half that we will be in Berkeley.” 

Headed by Ralph “Jake” Warner, Nolo specializes in books, forms and software on a wide range of legal issues, including wills, estate planning, retirement, elder care, personal finance, taxes, housing, real estate, divorce and child custody. 

According to historical information on Nolo’s website, Warner was a legal aid lawyer serving low-income families in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1970s. 

Frustration over a complicated legal system that was overly expensive for average working Americans led Warner and a few of his colleagues to writing do-it-yourself legal guides. 

Rejections by numerous publishers saw Warner and his colleagues publishing their own books, and the advent of personal computers also allowed the addition of software. 

When the Internet arrived, Nolo created a website that offered free information and resources to people. 

Nolo, Dubow said, had started toying with the idea of moving three years ago when it ran out of space in the old building and rented additional space in the warehouse next door. 

Although there is no timeline for moving, Dubow said the company would probably relocate in the early part of 2009. 

“Of course, we could be forced out, someone could buy it and give us a a 30-day notice, but we are in a good relationship with the current landlords and hopefully that won’t happen,” he said. 

Dubow added that the area around Ninth Street was undergoing a lot of development. 

The Fantasy Records building owned by Wareham Development on Tenth Street— right across from Nolo’s offices—has seen a lot of development in recent years, with one of the most recent being the construction of a child care center for Disney Pixar employees. 

The city’s zoning adjustments board also approved a use permit for Bayer Healthcare in June, giving the pharmaceutical giant the green light to move some of its administrative offices into 921 Parker, a space zoned specifically for industrial use.  

Further down the street, the new Berkeley Bowl is also under construction. 

“The area is quite hot right now,” he said. “Possibly that’s why the owner wants to sell it or maybe they were at that point in their life when they just decided to sell.” 

The owners of the property could not be reached for comment Friday. 

Oakland City Councilmember Desley Brooks has filed a defamation lawsuit against the San Francisco Chronicle and its East Bay columnist, Chip Johnson, over an item written about her by Johnson in a June 24 column. The lawsuit, filed in Superior Court in Oakland on Tuesday, alleges that the June 24 column item “began a campaign [by Chip Johnson] to smear and defame the reputation of Desley Brooks.” 

Brooks is being represented by Oakland attorney Wayne Johnson. 

In the June 24 column, Johnson gave a list of what he said were instances where recently ousted Oakland City Administrator Deborah Edgerly “intervened on behalf of a co-worker, friend or family member, police sources say.” In that list of instances, Johnson wrote that “two years ago, nothing was done when allegations of illegal kickbacks were raised against District Six City Councilwoman Desley Brooks, another of Edgerly’s allies, after police investigators linked bank deposits made by the mother of one of Brooks’ employees to several personal checks for $1,200 written to Brooks (exactly half the employee’s paycheck).” 

In an interview held this week after the lawsuit was filed, Brooks denied the allegation in the June 24 Chip Johnson column, but said she could make no other comment about the details of the lawsuit. “I’m in litigation mode.” 

Johnson was closed-mouthed as well. 

“Why would I comment on a lawsuit that’s ongoing?” Johnson said by telephone. “I couldn’t do that.”  

Neither the Chronicle nor Johnson has yet filed an answer with the court to the Brooks lawsuit. 

Meanwhile, while Brooks would not talk about the lawsuit details, she talked freely about reasons why she was bringing it. “I think it’s reprehensible that the Chronicle feels it can trash and tarnish people’s reputations without factual basis,” the councilmember said. “I will never get my name fully back, but there’s got to be greater accountability in the media. When I was coming up, good journalists reported the facts; they didn’t make them up. But now, reporters are more likely to make things up. They’re reporting subjectively, not objectively. And the people can’t distinguish between the two. They’re taking what goes in the paper as gospel.” 

The lawsuit asks for no stated dollar amount from the Chronicle and Johnson, only undefined “compensatory” and “exemplary” damages. 

Brooks said that following the publication of the June 24 column, she contacted Chronicle officials and asked them to retract the item, but said they refused. 

Johnson refused in his telephone interview to comment on the original column item. The way it was written, it's not clear exactly what the columnist intended to allege or insinuate about Brooks. Some confusing points: Who was the Brooks employee mentioned? Who was supposed to have written the “several personal checks” to Brooks? How were the checks “linked” to deposits to the employee's mother's bank account? And which “police investigators”—and from what agency—had done the linking? 

The Johnson column may have been intended to refer to allegations made against Brooks beginning in August 2005, when the Oakland Tribune said the Alameda County District Attorney’s office was investigating charges that Brooks had taken “kickbacks.”  

“Although District Attorney Tom Orloff declined to discuss the 

matter,” the Tribune reported in the 2005 story, “the sources confirmed his investigators are looking into whether Christen Tucker, Brooks’ former council aide and the daughter of her boyfriend, Frank Tucker, gave some of her pay to the council member.” The Tribune also reported that “[Christen] Tucker’s paychecks were deposited by the city into an account jointly held by her and her father, records show.” 

A review of local newspaper articles about the allegations in 2005 and 2006 did not reveal any mention of specific-amount personal checks made to Brooks, so that if the Chip Johnson June 24 2008 item referred to Tucker, it is not clear where the columnist got the information about checks. 

In addition, sources close to the Tucker family said that Tucker’s mother died several years before the alleged 2005 kickback activity was supposed to have taken place. 

In 2006, Oakland resident Harold Jackson filed a complaint against Brooks with the Oakland Public Ethics Commission in part over an allegation that Tucker had lived out of state part of the time she was supposed to have been working for Brooks. The Ethics Commission dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to conduct further investigation to determine whether the allegations had occurred, as well as that the matter was being investigated by the District Attorney’s office. 

Brooks repeatedly denied the original allegations made in 2005-06, and no charges ever resulted from the District Attorney office's investigation. 

Brooks said in this week’s interview that her biggest regret about the allegations was the effect it was having on Tucker.  

“I ran for office accepting the hits I might take in the public and the press,” Brooks said, “but staff members only come on board because they need a job, or want to help in the public sector. For the rest of her life, when someone ‘googles’ Christen Tucker on the internet, these allegations will be the first things that come up. There’s no way to clear her name, and she’ll never get free of that. And that’s not right.” 

Peace activists have taken a page from the book of Budweiser and—in addition to using the web and other modern means—are spreading their message by old fashioned billboard advertising.  

“Silence + torture = complicity,” says the billboard above Round Table Pizza on University Avenue near Milvia Street, its orange background evocative of the Abu Graib prisoner jumpsuits. 

That billboard is not exactly what activists had envisioned. They wanted an image of a torture victim and the words: “Fire John Yoo,” with a link to firejohnyoo.org, said Giovanni Jackson, of the Fire John Yoo Coalition. 

The coalition is made up of the World Can’t Wait, the Coalition for an Ethical American Psychological Association, Act Against Torture, the Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute and individuals such as Elliot Cohen from the Peace and Justice Commission and Gray Brechin, noted author and UC Berkeley geography professor 

They thought that at the $500 per month billboard rent, they could craft the message as they saw fit. 

However, billboard companies, it appears, get to control the message. CBS Outdoor, who owns the billboard, turned down the originally proposed “Fire John Yoo” billboard, but accepted the other, Jackson said. 

CBS Outdoor did not return Planet calls or e-mails for an explanation. 

John Yoo is the UC Berkeley law professor who, when working for the Bush administration, wrote documents that many people—the National Lawyers Guild among them—say lay the foundation for rationalization of torture of prisoners that has taken place in Iraq. 

On Thursday evening, a group of young people stood on the University Avenue median displaying a large “fire John Yoo” banner. They got positive “honks” from cars going by, though it’s not clear if the drivers linked the banner to the billboard above. 

Elliot Cohen of the Peace and Justice Commission came out to support those holding the banner. He told the Planet that his commission had passed a resolution on July 7 calling on the university to investigate Yoo and to demand that classes required for graduation taught by Yoo would also be taught by another professor, so that students would not be forced to study with Yoo.. 

The resolution will go to the City Council in September. 

In a phone interview Friday, Brechin told the Planet he has worked to fire John Yoo for several years, demonstrating outside Yoo’s classroom and at Sproul Plaza. He said he was disappointed that the university faculty and students don’t seem bothered by Yoo’s presence on campus. 

The university’s silence on the question of Yoo makes it complicit with torture, Brechin said. 

The dean of Boalt Hall has refused to take up the issue of firing Yoo. “He said his hands are tied,” Brechin said. [See Dean Christopher Edley, Jr.’s letter at http://www.law.berkeley.edu/news/2008/edley041008.html in which he points to academic freedom among the reasons for not firing Yoo.] 

Brechin said Edley argued that Yoo would have to be convicted of a criminal act to be fired, but, said Brechin: “The federal courts are so corrupted, so politicized, that won’t happen.” 

For more information see firejohnyoo.org. 

The ongoing struggle over the shape of Berkeley’s future skyline gained a higher profile during a lengthy session of the city Planning Commission on Wednesday night. 

At issue was the question of how many tall buildings—and what heights—should be included in the environmental impact review for the city’s new Downtown Area Plan (DAP). 

The battle over building heights pits “smart growth” advocates against neighborhood activists, with the lines sharply drawn during the two years that the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee (DAPAC) spent drafting the plan, which is now before the commission for review before it moves to the council—and UC Berkeley—for final approval.  

Smart growth advocates want dense housing built near urban transit hubs, with high-rises close to work, proposed as solutions to greenhouse gases generated by commuters who drive from distant suburbs. 

But neighborhood activists, allied with preservationists and some environmentalists, won a DAPAC vote that rejected a plan repeatedly proposed by staff and backed by committee Chair Will Travis: to concentrate new housing in so-called point towers built in the city center. 

Two members of the DAPAC minority—Travis and retired UC Berkeley development executive Dorothy Walker—urged commissioners to include, respectively, eight or ten of the 180-foot high-rises in the environmental study. 

But environmentalist Juliet Lamont, a member of the DAPAC majority, said benefits from high-rises were marginal at even the most optimistic projections. “If someone said we would start to get benefits at 30 stories, would we do that?” she asked. 

But Travis said, “I believe the staff has allowed (DAPAC’s) political compromise to get in the way of providing the thorough professional analysis that is truly needed.” 

Walker urged the commission to extend the core area open to high rises “along the entire length of Shattuck and University avenues. Your decisions require that you take the long view beyond the horizons of our current population.” 

But Jesse Arreguin, chair of the city’s housing advisory commission and a candidate for the downtown City Council seat, said he was surprised to see the point towers brought back “as part of the discussion of the environmental impact report.”  

He said he was dismayed to see a feasibility report commissioned by the city at the Planning Commission’s request—though specifically voted down earlier by DAPAC—which suggests cutting in-lieu fees paid by developers to fund public housing in exchange for building all-market-rate condo high-rises. 

“Is it important that we cut some deal and let developers have luxury condos or that we really have affordable housing?” Arreguin asked. 

“This is not about empowering developers, but increasing the livability of downtown,” said developer Ali Kashani, who said the downtown “has suffered for 30 years from tweak and twist adjustments.” 

Kashani said the DAPAC plan wouldn’t work, because “the compromises were wrong,” as was the staff proposal to limit the 180-foot buildings to a single pair. 

Deborah Badhia, executive director of the Downtown Berkeley Association, said her organization wants to see both more housing density and greater employment intensity downtown. 

When it came for the commissioners to weigh in, the first vote of the evening called for the EIR not to include a study which featured the downzoning of the expanded downtown area’s single family residential areas, which are in neighborhoods zoned for higher density R-4 apartments. 

The motion by commissioner and attorney Harry Pollack carried on a five-four vote, joined by David Stoloff, City Council candidate Susan Wengraf, Larry Gurley and Chair James Samuels.  

But a second motion, which would have extended the DAPAC plan’s downtown core base height of 85-feet along the south along either side of Shattuck Avenue on the two-and-a-half-block stretch between Dwight Way—the southern limit of the new planning area—and midway on the block between Channing Way and Durant Avenue, failed on a 4-5 vote, with Wengraf joining Roia Ferrazares, James Novosel, Jason Overman (filling in for Patti Dacey) and Gene Poschman. 

Gurley switched sides to join with the others in a vote to keep the southern stretch of Shattuck at its present 65-foot height limit. 

The third vote was on the most controversial subject: point towers and other tall buildings in the city center. 

Both the existing and DAPAC plans contains central core areas where denser development is allowed, though the new plan extends the boundaries of the older core. 

Overman said his biggest concern was that the staff proposal contradicted the work of DAPAC. “Are we showing proper deference to what has really been a thorough public process?” he asked. 

Poschman said he wanted to “get back to the basics of what I call the infesasibility study,” which ruled out the possibility of high-rise apartments and left open only the possibility of million-dollar condos. “The question is, who’s going to live here?” 

He questioned a decision he said would favor housing for the well-to-do, who would be unlikely to give up “their two or three cars” at the expense of inclusionary housing for those of lower incomes and other amenities DAPAC wanted to fund with developer fees. 

In the end, commissioners voted on a compromise proposal from Novosel and Stoloff, who are frequent opponents on many commission votes. 

Under their proposal, the EIR study would include four of the 180-foot point towers in the older, smaller core area, plus four 120-foot buildings—rejected by the feasibility study as economically unviable—in the larger new core. 

Samuels wanted a study that would have included eight of the 180-footers, and the final vote was 6-3 in favor of the compromise, with Ferrazares, Poschman and Overman opposing. 

While none of Wednesday night’s votes are binding on the commission for its proposed revisions to the plan which will got to the council along with DAPAC’s original proposal in late December or early January, any significant changes could result in the need for revisions to the final EIR, which will go to the council for adoption with that body’s final plan revisions by late May 

Visitors, business travelers and international students at UC Berkeley might be able to soon stay in the city for up to a year without having to worry about signing leases or dealing with fussy landlords. 

The Berkeley Zoning Adjustments Board last week approved a use permit for a 68-room extended stay hotel in downtown Berkeley. It will be located in a five-story building at 2136 Center St. previously approved for condos. 

The hotel will be the first in the city to cater to travelers looking to extend their stay in Berkeley for more than a few days, according to Berkeley-based Iranian-born developer Soheyl Modarressi, who owns the property.  

Modarressi, who is president of the Oxford Development Group, developed Epicurious Garden, located in the Gourmet Ghetto on North Shattuck, over a period of three years. 

According to him, the hotel would “serve an unmet demand for extended stay accommodations within the city.” 

“There are no extended stays in Berkeley,” he told the zoning board at a public meeting last week. “People who want to stay for a month are going to Emeryville and Richmond ... Extended stay is a new idea and it’s important to get it done before the market shifts again. The banks are being conservative with loans right now.” 

According to a staff report, Modarressi had a difficult time securing funds for the proposed project because of the “recent dramatic decline in the real estate and financial market.” 

Modarressi said the hotel rooms would be upscale luxury units with maid service. 

Hotel amenities would include furnished studios and one-bedroom units with bathrooms, but unlike a typical hotel room, each unit would come with a fully equipped kitchen which guests would be responsible for cleaning. 

“We expect our clients to stay from two weeks to four or five months,” he said. 

According to the staff report, “visitors would typically stay an average of one to six weeks, but have the option of staying up to a year to accommodate the needs of corporate reallocations, extended work relocations, visiting researchers, faculty and family of UC Berkeley students.” 

Located on Center between Shattuck Avenue and Oxford Street, the proposed project—on a 23,017-square-foot site—is close to the downtown BART and the UC Berkeley campus.  

The site is now a 36-spot parking lot facing Oxford Lane, and the new hotel will be located behind the two-story historic Thomas Block building. 

It is also close to the Brower Center, located on the southwest corner of Allston Way and Oxford, and to the Arpeggio mixed use project, located on the north side of Center Street west of Shattuck Avenue, which are both under construction. 

UC Berkeley is also designing a new art museum at the northwest corner of Oxford and Center. 

The zoning board approved two separate use permits for the extended stay hotel— as a tourist hotel and a residential hotel—since it was a slightly different concept, zoning officials said. 

“It’s more like a residence inn,” zoning secretary Steve Ross told the Planet. “It has a slightly different use than residential or tourist hotels. So we required two different use permits to define it. Tourist hotels are limited to shorter stays where as residential hotels allow for a slightly longer stay. Since the units in this building were already designed as dwelling units, the hotel rooms have a little kitchenette and a wet bar to make the stay more comfortable.” 

According to the staff report, “extended stay hotels offer flexibility to those clients who may require accommodations for greater than the 14 days allowed in the tourist hotel and would like the full amenities provided in a home, but do not wish to enter into long-term lease agreements in the rental housing market due to the limited duration of their stay.” 

The city’s municipal code defines a tourist hotel room “as one with an occupancy not to exceed 14 consecutive days,” and a residential hotel room is defined as “one to be used, designed or intended to be used for a period of 14 consecutive days or more. 

The city currently doesn’t have a separate use permit for extended stay hotels.  

The city would also get transit occupancy taxes from the tourist hotel use, Ross said. 

Despite pleas and arguments for an appeal of the city’s lawsuit against the university by an overflow crowd last Thursday evening in the Berkeley City Council Chambers, the council went behind closed doors and “decided not to take action,” according to Mayor Tom Bates, who reported the action to the public.  

On July 22, Superior Court Judge Barbara Miller ruled on the case, siding with the university, thus permitting the construction of an athletic training facility on the site of an oak grove, next to a football stadium traversed by an active earthquake fault.  

The council retains the ability to appeal within 58 days of the ruling, Bates said. However, Councilmember Kriss Worthing-ton said that getting five votes to appeal—especially without Dona Spring’s vote—would be difficult. Councilmember Spring, who died recently, was a strong supporter of the movement to save the grove.  

The trial judge’s injunction, which had protected the oak grove at the construction site, was scheduled to expire on Tuesday, but appeals filed by the Panoramic Hill Association and the California Oaks Foundation, along with individuals, have kept the injunction in place until at least Aug. 13, when the two groups submit their reason for the appeal to the court. 

Only a handful of persons speaking to the council at the open session urged no appeal—Roland Peterson, immediate past president of the Chamber of Commerce, and Mark McLeod, President of the Downtown Berkeley Association, both pointed to the high court costs.  

“It’s an unwise use of our tax dollars,” Peterson said.  

Linda Schacht, lecturer at UC Berkeley’s journalism school, expressed a similar view, asking the council not to continue spending “a huge amount of money on a useless lawsuit.”  

The overwhelming number of speakers supported the appeal. There were about 60 people able to speak but several dozen could not, as Bates ended the public comment period at 6:55 p.m.  

Dan Lambert, who works for the city’s planning department, said the cost to the city of providing services to the university was exactly why the city should appeal. “If the university paid its share, we could fill the potholes,” Lambert said.  

Given the earthquake and fire danger, the university should take responsibility to make the area safer, he added. The area around Memorial Stadium “is the most unsafe place in Berkeley,” Lambert said.  

Supporting an appeal, Dr. Ronald Berman also pointed to safety issues. “Part of the stadium is built on 30 feet of fill,” he said. “It’s a prime site for liquefaction.”  

Planet Executive Editor Becky O’Malley said that it did not make economic sense to stop the lawsuit now. “It would be frivolous to undertake a lawsuit and not carry it to the appeal level,” she said.  

Others pointed out that the university was addressing the issue backwards. Since the Hayward Fault traverses Memorial Stadium and since the stadium is in great disrepair, that structure should be the first to be repaired, they said.  

Former Mayor Shirley Dean, opposing Mayor Tom Bates in November, said the university should “stop holding sports camps for young children in the stadium.”  

A number of people spoke to the issue of filing the lawsuit in order to right the power imbalance between the city and university.  

Yvonne Knebel urged the council not “to rubberstamp what the regents tell you to do.” If you do, she said, “you are a puppet government.”  

“This is about normalizing power relationships between the city and university,” Sharon Hudson said.  

The appeal “is the only leverage you have,” Dean said.  

Michael Kelly, president of the Panoramic Hill Association, told the council his group was appealing the decision and urged the city to join the appeal. 

This led to Worthington’s attempt to question Kelly, but Bates quickly cut Worthington off, despite Worthington’s assertions that Bates was acting contrary to council rules.  

Later, Worthington told the Planet he had wanted to ask Kelly about the cost of the appeal, which would have helped the council in the closed-door deliberations following the open session.  

The cost of the lawsuit to this point is estimated by most observers to be about $300,000. The legal cost for the next step, continuing to press for an injunction to prevent the grove from being destroyed, was estimated by Kelly at about 20 percent of the cost of the lawsuit, or about $60,000. 

Other speakers, such as Jack Gerson of the Oakland Education Association, bemoaned the university going from a world-class center of learning to an increasingly privatized entity, reflecting, Gerson said, “the corporate interests they represent.”  

“If Berkeley doesn’t stand up to them, who’s going to?” he asked.  

Many invoked the name of recently deceased Councilmember Dona Spring, who just a few weeks ago went in her wheelchair with her body in pain to support the tree-sitters protesting the university’s plan to cut down the oaks.  

“Do it in Dona Spring’s name,” said Jane Welford.  

“We need you, Laurie, Max, Linda [councilmembers Laurie Capitelli, Max Anderson and Linda Maio] to be Dona’s voice,” said Ayr, who has been ground support for the tree-sitters for some 600 days.  

When Mayor Bates announced that the council had decided not to appeal the decision, boos and hisses filled the council chambers. 

“Shame on you,” cried out several supporters of the tree-sitters.  

“Shame, Shame, Shame,” chanted a few others in unison.  

“Is this your legacy? Is this your legacy?” asked a young girl from the middle row.  

As the council members prepared to leave the chambers, Ayr asked, “How did you vote?”  

“We are not allowed to tell the public how we voted,” Councilmember Kriss Worthington replied.  

Speaking to reporters inside the City Hall later, Worthington declined to say how he voted.  

“If five people had voted in favor of an appeal, then we would have come out and announced that the city had decided to appeal,” he said. “Now we will be in limbo for 58 days … I have said repeatedly that the city has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars on this. For a tiny bit more the city can preserve that bit of land.” 

Although the council declined to vote on whether to appeal, the injunction preventing construction at the grove was extended Thursday when the Panoramic Hill Association and the California Oaks Foundation appealed. 

“We are not getting involved with the other two groups in their appeals to the lawsuit,” Bates said.  

“We are reserving our right to appeal,” Bates said, “The cost of the appeal is an issue, but we have spent a lot of money in the past, and relative to that, this is not a lot.”  

An appeal would cost the city around $25,000 to $50,000, Bates said.  

“It’s an important lawsuit,” he said. “It’s been going on for 18 months and has cost the university a lot of money. Maybe the next time we can resolve the issue in a better way.”  

Jerry Wachtel, former president of the Panoramic Hills Association, said he was disappointed by the city’s decision.  

“I am stunned, but I am not surprised,” he said, “Maybe no decision is better than a negative decision. But it certainly makes our task more difficult.”  

Wachtel said that apart from the appeal, the group had also filed a motion with the judge to vacate the decision and asked her for a new trial.  

The legal battle over the grove where tree-sitters and a now-threatened injunction have stymied UC Berkeley’s growth plans has entered a new forum—minus, for now, one litigant. 

Panoramic Hill Association and the California Oaks Foundation have appealed last week’s order by Alameda County Superior Court Judge Barbara J. Miller, which gave a conditional win to UC. Their move comes after a controversial university settlement offer delivered to the City Council the same night as that body declined—at least for the moment—to join the appeal. 

In the settlement letter,  

UC Berkeley Vice Chancellor  

for Administration Nathan Brostrom announced that in addition to a quick start on construction for the four-level gym planned at the grove site, the university also wants to accelerate work on the adjacent Memorial Stadium so that work on both projects occur at the same time. 

Zach Cowan, Berkeley’s  

acting city attorney, said Brostrom’s letter was the first time he had seen a written proposal to tackle both projects at once, though he believed “the idea has been out there for some time.” 

Cowan said he believed the project’s environmental impact review also didn’t consider the possibility of simultaneous construction projects, “though they could do a supplemental EIR.” He said he also didn’t recall the proposal being mentioned during the litigation in Miller’s court. 

Earthquake concerns 

Just how much the university can spend on the stadium remains in dispute in light of Miller’s ruling that the Alquist-Priolo Act and its limitations on construction costs apply to the stadium. 

“They don’t even know if they can do it,” Cowan said. 

The university had argued that it was exempt from Alquist-Priolo, though its spokesperson, Executive Director of Public Affairs Dan Mogulof, said the argument had been made only after it was raised in a question by the judge herself. 

Alquist-Priolo bars new construction within 50 feet of active faults and limits repair and renovation costs to 50 percent of the building’s value. The 85-year-old stadium itself sits directly over the Hayward Fault. 

The 59-page appeal filed with the first district of California Court of Appeals Friday charges that construction of the Student Athlete High Performance Center, the official moniker of the four-level semi-subterranean gym and office facility, would subvert both Alquist-Priolo and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 

While the plaintiffs contend—and the university’s appellate attorney Paul D. Fogel has conceded in a written statement to the higher court—that the appeal triggers an automatic 20-day stay that keeps the current injunction against construction in place, the plaintifffs are asking the appellate court for a writ that will keep the injunction which has protected the grove in place “[t]o assure that this Court’s jurisdiction does not succumb to the university’s chainsaws and bulldozers.” 

In addition to the appeal, the plaintiffs have also filed a motion with Miller asking her to vacate her decision and grant a new trial. A hearing on that motion—a pro forma part of the appeal process—is set for Aug. 12. 

Stadium plans 

The gym complex is the first of three proposed phases of a costly construction agenda at the stadium. The second phase, the one which the university now proposes to begin while work on the gym is under way, calls for a major retrofit of the western half of the stadium, installation of permanent night lights for televised games, a new sound system, a multi-level press and luxury sky box addition above the western wall and new plazas to the north and south of the stadium. 

The third phase would see renovation and retrofitting of the stadium’s eastern half and construction of a new concourse and an expansion of seating above the current level of the eastern rim. 

In his letter to the city, Brostrom wrote that parking, which is required for staff and faculty who worked in the southeast campus and visitors to the Optometry Clinic, would be displaced as the gym projects, referred to collectively as the Southeast Campus Integrated Projects (SCIP), move forward.  

He added that although the city and UC Berkeley had agreed on a specific number of additional parking spaces in the 2020 Long Range Development Plan settlement agreement, the university had agreed to conduct a comprehensive review of alternatives, including exploring possibilities for developing, funding and/or sharing parking with the city on the west side of the campus and downtown, before it developed new parking on the east side.  

“In any event, we will not develop additional parking as part of the SCIP projects until completion of Phase II of Memorial Stadium,” Brostrom's letter said.  

Brostrom also reminded the council of numerous changes the university had made to the stadium project, and the subsequent phases of the stadium renovation to address the city and the community’s concerns over the course of the lawsuit.  

The list of changes included a construction and financing strategy which would accelerate the renovation and seismic retrofit of the Memorial Stadium by over 18 months.  

Under this plan, the construction of the second phase would overlap with the construction of the Student-Athletic High Performance Center, which would lead to its completion by the 2012 football season, the letter said.  

“This approach would impose additional costs, because of the need for surge space for Stadium occupants for an extended period, but we believe that our financing plan—which solely utilizes private dollars—can accommodate these increased costs,” the letter stated.  

The list also included the university’s promises to plant three trees for every tree removed from the areas around the stadium, to cancel the seven “additional capacity” events now scheduled for the stadium and to work with residents of Panoramic Hill to minimize the effects of the university's programs in and around the stadium.  

The university, according to the letter, would also work with Panoramic Hill representatives to create an emergency access route for Panoramic Hill during football games.  

At the end of the letter, Brostrom said the university had adopted these positions in response to concerns from neighbors and the City of Berkeley and that the changes continued “to hold in the face of the judge's decision in the case, contingent on the city's agreement not to file an appeal to the current litigation and not to file any future legal challenge to the Memorial Stadium project.”  

The university, Brostrom said, be-lieved it was “time to end the cost and adversarial relationship inherent in these legal proceedings” and redirect its efforts towards “working together in the best interests” of the community.  

One question raised by the university’s consolidation of the first two phases—the gym and the western half of the stadium—is whether the impacts of construction on traffic and access to nearby residential neighborhoods were adequately addressed in the EIR approved by the UC Board of Regents’ Committee on Grounds and Buildings on Dec. 5, 2006. 

Before certifying the EIR, the regents building committee had given thumbs up to a $112 million budget for the gym—though costs have now soared to an estimated $140 million.  

Three days earlier, Zachary Running Wolf and a crew of tree-sitters scaled a redwood and several oak trees in the grove, kicking off an arboreal occupation that still continues despite countless arrests by campus police, the installation two layers of barbed wire-topped chain link fencing and a barricade blocking off the sidewalks along the eastern side of Piedmont Avenue along the stadium frontage. 

Meanwhile, the tree-sit picked up another celebrity endorsement over the weekend, with superstar James Taylor offering tributes to the branch-borne activists during his performance Sunday night at the nearby Greek Theatre and musing “I wonder if they can hear me now.” 

He dedicated one number in each of his two sets to the protesters, reported Doug Buckwald, one of the named individual plaintiffs and a supporter of the tree-sitters. 

The public doesn’t know exactly what the Berkeley City Council voted on at last Thursday’s closed-door session. And it doesn’t know how each elected official voted.  

The closed-session meeting was called to discuss a possible appeal to the decision by Judge Barbara Miller against the city over the construction of an athletic center next to Memorial Stadium, which is traversed by an earthquake fault. 

An open session where some 70 people addressed the council—several dozen were turned away due to time constraints—preceded the executive session.  

After the closed-door meeting, Mayor Tom Bates announced in a terse public statement that the council “decided not to take action.”  

Had the council made an affirmative decision, either voting to appeal the lawsuit or voting not to appeal it, it would have been required to disclose the precise decision and the council vote, according to Acting City Attorney Zach Cowan. 

Some members of the public are angry about constraints placed on the information revealed about the closed-door vote and also object to two other limitations placed on their input into the discussion of an appeal. One was the public not getting access to a letter sent to the council by the university outlining a settlement, a letter received by councilmembers earlier that same day. 

The other was the issue of disallowing full public comment on the question of an appeal. The meeting was held in the council chambers, which limited the number of people present at the meeting. 

The number of people who could comment was also constrained by scheduling the public portion of the meeting so that it ran directly into a 7 p.m. zoning board meeting. 

Disclosing the decision 

Attorney Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, said he had to concur with what he said was Cowan’s “technically right” interpretation of the Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law, which says that the City Council is not required to reveal a vote when a decision is not made. [See Section 54957.1(a)(2))] [www.cfac.org/Law/BrownAct/Text/ba_text.html] 

“The language [of the statute] is odd, ambiguous,” Scheer said, wondering whether it could be a drafting error in the law. “We’re stuck with the literal language—it is defensible,” he said. 

So, if the council voted on the question of whether to appeal Miller’s ruling against the city, there would have to be five affirmative votes for the city to be obligated to reveal exactly what the council was voting on and who voted in what way.  

Scheer told the Planet that if members of the council revealed either their own votes or how others voted, they could be accused of abusing attorney-client privileges. However, Scheer said, the City Council could also vote to reject the city attorney’s advice and make the vote public. Cowan concurred. 

Former Mayor Shirley Dean, who will face Bates in the November elections, was among those who criticized the council for not revealing particulars of the vote. 

“It’s important to know where each councilmember stands,” Dean said. “It should be part of the public record.” 

Citizens should know how their councilmembers voted and be able to call them and ask them to explain the reasoning behind their vote, open government activist Gene Bernardi told the Planet. 

Bates did not return calls for comment. 

The letter 

Another question members of the public are asking is why a letter from the university to the council regarding the lawsuit—which many assumed the council discussed in closed session—was not made available to the public so that people could address the questions raised by it before the closed session. 

Once correspondence from the public goes to a City Council majority, that correspondence becomes a public document. Cowan told the Planet the public should have gotten copies of the letter, but said it was up to the city clerk’s department to make that happen.  

Acting City Clerk Deanna Despain called the lapse a “clerical error,” given that her staff had brought to the meeting only enough copies for the City Council and a few extras that had been left on the clerk’s table.  

“I don’t know who got them during the craziness of all that,” Despain said, referring to the crowded meeting, which was kept orderly by some six to eight uniformed police officers. 

City Manager Phil Kamlarz backed up the clerk. “We just got the letter a few hours before the meeting. Deanna got jammed,” he said. 

Kamlarz said this was not a Brown Act violation and played down the importance of the university’s letter in the overall discussion. 

“It was not critical—a lot of stuff was put out already,” Kamlarz said. “It’s just a question of logistics.” 

The letter was given to members of the public by Councilmember Kriss Worthington, who made copies at his council office after the meeting. The press and public asked for it after the mayor had disclosed its existence in a press briefing after the open session announcement.  

Michael Kelly, president of the Panoramic Hill Association said, contrary to Kamlarz’ belief, he thinks not giving the letter to the public before the public comment period was a critical error. The Panoramic Hill Association was one of the three entities, including the city and the Oaks Foundation, that sued the university. The Panoramic Hill Association and the Oaks Foundation have filed an appeal and encouraged the city to do so as well. 

While the university letter recapitulates a number of concessions the university had already offered, including reducing the number of parking spaces for the project, reducing the number of events at Memorial Stadium, replacing trees eliminated by the project and creating an emergency access road in the Panoramic Hill area, it strongly advised the city not to appeal. 

The letter says that these “positions”—the reduced number of parking spaces, etc.—are “contingent on the city’s agreement not to file an appeal to the current litigation and not to file any future legal challenge to the Memorial Stadium project.” 

Kelly told the Planet there were issues he would have wanted to raise with the council based on the letter, which also addresses an accelerated schedule for rehabilitation of the stadium. 

“These issues weren’t revealed to those of us who wanted to speak” at the open session, Kelly said.  

Kelly said had he known about the letter, he would have been able to address its contents when he spoke to the council. “The reality is that in the city, there are citizens who have been paying attention to the project and understand it better than the council. I’ve spend the last two and a half years of my life working on it,” he said.  

Public comment cut  

The public is permitted to address every item of every council meeting, including closed sessions. However, there wasn’t an opportunity for everyone who had come to speak to the council to do so. 

The mayor called the special closed session meeting in the City Council chambers at 5 p.m. on Thursday, just two hours before the zoning board was scheduled to meet there. 

The open council session was therefore scheduled to end at 6:55 p.m. 

Hundreds of people showed up, many of them desiring to speak. Several dozen people were waiting their turn to speak at 6:30 p.m. The mayor took a 10-minute break at which time he directed those in line to fill out cards and put them in a drum, from which people would be chosen to speak in the remaining 15 minutes of speaker time. 

“The mayor cut off a whole group of people,” Dean said. “We don’t know what those people were going to say—that bothers me.” 

Further, Dean said she thought the meeting should have been moved to a place where the large crowd could be handled—people lined up outside the council chamber and rotated in. “It needed to be in a place that could handle the crowd,” she said. 

City manager Phil Kamlarz said there is no other venue in the city that can hold a large crowd and where the meeting can be televised. (He noted that city staff was looking at the possibility of moving the council chambers permanently to the adult school.) 

Further, Dean pointed to the two instances during the meeting where Worthington asked to be recognized so that he could pose a question to one of the speakers.  

One of those instances was when Worthington wanted to ask Michael Kelly his estimate of the cost for an appeal—information he wanted to have for the closed- door discussion, he told the Planet later—but the mayor refused to recognize him. 

“Questions from councilmembers are always allowed,” Dean said. “I don’t believe the mayor had the right to say, ‘I don’t see you.’”  

Disability rights advocates in wheelchairs held a protest Tuesday in front of the downtown Berkeley McDonald’s at University and Shattuck avenues, against what they said was unlawful discrimination against three of its disabled employees. 

The protest came a week after the Legal Aid Society Employ-ment Law Center of San Francisco filed charges with the U.S. Equal Employment Oppor-tunity Commission alleging that their client Lisa Craib, 43, was unfairly dismissed from the restaurant along with her two co-workers because of their developmental disabilities. 

Craib, diagnosed with Asper-ger’s Syndrome—a form of autism—worked the 7:30-10 a.m. morning crew, cleaning tables, preparing salads and bussing for almost 21 years 

Craib said that shortly after the franchise was sold to a new owner in March, she and two other workers with disabilities—Susan Hanks and Alice McGill—were abruptly fired.  

McDonald’s released a statement on behalf of Nick Verghis, the new owner of the McDonald’s franchise, Tuesday, which was similar to the one issued in response to the charges filed last week. 

“I have a strict policy prohibiting any form of discrimination in hiring, termination, or any other aspect of employment,” the statement said. “I comply with all applicable laws—including the American Disabilities Act—and continually strive to maintain an environment in which everyone feels valued and accepted. Beyond that, it would be inappropriate to further comment or speculate.” 

Calls to Verghis for comment were not returned by press time. 

Michael Pachovas, one of about 75 protesters, said he had helped organize the protest to speak out about the plight of the three disabled workers who were fired when the new owner took over the franchise. 

“I’m very angry,” he said, carrying a “MacDonald’s Unfair to Labor” placard as he demonstrated in his wheelchair. “It’s such an obvious discriminatory action and for this to happen in a city with its history of civil rights movements is even worse. We want to get a meeting with the manager and find out what this is about.” 

Pachovas said Verghis reportedly owned as many as six McDonald’s franchises in the Bay Area. 

“I also want to know if, as the parent company, McDonald’s, has anything to say about this,” he said, “if they have any programs to help people with disabilities.” 

Calls to Evelyn Sanchez, director of operations for McDonald’s, were not returned by press time. 

“Shop somewhere else,” Pachovas called out to customers approaching the restaurant during lunch time. “I eat here on rare occasions, but I won’t come here anymore. I hope no one with a conscience will.” 

Peter Mendoza, a Berkeley resident diagnosed with cerebral palsy, sat in front of the restaurant’s glass doors handing out flyers. 

“I think what happened in this case was a travesty,” he said. “Lisa was a good employee. She always assisted me and carried my food over to the table. She unwrapped my hamburger so that I could eat it. They deserve to get their jobs back and an apology from the owner. People who own McDonald’s have a lot of money and should comply with the law. I am boycotting McDonald’s and encourage the entire Berkeley community to join the disability community to boycott it as well.” 

Inside the fast-food chain Tuesday afternoon, business was slow. 

“I think we had a huge impact,” said Chris Mullin of the Center for Independent Living. “This place usually has big lines around lunch.” 

“I am definitely boycotting this McDonald’s,” said Michael Diehl, a mental health commissioner for the city. “Frankly, I could give up on the cheeseburger.” 

Jan Garrett, the center’s executive director, waved a sign with “People with disabilities make great employees” written boldly on it.  

“People with disabilities have clear employment rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act,” she said. “We want this McDonald’s to know that and all businesses nationally to know that.” 

Susan Hanks, one of the disabled workers fired along with Lisa on March 18, stood outside the restaurant talking to family and friends. 

Hanks, who has cerebral palsy, was the first disabled worker to be hired by the downtown McDonald’s. 

“I have been here since 1982,” Hanks, 65, said. “I don’t want my job back, but I want them to know that they fired me and they shouldn’t have done that.” 

Hanks said she was considering joining in the federal charges filed by the Legal Aid Society. 

Lisa Gordon, one of the executive directors of Easy Does it, which provides emergency services to the disability community, watched the action from her wheelchair. Gordon expressed her thoughts through her assistant Alejandra Ortiz. 

“This is just wrong,” Ortiz said, translating for Gordon. “Lisa worked here for 21 years because she was able to. She knew how to do a good job. It is not fair that they fired them because they have disabilities.” 

“We are appalled by this,” said Gina Sasso, who co-directs the organization with Gordon, adding that more than 70 percent of people with disabilities are unemployed. “We are going to continue the struggle.” 

Some protesters said they missed councilmember Dona Spring’s presence at the demonstration. Spring, an avid supporter of disability rights, died two weeks ago. She suffered from rheumatoid arthritis. 

“There was only one Dona, but we as a community must stop the injustice,” Mendoza said. “She’s here in spirit.”

Books and furniture belonging to Cody’s Books, which closed its doors for good on June 20 after 52 years due to dwindling sales, will be sold next week to pay off a Uniform Commercial Code lien in favor of Summit Bank, according to Mindy Galoob, the store’s former general manager. 

Robert Kidd, the attorney representing the corporation’s current owner, IBC Publishing, told the Planet Wednesday that the bookstore was not declaring bankruptcy. 

“We don’t see any benefit that would flow to anyone from doing that,” Kidd said Wednesday. 

Kidd also said that Cody’s owed money to “different people.” 

“Yes, Cody’s owes money to a number of schools, libraries and public agencies,” he said, adding that he didn’t have any numbers on hand. He said the corporation has no plans to repay these creditors. 

Galoob said the bank will be conducting the lien-foreclosure sale of its collateral on Aug. 7, and the store premises will be returned to the landlord later that week. 

Cody’s landlord, San Francisco-based Townsend I LLC and Townsend II LLC, put up a three-day notice to pay rent or quit outside the Shattuck Avenue bookstore on July 25, which claimed that the store owed $6,877.88 (for June 1 to July 31) in past-due rent. 

“Pay rent for the premises in the following amount, which is past due, or vacate the premises and surrender possession,” the notice from Levy, Ram & Olson, attorneys for the landlord, says. “If you do not pay the past-due amount or give up possession by the required time, a legal action will be filed seeking not only damages and possession but also a statutory damage penalty of up to $600, and with court costs and attorneys fees according to the terms of your lease.” 

According to the notice, the landlord would declare a forfeiture of the lease if the past-due rent is not paid and Cody’s continues to occupy the premises. 

The store still has books displayed on its aisles as well as some furniture on its premises. 

“It is anticipated that the bank will sell all of the book inventory to the successful bidder,” Galoob told the Planet in an e-mail Wednesday. “That is to say, it is not anticipated that the bank will be selling off books one-by-one or in small batches.” 

Cody’s, which closed its flagship store on Telegraph Avenue and branches in Fourth Street and San Francisco in recent years, moved to Shattuck Avenue in April. The store moved to Shattuck Avenue when the rent for its Fourth Street location almost tripled. 

Cody’s president Hiroshi Kagawa of IBC Publishing, which bought Cody’s from long-term owner Andy Ross in 2006, said in a statement in June that “his current business was not strong enough or rich enough to support Cody’s.” 

He added that the store “has been suffering from low sales, and the deficit exceeds our ability to service it."

It’s almost August, laid-back vacation time for some. But for candidates for local offices, it’s time to sharpen elbows and dust off the cleats. 

The first campaign milestone has passed—July 24 was the day the candidates who opted to do so turned in their signature-in-lieu papers, a process in which candidates collect signatures instead of paying the $150 filing fee. Each valid signature is worth $1 toward the fee. 

These signatures are not formal endorsements—registered Berkeley voters can sign any number of signature-in-lieu papers. Still, a glance at the lists of signatures gives some clues to who the candidates’ friends are—in politics and life. 

Here, the Planet takes a quick look at signatures gathered for the mayor and council races. All signatures are available for viewing in the city clerk’s office. 

Mayor 

• Incumbent Mayor Tom Bates, out of town until mid-August, apparently didn’t spend time worrying about gathering signatures—his chief-of-staff (one assumes acting in the capacity of his campaign staff and not on the city dime) collected just 38 names. That means that Bates shelled out $112 in filing fees. 

Among the signatories were councilmembers Gordon Wozniak, Darryl Moore and Max Anderson, School Board Member Karen Hemphill, District 4 candidate Terry Doran and District 6 candidate Susan Wengraf. Other signatures included that of Chamber of Commerce President Roland Peterson and Maggie Gee of the Berkeley Democratic Club. 

• Not known as a slacker, former mayor and mayoral candidate Shirley Dean’s list sports 230 names; only 150 valid signatures are required. 

Some of those who signed the papers are longtime allies from her days as mayor and councilmember, such as Councilmember Betty Olds and schools activist Salvador Murillo. Many are newer comrades-in-arms, working with Dean around the Memorial Stadium-oak grove issue. They include Doug Buckwald, Michael Kelly and Gianna Ranuzzi.  

Fellow candidates lent their signatures: Jane Welford, rent-board candidate, and Mary Rose (Redwood Mary) Kaczorowski, running for city council. 

• Active in supporting the tree-sitters at Memorial Grove and constant critic of the current mayor, Zachary Running Wolf collected 33 signatures, including Peace and Justice commissioners Phoebe Anne Sorgen and Diana Bohn and preservationists Laurie Bright and Gale Garcia. 

• Denis McComb is also running and opted to pay the $150 filing fee, rather than collect signatures. The Planet was unable to contact him. 

District 2 

• Running for his second term in office, incumbent Darryl Moore picked up 136 signatures, including several from elected officials: Assemblymember (State Senator-elect) Loni Hancock, Mayor Tom Bates, Councilmember Kriss Worthington, School Board President John Selawsky, Rent Stabilization Board Member Jason Overman and East Bay Parks Director (Assemblymember-elect) Nancy Skinner. Also signing was Dennis Walton, companion to Dona Spring, recently deceased councilmember in District 4. 

Candidates who lent their signatures to Moore include Susan Wengraf, candidate for District 6, Jesse Arreguin, candidate for District 4, and Nicole Drake, candidate for rent board. Chair and vice chair of the Chamber of Commerce, Roland Peterson and Miriam Ng also signed Moore’s papers, as did city Economic Development staff and Berkeley residents Michael Caplan and Dave Fogarty and Michael Goldin of the West Berkeley Business Alliance. 

Helping Moore collect signatures were his council aide Ryan Lau and Mark Rhoades, developer and former planning staffer. Rhoades’ wife, Erin Rhoades, and business partner Ali Kashani also signed the papers. 

•Jon Crowder, who faces Moore in District 2 for the second time, collected 126 signatures including those of Peace and Freedom party activists Marsha Feinland and John Thomas Condit, rent board candidates Jane Welford and Igor Tregub, former rent board member Judy Ann Alberti and commissioners Michael Diehl and Winston Burton. 

District 3 

• Although no challenger has emerged to date, incumbent Max Anderson collected 145 signatures. They include fellow Councilmember Darryl Moore, Rent Board Chair Jesse Arreguin, also a District 4 council candidate, rent board commissioners Jason Overman and Eleanor Waldon, also a candidate for the rent board, and rent board candidate Nicole Drake. 

District 4 

• Elected Rent Stabilization Board Chair Jesse Arreguin picked up 180 signatures. They include City Councilmember Kriss Worthington, for whom Arreguin works as council aide, rent board commissioners Selma Spector and Lisa Stephens, rent board candidates Nicole Drake and Taylor Kelly. 

Commissioners signing Arreguin’s papers include Michael Diehl, Gene Poschman, Elliot Cohen, Patti Dacey, John McBride and Diana Bohn.  

In a brief phone interview, Arreguin underscored receiving a formal endorsement from Walton, Spring’s longtime companion, and from Spring’s council aide, Nancy Holland. Neither, he said, were asked to sign signature-in-lieu papers. 

• Mary Rose “Redwood Mary” Kaczorowski had the help of six signature gatherers plus herself and ended up with 204 names on her list. Among those to sign are Peace and Justice Commissioner PhoeBe Anne Sorgen, former mayor and mayoral candidate Dean, rent board candidate Taylor Kelly, Peace and Freedom Party activists Marsha Feinland and John Condit, neighborhood activist Janice Thomas and anti-toxics advocate Pamela Shivola.  

Sorgen, a Spring commission appointee, helped Kaczorowski collect signatures. 

• Former School Board Member Terry Doran gathered precisely 150 signatures. They include councilmembers Laurie Capitelli and Olds and Mayor Bates and Middle East activists Howard Levine and Barbara Lubin. School Board Member Nancy Riddle signed on, as did peace activist Carolyn Scarr. 

Council Candidate Susan Wengraf signed Doran’s papers and school board candidate Beatriz Leyva-Cutler did as well.  

Doran said Bates has formally endorsed his candidacy. 

• Attorney Jerry Threet, a tenant and LGBT rights activist, told the Planet he opted not to collect signatures and paid the $150 filing fee himself, due to the time-consuming job of parenting a four-month-old baby and working four days a week. He plans, he said, to take a month leave from his job to campaign for the election. He said it was too early to have received endorsements. 

• Videographer and environmental activist L.A. Wood said he decided not to turn in signatures, but is still in the council race. Like Threet, Wood told the Planet it is too early to have gathered formal endorsements. 

• Asa Dodsworth has not turned in the signature-in-lieu papers he had taken out and has not yet paid the $150 filing fee. He told the Planet that he hadn’t submitted the signiture-in-lieu papers because he had been consulting with others on whether he could mount an effective campaign. He said Wednesday that he would be paying the filing fee and submitting nomination papers. 

• Wednesday, N’Dji Jockin filed to run for the District 4 seat. He was not available before deadline. 

District 5 

• Incumbent Laurie Capitelli collected 87 signatures. They include Mayor Bates, councilmembers Olds, Moore and Wozniak and School Boardmember Shirley Issel. 

Miriam Hawley, who formerly held the District 5 seat signed Capitelli’s papers as did former councilmember Polly Armstrong. Rent board candidate Nicole Drake signed Capitelli’s papers. 

Other signatories include Roland Peterson, president of the Chamber of Commerce, George Beier, former candidate in District 4 and Maggie Gee of the Berkeley Democratic Club. 

• Sophie Hahn is vying for the District 5 seat. She told the Planet she didn’t collect signatures but opted to pay the filing fee because she felt she needed to move forward in putting together other aspects of her campaign. She said she’s been an attorney and started then sold a small business. Mother of three, Hahn’s currently PTA president at King Middle School. 

•Jason Ira Magid took out signature-in-lieu papers to run for District 5, but did not return them to the clerk and has not paid the $150 filing fee. He has until August 8 to do so. The Planet was unable to contact him. 

District 6 

• Susan Wengraf, currently aide to Olds, is running for the seat occupied by Olds since 1993. Olds is retiring. 

Wengraf picked up 186 signatures, representing politically a large spectrum of the community. Signatories include councilmembers Gordon Wozniak and Betty Olds, School Board Member Shirley Issel, Library Board Chair Therese Powell, Rent Board Chair Jesse Arreguin, a council candidate for District 4, commissioners Gene Poschman, Joshua Kornbluth, Robert Meola, Marie Bauman, Lawrence Gurley and David Stoloff.  

She has the signatures of former mayor and mayoral candidate Dean and former Councilmember Armstrong. 

Rent Board candidate Nicole Drake, aide to Councilmember Linda Maio, signed the papers.  

Chamber President Peterson and real estate developer John Gordon also signed Wengraf’s papers. Former mayoral candidate Zelda Bronstein and former District 7 candidate George Beier signed the papers, as did Maggie Gee of the Berkeley Democratic Club. 

• Laura Miller has taken out papers to run for the District 6 seat. She did not return calls from the Planet before deadline. 

• PhoeBe Anne Sorgen, Peace and Justice commissioner, had taken out signature-in-lieu papers for District 6 but subsequently decided not to run for the office.

On Sunday, a group of self-identified progressives will select five candidates to form a slate to fill the five vacancies on the Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board. 

The convention, open to all people living in Berkeley, will take place Sunday, August 3, 4–8 p.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, Hearst Avenue at Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Attendees are asked to pay a sliding-scale admission at the door. 

Members of Berkeley’s eight-member board regulate residential rent increases and “protect against unwarranted rent increases and evictions and ... provide a fair return to property owners,” according to the board’s mission statement. They also are charged with advancing the city’s affordable housing policies with respect to “low- and fixed-income persons, minorities, students, disabled, and the aged.” 

The convention, sponsored by the Committee to Defend Affordable Housing, is preceded by the work of a screening committee. All candidates respond to a questionnaire asking about their positions related to affordable housing and rent control. Screeners make recommendations to the convention based on candidates’ responses.  

In the past, the screening committee had been made up of former rent-board members and representatives named by various organizations—the Green Party, CalDems, the Wellstone Democratic Club, the Gray Panthers, the disabled community and Berkeley Citizens Action. More recently the screeners are members of these groups but are not necessarily elected by them as representatives, according to Selma Spector, a former rent-board member helping to plan the convention. 

Spector said that, while not all candidates had made their candidacies known in time to go through the screening process, all candidates will have a chance to be heard at the convention. 

The need to select a slate of pro-rent-control candidates came about because landlords were putting up their own slate, Spector said.  

But after vacancy decontrol—where rents on apartments under rent control can be raised as high as the owner wishes when the units become vacant—became effective in the mid 1990s, landlords stopped vying for the seats, she said.  

Berkeley is a transient town, and “landlords felt they got what they wanted,” Spector said. Since that time, landlords have tried mainly to put measures on the ballot to make it easier to evict people, she said. 

There are, however, critics of the convention. “It’s a wonderful concept but not a wonderful process,” Councilmember Kriss Worthington told the Planet. 

“It’s always a scramble to try to pull things together on time,” he said. “It’s not always known who is running” when the convention takes place. 

Another problem is the way it is organized, candidates can bring along people to vote for them. “Somebody can try to pack the convention,” Worthington said. 

One critic, who asked that his name not be used because of work-related reasons, said the process was flawed because the screeners and attendees “are a very self-selecting group, with little representation from tenants at large. It’s a little sandbox for student-government types, with a Peace and Freedom faction, a Green faction, and a Kriss Worthington–student faction,” he said. 

The critic, a supporter of rent control, concluded, “The process attracts marginal candidates and marginalizes rent control because of the caliber of people who get on the board.” 

Spector, however, said just the opposite was true. The screening and convention process leads to a slate of strong candidates, she said, arguing that people would learn about the convention through the Planet calendar and announcements on KPFA and through the various organizations involved in screening. 

Worthington argued that the need for a strong, unified rent board outweighs the problems in selecting it. If there were landlords who decided to run for the open seats, it might take a slate to beat them, he said, giving the example of a pack of progressive council candidates in District 4 that, he said, could result in none of them winning and a moderate being elected. 

Spector said a strong rent board is more critical now than ever, with a need to work on issues of eviction of renters due to foreclosure on their units. And, she noted, “People losing these homes have to rent.” 

“People are losing their jobs—we have to keep rents controlled,” Spector said. 

Generally, those elected to the rent board serve four-year terms. In this election, the low-vote getter among the five winning candidates will serve two years. That person will replace a member appointed a few months ago, whose term will end with an elected replacement. The appointed member replaced Chris Kavanagh, a rent-board member convicted of a felony related to his living in Oakland and serving as an elected official in Berkeley. 

Those vying for the rent board to date are incumbents Eleanor Walden and Jack Harrison. Incumbent Rent Stabilization Board Chair Jesse Arreguin is running for City Council in District 4; rent board member Jason Overman has decided that he wants to “explore other ways of being active for progressive causes in the community” and is not running. Because sitting rent board members are not in the race, the Aug. 8 date for submission of rent board nominations is pushed back to Aug. 13. 

The other candidates are Nicole Drake, Robert Evans, Judy Shelton, Jane Welford, Marcia Levenson, Jesse Townley, Taylor Kelly and Igor Tregub. 

Formerly announced candidates Judy Ann Alberti and Clydis Ruth Rogers are not running.

The ground floor of the Fine Arts Building on Shattuck Avenue—built on the former site of Berkeley Fine Arts Cinema, which evolved from the historic Cinema Theatre, showcasing repertory films from all over the world—was approved to be converted to medical office space by the Berkeley Zoning Adjustments Board last week. 

The board approved a use permit modification Thursday for the Fine Arts Building project to allow Chicago-based Equity Residential to build offices in a space previously approved for a 4,749-square-foot movie theater. The prospective tenant for the medical office was not named in the city report. 

The Fine Arts Cinema was demolished almost six years ago in order for the apartment building project to be built. One of the conditions of approval required a space on the ground floor for the cinema. 

In an e-mail to Greg Powell, the city’s project planner, Berkeley-based developer Patrick Kennedy, the building’s previous owner, said he had been unable to find a movie theater operator to rent the space, attributing the failure to the lack of demand for single-screen theaters. Kennedy also included several media reports about the demise of single-screen theaters in the country, including articles from the New York Times and the San Francisco Examiner, which spoke about the challenges faced by single-screen movie operators in the face of competition from multiplexes. 

He added that he had built the shell for a 150-plus seat, single-screen movie theater with plumbing and electrical systems and a 25-ton air conditioning system, as requested by Keith Arnold, who sold the theater to Kennedy.  

The original use permit required the owner to have a minimum of 275 seats in the theater. 

“Mr. Arnold was unable to raise sufficient funds to do any improvements to the space and never even submitted plans to the city for a new theater,” Kennedy’s e-mail said. “For two years we advertised to find a new theater operator and received no interest... . Single-screen theaters have been economically challenged for many years, with almost all such institutions in San Francisco—40, in fact—closing in the last [25] years.”  

Zoning commissioner Jesse Arreguin, who voted against the project, asked city staff how the zoning board had arrived at a minimum of 275 seats when approving the project’s original use permit. 

“Why was it the standard we set?” he asked. 

“It appears the owner of the building did not comply with it since he only built 155 seats.” 

Powell replied he was not aware of the history behind the zoning board’s decision. “Going from memory, the old theater had around 150 seats,” he said. 

Patti Dacey, who sits on the city’s Planning Commission, criticized the proposed use permit modification. 

“This situation is very instructive,” she said during public comment. “The promise of developers to provide citizen amenities, cultural use and improve the quality of life for the community... . What is happening again and again is that these amenities are being stripped away. Now we are going to have office space instead of a well-loved theater. The citizens are not going to get anything from the Fine Arts Building.” 

Cindy O’Hara, who spoke on behalf of Equity Residential—which is owned by Sam Zell, the new owner of the Tribune Company, which owns the Los Angeles Times—said a medical office would also be an amenity to the community. 

“A vacant building is not good for the community, so we applied for medical offices,” she said. “If we could have a theater we would have a theater. The medical office will also provide services to people.” 

Commissioner Bob Allen was the first to move approval of the project. “We are putting blinders on if we don’t recognize the theater industry is a failing business,” he said. “Who are we kidding that if we like something we will get it? The Fine Arts Building is one of the best-designed buildings we have got in the city in the last 25 years, if not the best.” 

Arreguin pointed out that the Fine Arts Building was constructed by demolishing a “long-standing community resource.” 

“I think we are closing the door to another independent theater,” he said. 

Commissioner Sara Shumer echoed Arreguin’s thoughts. “I am also very disappointed that we are changing the arts to office space,” she said.

The Berkeley Unified School District will hold a public meeting Wednesday to discuss the latest design for new classrooms and athletic facilities on the south side of the Berkeley High campus. The district proposes to replace the landmarked Old Gym on Milvia Street, which houses the warm water pool, as outlined in the South of Bancroft Master Plan. 

The Berkeley Board of Education is scheduled to vote whether to approve the conceptual design on Aug. 20. 

Boardmembers have said in the past that the district’s ideal would be to build 15 or more classrooms in the new building to help alleviate the space crunch faced by Berkeley High students, who are forced to attend classes on the steps of the Community Theater at times. 

School Board President John Selawsky said the district would “reiterate and explain” the timeline for the proposed project at the meeting, adding that the demolition of the gymnasium would not begin before June 2011. 

Berkeley Unified passed a resolution last week to work with the City of Berkeley to relocate the warm water pool from the landmarked Old Gym to an appropriate location. 

Part of the master plan includes an opportunity for the district to work out a “property arrangement” with the city so that the city may construct a “replacement warm water pool.” 

The resolution calls for the city to prepare a ballot measure for the June 2010 election to improve the three community pool centers which are on district property, including the warm pool, and fund a new site for the warm pool.  

The district was sued over the South of Bancroft master plan last year by Friends Protecting Berkeley’s Resources for an inadequate environmental impact report, but settled the lawsuit with the group in February in exchange for a charette outlining possibilities to renovate the Old Gym. 

The warm pool is used by the City of Berkeley for recreational and therapeutic programs for seniors and disabled community members. 

According to a memorandum of understanding created in 1990, the city is responsible for operating and maintaining the pool and the adjacent north pool, which is closed for safety reasons, but provisions to recover costs from the school district also exist. 

All capital improvements have to be agreed upon by both the city and the district, according to a report included in the master plan. 

The conceptual design for the proposed project is being prepared by Baker Vilar Architects. A site committee has met eight times in the last six months to discuss the developments, said Lew Jones, the district’s facilities director.  

He said the proposed project was similar to the one outlined in the master plan. It would constitute three phases, starting with the construction of a two-story bleacher building between April 2010 and June 2011. 

The building, which will have bleachers on top, would be built on the opposite side of the football field where the old bleachers currently exist, Jones said. 

“It will have locker and coach rooms which are now located in the Old Gym,” he said. “Before we tear down the Old Gym, everything in it, with the exception of the warm water pool, will be replaced in the new bleacher building.” 

The demolition of the Old Gym would take place between June 2011 and November 2011, followed by the construction of a new classroom building and gymnasium from January 2012 to August 2013. 

“We were never going to do those simultaneously,” Selawsky said.  

He added that the district would be putting in four portables and renovating parts of the Berkeley High campus—including the studio at the Berkeley Community Media-to have up to seven classrooms ready for students in September. 

Selawsky said the district has only conceptual designs for the new classroom building at this point. 

Jones said the new classroom and gym building would be smaller than the Old Gym, which is around 86,000 square feet. 

“The classrooms will take up approximately 20,000 square feet and there will be two small gyms,” he said. 

The Berkeley Unified School District at a public meeting on Monday is scheduled to unveil a plan to rehabilitate West Campus before taking it to the Berkeley Board of Education later in the month. 

On Aug. 20, the board is scheduled to pick either the rehabilitation plan or a design outlining the use of prefabricated structures in order to relocate the district’s administrative staff from the seismically unsafe old City Hall building on 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way to West Campus. 

At a school board meeting last month, the board did not approve the use of prefabricated modular buildings and instead directed staff to develop rehabilitation plans for the existing red brick building on Bonar Street 

Critics of the school district’s proposed West Campus alterations with the use of modulars said the prefabricated structures would ruin the site’s open space, and they pushed for renovation of the building which is already there prompting District Superintendent Bill Huyett to explore that option. 

The district looked into retrofitting West Campus two years ago, but abandoned the possibility when the costs turned out to be prohibitive, almost double the allocated budget for the site, school board President John Selawsky told the Planet. 

“It was around $18 to 20 million,” he said. “We just couldn’t do it. Hopefully the scaled-back renovations will cost much less. But we will also need to know what we are getting from it. The amount of square footage is very important. I know we need at least 25,000 square feet for our offices.” 

Selawsky said the board will give emphasis to the concerns raised by the community at two public meetings held recently before it approves a plan for West Campus. 

“I heard there was strong opposition to the modulars,” he said. “Most of the neighbors want the place to be renovated. This meeting will allow people to comment on the design and give the district time to make revisions before taking it to the board.” 

Lew Jones, the district’s facilities director, said changes to the building’s interior as well as exterior would be presented to the public at the meeting. 

“Conceptually the first floor would have classrooms and space for public functions,” he said, adding that the five classrooms would serve the Berkeley Adult School, which has expressed the need for more space. 

Offices for human resources and the business department would be built on the second floor, Jones said, and the superintendent, along with Assistant Superintendent Neil Smith, would occupy the third floor. 

The building’s exterior would undergo few changes, he said, with renovation focusing mainly on replacing the glass windows. 

“We hope to start work in February 2010,” Jones said. “If we renovate the buildings it will take more time than the modulars. So the offices should be ready for the district to move in by 2011.” 

Jones said the district was also investigating the possibility of refurbishing the cafeteria, which would be used for school board and City Council meetings if the plans were approved. 

“We are currently working on the cost estimates and we don’t expect to have it before the board meeting,” Jones said 

At a public meeting in June, Huyett informed West Campus residents that rehabilitation expenses had turned out to be slightly more than the modulars, which were estimated to cost the district around $10 million. 

“We have to look at the finances very carefully,” Selawsky said. “Our bids have been coming in lower than usual for some time, maybe because of a decrease in construction costs, so we have a little bit more from bond money. I haven’t seen the price tag yet but personally I favor the rehabilitation option.” 

Although some community members had pressed Huyett to create a master plan for West Campus, Selawsky said the district did not have the need or the financial means for it at this point. 

“Ideally it’s a nice idea, but unfortunately we don’t have the bond money for it now,” he said. “We don’t anticipate going out for another bond before 2010 or 2012. Also, we don’t have any needs that would be solved at West Campus. We have various needs that might be fulfilled, but we need to go through our list of properties first and match them up before moving to a master plan.” 

The district passed a resolution last week to work with the City of Berkeley to find a site for the warm water pool but refrained from mentioning West Campus as a preferred site. 

The meeting will be held on Aug. 4, Monday, 7-8 p.m. at the West Campus Boys’ Gym, 1222 University Ave. 

For more information visit www.berkeley.k12.ca.us or call 644-6066. 

The 82 percent graduation rate for the Berkeley Unified School District in 2006–07 is higher than the state level (79.5 percent) but lower than the county level (84 percent), according to data released by the California Department of Education Tuesday as required by federal No Child Left Behind standards. 

Berkeley High School’s graduation rate (85.6 percent) was higher than the state and county levels, but graduation rates at Berkeley Technology Academy (43.6 percent) were lower than both the statewide and countywide levels. 

The State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell released two sets of data for graduation rates for 2006–2007. 

Under the state-level report, the “ninth-grade-to-graduate rate” is 67.6 percent, which means that just over two-thirds of California’s high school students who started high school received a diploma four years later in the 2006-2007 school year. 

Tina Jung, spokesperson for the California Department of Education, said the state-level data could not be broken down to county, district and school levels. The state-level data is based on the Statewide Student Identifiers (SSIDs), a tracking system established in 2006, which makes the data more accurate, Jung said. 

The state Department of Education, Jung said, was also required by the No Child Left Behind law to report graduation rates that showed a more favorable graduation rate for students compared to the state-level data.  

“These numbers are overstated,” she said. “It does not take into account the students who have not graduated and not dropped out.” 

Last week the state released the first statewide report on high-school dropout and graduation rates tracking individual students, which also relied on Statewide Student Identifiers. 

Although the dropout rate for students at Berkeley Unified School District (15.6 percent) was lower than the countywide (18.7 percent) and statewide (24.2 percent) rates, the rate for Berkeley Technology Academy (59.3 percent) was more than three times the countywide rate and more than double the statewide rate.  

SSIDs provide each student a unique identification number and allow for much more accurate information about how many students are or are not completing their education, state educators said.  

“Increasing graduation rates is critical to closing the achievement gap and preparing students for success in the competitive global economy,” O’Connell said in a statement Tuesday.  

“We are now able to use individual student-level data to more accurately report how many students graduate, how many drop out before graduating, and why these students leave school. Educators at the state and local level must use this powerful new information to prevent students from dropping out in the first place, and to ensure more students leave high school with a diploma in hand.” 

To download state-, county-, district-, and school-level reports, see dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest.

Last Friday, 450 students finished classes for summer school at Berkeley High School (BHS). While most of BHS’s 3,200 students have already been enjoying summer for the last month, many kids have been diligently attending school to receive credit for courses that they either failed or failed to take during regularly scheduled school. 

“I’d say between 95 and 99 percent of students are passing their classes,” said Kristin Glenchur, the school athletic director who is also summer school co-principal at BHS. “Kids actually choose to come to summer school. It’s a choice. They are not required to come. They want to come and improve their grades.” 

For the past month, students have been going to school Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m., taking classes such as English, math, Spanish, chemistry, advanced biology, and history. Students who applied for summer school chose the classes they wanted to take, which formed the course catalog for the summer, based on popular demand. 

Glenchur reported that they started with 550 students, but are ending the summer term with 450 students, “40 or 50 of which may have signed up thinking they were going to fail a class but instead passed it.” The official average daily attendance for the school is around 82 percent, but taking into account the incorrectly enrolled kids, the real attendance rate was more around 91 percent, pretty close to Berkeley High School’s 2007-2008 attendance average of 94-95 percent. 

In addition, the School Lunch Initiative, initiated by Director of Food Services Ann Cooper, continued to provide a free breakfast to students who arrived a half-hour early. 

Glenchur and Jared Brody have been acting co-principals during summer school, leaving Principal Jim Slemp to plan for the upcoming school year. 

“It’s a job I do all year round,” says Slemp. “It’s very rewarding, but I am glad that Kristin and Jared are taking charge for summer school. I wouldn’t really call this a break, though.” 

What determines under what circumstances—and how energetically—the California Democratic Party intervenes in contested Democratic primaries? 

The question came up after the state party poured thousands of dollars into last month’s primary battle for the Senate District 9 Democratic Party nomination between current District 14 Assemblymember Loni Hancock and former District 16 Assemblymember Wilma Chan, helping to fuel Hancock to a 56.8 percent to 43.2 percent victory. An attempted endorsement in an Imperial county race, thwarted at the last minute at the state Democratic convention, prompted similar questions about the propriety of the party’s role in primary campaigns. 

Key portions of the endorsement and candidate support process during the primaries are shrouded in mystery, information either deliberately withheld by the state Democratic Party or made difficult to obtain. 

The framework for California Democratic Party endorsements appear in the party bylaws, which are published on the party’s website at www.cadem.org. 

Under these bylaws, primary election endorsement nominating recommendations take place by written ballot within the 21 regional caucuses at the party’s annual convention, held this year on the weekend of March 28 in San Jose. Endorsement recommendations of incumbent candidates to an office need to get only a simple majority of the regional caucus votes, while non-incumbents must get a 60 percent majority. Endorsement recommendations are then forwarded to the floor of the full convention, which approve them by voice vote on a consent calendar. 

Who actually makes the endorsement decisions? 

As outlined in the bylaws, the 2,700 member Central Committee of the state Democratic Party consists of a collection of elected officials, appointees, and individuals elected at county and regional conventions throughout the state. But a representative at Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento said that list of the names of the Central Committee membership can only be obtained for a $50 fee. 

The state party closely guards the process by which it determines how much money each campaign receives in party donations as a result of the party endorsement. 

“That’s all decided by internal discussions,” state Democratic Party campaign adviser Bob Mulholland said by telephone. Asked to explain, he compared it to a football game “where the players meet before the game to discuss strategy.” Asked to explain further, Mulholland said that the final decision on how much money to give to each endorsed campaign in the Democratic Party is decided by state party chair Art Torres after Torres “consults with various individuals.” 

The results of those consultations can vary widely and dramatically. 

In the 30 State Senate or State Assembly races endorsed by the state Democratic Party in last month’s primary—aside from the Hancock-Chan Senate 9 race—the party reported in its last official financial statement a maximum donation of $1,162 and a minimum of $407 for a total of $32,803 for the 30 races. In that same period, the party donated $41,669 to the Hancock effort.  

Hancock eventually received another $100,000 in last-minute donations from the state Democratic Party following the last formal reporting period, bringing her total donations from the state party to $144,779. As the Daily Planet reported last month, that was more than 23 percent of her total contributions from non-individuals during her entire two-year fund-raising effort. 

During the primary, Chan’s campaign charged that Hancock and the state Democratic Party were using donations from the party to circumvent state laws limiting donations to individual candidates. California election law allows the state party to give unlimited amounts to candidates, without specifying where the money came from, or to disclose whether the persons who donated the money to the Democratic Party earmarked it for specific candidates. 

Although the party declined to provide an explanation for the disparity in the donation amounts, the absence of serious opposition in a primary, or any opposition at all, may provide one explanation. 

In 27 of the senate or assembly primary races in which the Democratic Party made donations, the candidate who received the donation was running unopposed. 

In Assembly District 39 (Los Angeles County), where incumbent Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes easily beat paralegal Louis Shapiro 74.2 percent to 25.8 percent, the party donated $406 to the Fuentes campaign. That case was similar to Assembly District 62 (San Bernadino County), where incumbent Assemblymember Wilmer Carter beat education advocate Gil Navarro 60.4 percent to 39.6 percent. The party gave Carter $940. And in Riverside County’s Assembly District 64, the party gave $1,162 to Paul Rasso in his 97 percent to 3 percent victory over Darryl Terry in a battle of write-in candidates.  

In 17 contested Assembly races and four contested State Senate races during the June 3 Democratic primary, no candidate received sufficient endorsement votes at the state party convention district caucuses for the party to intervene. 

Meanwhile, the party’s practice of endorsing non-incumbent candidates in contested primaries has come under fire in some state Democratic Party circles. In April, Democratic Central Committee delegate Dale Wissman posted an entry to the California Progress Report website on the controversy surrounding attempts to get a party endorsement in the 80th Assembly District (Imperial County). In that primary, in which the party made no endorsement, school board member Manuel Perez took 36 percent of the vote in beating out three challengers for the nomination. 

In his posting, Wissman wrote that “eleven scrappy delegates [to the state convention in San Jose], the majority of whom were first timers, found it necessary to stand together (no matter which candidate they supported) to ensure that the Party made no endorsement in the AD80 race.”  

Wissman said that the reasons for their position on non-endorsement “had everything to do with good old-fashioned democracy and fairness. … Imagine the mess if the Democratic Party attempted to endorse Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama as the Party’s presidential candidate BEFORE any voters had a chance to cast primary ballots in their state. Do you think some people would see it as unfair if Barack was endorsed over Hillary (or vice-versa) without a primary vote? You bet. Do you think it would create conflict? Absolutely. Yet, that is exactly the scenario that played out in San Jose at the state Democratic Party Convention in the 80th Assembly. 

“Perhaps most disturbing for us, and many of the other eleven delegates working together in San Jose, was why the Democratic Party was even trying to endorse a candidate BEFORE the June primary election in the first place,” Wissman concluded. “It only makes sense that the Democratic candidate in the 80th Assembly District who gets the most votes in the June Primary should be the Democratic Party’s endorsed candidate.” 

The effort to change West Berkeley zoning regulations has produced an unusual show of amity after an initially tense confrontation between city staff and neighborhood activists. 

Woodworker John Curl said that while he had been concerned that a push for regulatory revisions would cause dire impacts in West Berkeley’s embattled community of artisans and small industries, “staff has really been talking with stakeholders.” 

Curl and others in the West Berkeley Alliance of Artisans and Industrial Companies (WEBAIC) initially perceived the push for change as “something that came from the top, like orders to shake things up.” 

The initial title given the effort, “West Berkeley Flexibility,” had raised fears that the program would displace the smaller- scale producers as the city rushed to embrace major corporate projects. 

But Curl said city staff “have really moderated their stance and become more realistic and are not proposing changes to the goals and policies adopted in the West Berkeley Plan.” 

Darrell de Tienne, a San Franciscan who often represents Berkeley developers in negotiating the city regulatory process, said he hopes some flexibility will result—at least enough for retired Peerless Lighting President Doug Herst to build his two-square-block, 5.5-acre project. 

The site, which includes the former Peerless manufacturing plant, would include most of the two blocks between Fifth Street on the east and the Union Pacific train tracks on the west between Allston and Bancroft ways. 

To make the plan work, de Tienne said, the city would have to rezone half of the eastern block so that it all fit in the MUR zone, which allows for both residential and mixed uses. 

The rezoning would allow for creation of a new form of live/work space, where living and work sites are separated so that toxic compounds are separated from living spaces, de Tienne said. 

“For instance, oil paints are now considered toxics because of the fumes,” he said, citing the case of one West Berkeley artist who lives in her studio and had to switch from oils to acrylics after her child was born. 

With the rezoning, artists could have their studios in the block zoned for manufacturing and light industrial uses (MULI) and live across the street in the block rezoned for residential, he said. 

“In reality, it’s just a scheme to try to change the zoning ordinance so that they can put residences in a zone where you can’t put residences,” Curl said. 

“John just doesn’t want the line to move because God put it there 20 years ago,” quipped de Tienne. “In reality, we’re actually going to be increasing the amount of manufacturing space.” 

Peerless, co-founded 116 years ago by Herst’s grandfather and his two brothers, closed its manufacturing operations in the city two-and-a-half years ago, moving them to Mexico and Indiana, and Herst sold his interest in the firm, retaining the Berkeley property. 

Herst unveiled his ideas for the site at a special meeting of the Civic Arts Commission in September 2006, when he asked for a redefinition of the city’s statutory description of art to include the products of digital software as well as oil, canvas, marble and pen. 

While the commissioners responded with a proposed redefinition, the City Council still hasn’t acted, de Tienne said. 

Planning commissioners have been hearing arguments from all sides, and their July 23 session was devoted to the topic, with de Tienne, Herst and Curl all in attendance along with WEBAIC’s Rick Auerbach, who is working temporarily with the city to help draft the proposals that will go to the commission. 

One major concern of WEBAIC activists is what they call “land-banking,” where owners hold onto vacant or underutilized sites in hopes that regulatory changes will enable them to reap the rewards of higher prices. 

“We want the city to come out with a stable zoning ordinance so that property owners won’t try to create a crisis” to force changes, Curl said. “In reality, West Berkeley isn’t any more underutilized than any other part of town.” 

For his part, de Tienne said that Herst isn’t land-banking. 

“The site is already fully occupied,” he said, “so Doug doesn’t have to have it developed right now.” 

But Curl said Herst “is proposing a project that is totally against the zoning regulations because he, like a lot of big property owners, thinks that the City Council, the Planning Commission and the Zoning Adjustments Board will just go along with any project that offers greater revenues to the city coffers.” 

“Doug really wants to create an artists’ community,” said de Tienne. “This is the most exciting project I’ve seen in a long time.” 

While part of the space would be dedicated to the arts, much of the rest would house what de Tienne called “large-scale but not heavy manufacturing,” citing as an example the building at 725 Potter St. developed by another of his clients, Wareham Properties. 

Herst also wants to create small-scale “incubator” spaces of 1,500 square feet or less to accommodate product development projects. “We are calling them small-scale manufacturing,” he said. 

The idea of incubators also surfaced briefly during discussions of the Downtown Area Plan Advisory Committee. 

So far Herst hasn’t submitted any formal plans to the city, and he, de Tienne, Curl, Auerbach and many others are closely watching the effort now under way before the Planning Commission.

A rash of robberies in the past week brings Berkeley to a total of 50 this month, up from 25 in July 2007. 

In the past week, 10 robberies have been committed, which does not include the large number of auto break-ins that occur every day. This week’s include one commercial robbery and five muggings. Wednesday, July 23, alone saw two commercial robberies, two muggings and a third attempted mugging. 

“We have seen an increase in robberies this month,” said BDP Sgt. Mary Kusmiss, the Community Services Bureau Supervisor. “Whether that is going to be a persistent trend, we won’t know until next month.” 

According to Kusmiss, the trend extends across the Bay Area with many nearby communities also suffering from an abnormally high number of robberies. 

“We’re not sure why there has been such an increase, but we’re certainly feeling the impact,” Kusmiss said. 

Berkeley saw 34 robberies in April, 35 in May and 33 in June. July’s total reached 50 by the end of the month. Kusmiss said that a typical monthly average ranges from 25-40, but this summer has seen continually high numbers. 

On Thursday, July 24, just after midnight, two suspects stole a tray of donuts from Kingpin Donuts. When the cashier tried to stop the thieves, one of the suspects struck him. No cash was stolen, only donuts. 

Also on July 24, just before 1 a.m., two suspects attacked a man at Kittredge and Shattuck, threatened him with a gun and took his cash. One of the suspects was caught after a witness called the police after seeing the suspect flee the scene. 

On Saturday, July 26, just after 6 p.m., four suspects were involved in the theft of a man’s bicycle, backpack and iPod in the 2000 block of Allston Way. The victim said that one suspect took his bike, but he pursued the thief and recovered the bicycle. Unfortunately, another three suspects then attacked the victim, hit him repeatedly and stole his bike and other belongings. 

At 4:55 p.m. on Monday, July 28, in the 2200 block of Shattuck Avenue, a woman’s wallet was stolen by a male suspect who threatened the victim with a knife. 

On Tuesday, July 29, at 11:07 a.m., in the 3100 block of California Street, a suspect punched a man in the stomach and head before stealing his guitar and fleeing the scene. 

Last Thursday, Berkeley police issued photos of one of two suspects who robbed a Wells Fargo Bank in the Andronico’s Supermarket at 1444 University Ave. on July 18. 

“With robbery, unlike other crimes, the trend tends to be one suspect or a group of suspects, so when we can make one arrest, it will stop a series of crimes,” Kusmiss said. 

Although she said BDP have not identified a particular series in this month’s rash of crimes, in part because of the vague descriptions understandably given by victims, Kusmiss did say that robbers will keep using the same tactics in the same community because they have had past success with those measures. 

“Robbers are opportunistic,” Kusmiss said, they take advantage of a particular set of circumstances.  

To protect yourself, police stress the importance of awareness: turn off your cell phone or MP3 player, walk confidently, and pay attention to the behavior of someone making you uncomfortable.

I’ve smoked cigarettes for 52 years, which is pushing my luck. Statistically, I should have been dead six years ago.  

Almost everybody has a developed opinion about this strange habit, which has been deemed a health code violation in Berkeley business districts since May, subject to citation by the Health Department. 

Some people have several opinions at the same time. 

“It’s a filthy, horrible habit,” said Michael Sherman, who nevertheless smokes. But he doesn’t allow it in his apartment or car because he—and friends and visitors—don’t like the lingering smell. 

Sherman, a member of the city’s Police Review Commission, said, “I was an anti-smoking fascist the first time I quit, but it can go too far. When they banned smoking on the top of a hill in Golden Gate Park, it really pissed me off.” 

Zealous anti-smokers can get nasty about it. Once, a guy rode his bicycle down the sidewalk and through a crowd of children outside the downtown YMCA in order to give me the finger. 

But mostly it’s a sort of NIMBYism—smokers should have a place to smoke but not around me. 

Chris Sulberg, a professional musician who is a neighbor of mine, says the smell of smoke literally makes him sick. 

“When I was 4 years old, I drove with my parents from Wisconsin to Berkeley. All the way, they both smoked. It took 10 days,” he said. “Every day, I got terribly sick from reading comic books, and as it turns out, I associate the smell of cigarettes with that experience. It’s kind of a Pavlovian response.” 

I live in a small apartment building on upper Kittredge Street where the lease prohibits smoking. I smoked outside behind the building but tenants said they could smell it and that anyway the back lot was filling up with cigarette butts. 

I moved to the sidewalk out front. Sulberg—who took an active interest in the unfolding events—remarked, “The farther away the better.” 

Shortly, an elderly woman I know up the street, would shout out her window: “You’re my friend, but don’t smoke here.” 

I ended up across the street, smoking with employees outside the California Theater. 

These are young artistic types—a writer, a filmmaker, book readers. Smart. A type apparently prone to take up smoking. 

These days, they talk a lot about quitting. 

The smoking ban has yet to be enforced. Berkeley police have avoided being involved with it. Instead, citations may be handed out by the City Health Department following a period of trying to get people to stop smoking and other education efforts. 

Officer Andrew Frankel, the police department’s public information officer, said, “Police resources are limited.” 

“I’m a smoker, by the way,” I mentioned. 

“I won’t be the one who cites you,” Frankel said.  

My wife and I were visiting England when the Labor Party suffered its resounding defeat in the municipal elections held on May Day. Labor’s debacle may offer lessons for us and our own politicians. 

We spent most of our visit at the North Oxford home of Hubert Allen, an expert on the problems of local government. A consultant to governments in Europe and Africa, he shared with us his understanding of the reasons for Labor’s overwhelming defeat. Some of the most important, in his view, are built into the structure of government in England today, and are not party-specific. As he wrote in Cultivating the Grass Roots: Why Local Government Matters, “In England ... during recent decades local government has lost responsibility for over 90 functions: trunk roads, electricity, gas, hospitals, public health, water and sewerage, river pollution and many more. All these formerly local functions are now controlled by centrally appointed ‘quangos’ (‘quasi-autonomous, non-governmental organizations’) which lack any direct accountability to the citizenry. Moreover, through tighter and tighter controls local autonomy has largely disappeared in such fields as education, housing, police, and capital financing, and even the size of the annual budget.” 

As he sees it, regardless of which party is in power, too many of the decision-making groups in Whitehall (where power is concentrated) do not talk to each other. The result is that unless elected political leadership is extremely alert, policies are adopted which are uncoordinated and incompletely thought out. Too many new laws deal with only one aspect of a problem, and no consideration is given to possible unintended consequences. This is exacerbated by attitudes another scholar describes as “elite contempt for local government.” Bottom line: ordinary citizens are frozen out of decisions affecting them. 

An eco-town 

In April a development company named Parkridge Holdings, which is partly American-owned and has offices in London, Warsaw, Barcelona, Paris, and Moscow, announced its intention to construct an “eco-town” on open land near Weston-on-the-Green, an Oxfordshire village some 15 miles from Oxford’s city center. Weston Otmoor, the proposed town, is to include 10,000-15,000 homes, two secondary schools, and eight primary schools.  

Purposely keeping out of the public eye, Parkridge Holdings secretly negotiated options to buy thousands of acres from farmers in the area. At the same time, it lobbied officials of the Housing Ministry in London to approve its plan for the new town. (We’ve seen similar maneuvers in Berkeley and Albany.) The three local governments affected—Weston-on-the-Green, Bicester, and Charlton-on-Otmoor—did not learn about the developer’s plans until the Housing Ministry published a “short list” of 15 possible new eco-towns, 10 of which will be built. 

As reported by the Oxford Times, opposition appeared quickly. Local residents organized as “the Weston Front Action Group.” They soon found themselves supported by the Campaign to Protect Rural England, which says 80 percent of the land described by Parkridge Holdings as “brownfields” is actually healthy land where crops are growing today. One-third of the new town is to be built in Oxford’s cherished Greenbelt. It is also to include the entire Woodside Meadows Nature Reserve, created by the national government as an area of “Special Scientific Interest” for the protection of endangered plants and animals.  

Other voices have pointed out more suitable locations in Oxfordshire for ecologically sound housing development. Hubert Allen showed us two of them: a surplus American air base and an old abandoned factory complex. Unlike the Oxford Greenbelt, these really are brownfields. Key people at the Housing Ministry apparently talked to the developer but not to their own colleagues. They did not even visit Weston-on-the-Green, an hour’s drive from London. And the Housing Ministry did not communicate with any of the local city councils. The Labor Party reaped the antagonism generated by these proceedings. 

Final approval for Weston-Otmoor has not been issued, and the Ministry has promised “full local consultation.” But as the Oxford Times wrote, “the big question” is whether the views of the local governments “ultimately matter.” If the development is approved, the Weston Front Action Group stands ready to take it to court. 

War and taxes 

Early in the administration of Gordon Brown, the current prime minister, Labor abolished “the 10 pence tax rate.” The prime minister said this reform would boost the average income of the poorest 30 percent of English families by three pounds per week. In fact, the reform was partly successful: it did benefit families with children. But an unintended consequence was that millions of young workers, childless couples and pensioners wound up with really big tax increases. Some pensioners had to pay an increase of almost 500 pounds ($1,000 U.S.). 

Taxes came due shortly before the election, and the anger of working class voters promptly showed itself at the ballot box. In the aftermath—too late to help defeated Labor candidates for local offices—the government declared its intention to compensate those who had been injured. 

Throughout the campaign the Iraq war simmered in the background. It continues to alienate intellectuals and Labor’s idealistic middle class members, many of whom had hoped Gordon Brown would firmly repudiate Tony Blair’s war policy and take active steps to extricate Britain from Iraq. When it became clear that this would not happen, many of them gave up on Labor and stayed home on election day. Without its idealists, the Labor Party does not win elections. 

The London mayoralty 

London is the largest city in Europe and the most glittering prize in English municipal politics. Even Americans who don’t follow English elections noticed the media coverage of the London mayoral race. Ken Livingston, the incumbent, was the Labor candidate. He is famous in the U.S. for his efforts to reduce automobile traffic in central London. The Torys chose an off-beat figure named Boris Johnson to run against him. He had a reputation as a witty, undisciplined, and unpredictable politician. 

Johnson’s violations of the rules of political piety have been widely reported. “I’m supporting [our party leadership] out of pure, cynical self-interest,” he said. He also promised men that “Voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M-3.” In the midst of another speech he turned to an aid and said, loudly enough for the crowd to hear, “I can’t remember my position on drugs. What’s my line on drugs?” The Labor establishment wouldn’t take Johnson seriously. But Londoners, in their current mood, voted him in. 

After losing local offices all across the country, Ken Livingston’s defeat in London was especially disheartening for Labor. It was the first time since Tony Blair’s star rose above Downing Street that Labor finished last in a national election. Most English political commentators believe this augurs a Conservative victory in the Parliamentary elections two years from now. To stay in power, Labor needs to get its act together. 

Peter Mutnick was mad as hell and he wasn’t going to take it anymore. So he sued UC Berkeley and the city all the way to the Supreme Court. He died peacefully last week in the Oncology Unit at Alta Bates at the age of 59. He was a frequent contributor to the Daily Planet’s opinion pages. 

Although the court refused to consider his challenge to the city and UC’s role in the Downtown Development Plan, he emerged as a self-made legal beagle, able to prepare and submit briefs to the Supreme Court (even if he did consult with Lawrence Tribe, a leading constitutional scholar at Harvard). 

The continuing e-mail correspondence he had with Tribe, while buoyant, was, if anything, unusual (Mutnick argued with him on equal footing) and it ended with Tribe musing, “Why am I talking with you?” 

Why was he talking with Mutnick? After all, Mutnick wasn’t a fellow law prof, or even an attorney (it’s doubtful Tribe knew). He just had the knack of dialoging at the highest level with college professors and attorneys or anyone intelligent whom he would contact cold. 

Maybe he got this by being the son of a well-known civil rights attorney (his father collaborated with William Kunstler) and a librarian (from his mother he inherited a love of books). 

Born in 1949 in Plainfield, New Jersey, he attended the prestigious Han Academy after impressing his grade school teachers. He taught himself calculus at 12, a hint of later polymathism, entered the University of Michigan early and was on the fast track to a doctorate in physics when he was voluntarily hospitalized from what was described as schizophrenia; whatever it was, it ended his academic career. 

He had a longtime friendship with Henry Stapp, senior professor of theoretical physics at Lawrence Lab, who discussed his research with him and acknowledged Mutnick’s contributions in his papers. 

As his final days approached, Mutnick worked feverishly trying to reconcile Judaism with Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity. He was reading the works of Professor Samuel Sandmel, the late, great ecumenist rabbi, shortly before he died.  

Although the son of Marxist atheists (his father’s family was Jewish and his mother’s Christian) he had no Jewish education, but as he did calculus, physics and philosophy, he passed Judaism 101 and changed his name to “Cephas.” 

He is survived by two sisters, Barbara and Deborah, and several nieces and nephews, all of New York City. A memorial will be held on the balcony in the Med in September.

One day this week, much to my surprise, I pledged allegiance, sang the national anthem, and had my picture taken next to an American flag with an immigration service official. Why? one might ask, as I asked myself. Because a friend was being admitted to an exclusive society, becoming a naturalized American citizen, and despite all of our griping about what’s wrong with this country of ours, he thinks it’s great, and so do I. 

Mind you, he’s not the stereotypical right-leaning superpatriotic immigrant, not by a long shot. He’s French by birth. His Jewish-Tunisian-French mother was a “soixant-huitard,” one of the students who took to the barricades in 1968 in France’s version of the Free Speech Movement. His father is of African-French descent, a one-time labor leader from Martinique.  

The family legend is that he was conceived on a trip to San Francisco in the early 1970s. His African ancestry is accentuated by vigorous dreadlocks. His political outlook is leftish, like that of his parents. His wife is thoroughly Indian-American, born in Los Angeles of Indian parents. He’s also a computer whiz, graduate of one of France’s best technical institutes, now launching his own international entrepreneurial venture in the Bay Area.  

In other words, he’s a citizen of the world. So why does he say, and why do I agree, that the United States is where he belongs? 

Like many young people in his cohort around the world, including one of our current presidential candidates, he was brought up on images of the American civil rights movement. We haven’t gotten it right yet, not by a long shot, but in this country in his perception racial equality is a widely shared national goal. Affirmative action or at least equal opportunity are given lip service, if not always practiced.  

In his judgment, France is way behind the United States in dealing with its increasing minority population. He’s worried about the growing strength of anti-immigrant politicians in French elections. 

An incident which seems to have crystallized his decision to apply for U.S. citizenship was an encounter in a park in a Paris suburb. Some African immigrants having a picnic were being harassed by the ever-present “flics” (police), he spoke up to ask what was going on, and for his pains spent a weekend in jail with no charges ever filed. He hopes and believes that this couldn’t happen here in exactly this way, or at least that it’s not public policy, and he’s probably right in principle. 

And the great strength of this country, still true despite continuous attempts by some to change it, is that we’re a nation of immigrants. People who don’t exactly belong anywhere else belong here, by definition and tradition. 

We native-born Americans benefit enormously from this. My friend is a great catch for the United States, the kind of person who will add a lot of spice and a lot of substance to the national stew.  

The swearing-in took place in Masonic Auditorium in San Francisco, with the applicants for citizenship seated on the first floor and friend and family in the balcony. Our little party including three of our own family and his wife, mother-in-law and sister-in-law. We could spot him easily in the crowd below because of the dreads. 

While we waited for the event to start, he texted his wife: “Should I register with the Democratic Party? Ask Becky.” Honored to be part of such an important decision, I said yes, with reservations that I’d explain later. 

When it came time for everyone to join in singing the national anthem, we could see him singing lustily from the cheat sheet supplied by our hosts, the Department of Homeland Security. I don’t usually join in such ostentatious displays of patriotism, out of respect for my neighbors’ musical sensibilities as well as incurable cynicism, but when I saw him singing I couldn’t resist.  

And when I heard a loud, in-tune and clear voice coming from somewhere around my knees, I looked down and saw a little Asian boy, not more than four at the most, wearing a red white and blue striped T-shirt and singing away, with all the words correct from memory. Was I touched, tempted to shed the odd tear or two? You bet. 

We did all snicker in our little group when the video of the president came on. Someone threatened to start an “O-bam-a” chant. We all gathered on the stage afterwards for a picture with the genial official who presided over the event and his large American flag, but also for a joking shot with the equally large Homeland Security flag on the other side of the stage. 

Outside the hall the Democrats and Republicans had set up voter registration tables. The Republicans looked forlorn—their life-size cutout of John McCain only called attention to the lack of actual humans talking to them. The Dems were a bit busier, but were delighted to receive my photogenic friend into their midst and set up pictures with their Obama cutout.  

I explained to him that party registration meant that you could vote in primaries, but you could still vote for anyone you wanted from whatever party in the general election, and change parties if you wanted between elections. He was very impressed that Americans felt free to reveal their party leanings. In France, he said, people kept their choices a secret—even his very political mother would never tell him how she voted. He was amazed to learn that he could now run for office if he wanted. 

But after this uplifting encounter with idealized democracy on parade, do I now believe, like Dr. Pangloss in Candide, that this is the best of all possible worlds? Not exactly.  

After all, last week I also attended the two-hour charade wherein the Berkeley City Council pretended to listen to the public’s comments on whether they should appeal the lower court decision in the gymnasium lawsuit against UC. By my count it was about 50 or 60 pro-appeal, with just two or three con. There was, of course, the usual fact-free claim of the existence of a silent majority in opposition, too busy or too self-important perhaps to show up in person. 

(As a card-carrying member of the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce, I was embarrassed to see that the Chamber came out on the wrong side yet again. How can Chamber members ask Berkeley residents to shop in Berkeley with this record? Don’t members know that UC no longer purchases its office supplies or even its airline tickets from local vendors?) 

Other able writers in this issue explain exactly why the undemocratic nature of this whole performance—complete with the unreleased offer letter from the UC official and the “I had my fingers crossed” non-vote votes on the appeal decision which councilmembers sophistically claim that they don’t have to disclose—was so shocking to anyone who believes in open democratic process. We don’t need to rehash the whole sorry story in this space.  

Let’s just say, now addressing my newly naturalized friend, that it doesn’t have to be this way, but it does take a lot of work on the part of a lot of people to keep our politicians honest. The good news is that an enormous number of Berkeley citizens, breathtaking in their diversity, showed up last Thursday to speak out for they believe is right, and they deserve the thanks of all the rest of us for doing so on our behalf. 

Help send your cartoonist to D.C.!  

Each year the Union of Concerned Scientists sponsors a cartooning contest on the topic of political interference in science. Hundreds of entries are whittled down to 12 cartoons to appear in their calendar, and this year Daily Planet editorial cartoonist Justin DeFreitas has two of the 12. The public votes on the best of the 12 and the winner gets an all-expenses-paid trip to D.C. and their cartoon on the cover of the calendar.  

You can vote for DeFreitas' "Lab Coats" cartoon (No. 11) here: http://ucsaction.org/campaign/science_idol_2008_vote  

Voting closes Aug. 8. 

WINDFALL PROFITS ARE THEFT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Quarter after quarter, and year after year, the oil companies post record profits that are higher than ever before. If they were just passing the high cost of crude oil on to the consumer, their profits would be constant. No, they are squeezing us for excessive profits simply because they can. 

Sure, this hurts us consumers. It is also wrecking havoc on our country's economy. And still, they receive billions in tax breaks. These must stop. Instead, the oily companies should pay a windfall-profits tax. Let's use their profits to fund solar and wind energy alternatives. Then we could drive plug-in electric cars with no carbon footprint on the environment. 

Bruce Joffe 

Piedmont 

• 

McDONALD'S FIRINGS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I've been a regular patron of McDonald's restaurant in Berkeley over the past 20 or more years, always aiming for a table at the window where I've spent happy hours sipping coffee, reading a newspaper or simply watching the passing parade on Shattuck Avenue. 

In all those years I've had ample opportunity to observe Susan Hanks, who was recently dismissed by McDonald's after 26 years of faithful service. Granted that Susan is developmentally disabled, this didn't affect her work one whit. Clearly, Susan loved her job—loved it with a passion. She wiped tables and chairs with gusto, stacked trays, picked up trash from the floor and pushed a broom, all with lightning speed. If I tried to engage her in conversation, she made it clear she was there to work—not to chat. Never mind that we had been neighbors in the Elmwood District at one time. 

It pains me to think what this cruel dismissal has meant to someone so dedicated to her job. Could McDonald's not have waited until Susan and the two other employee retired? Are we to assume that this restaurant will now recruit only graduate students and Ph.D.'s to clean tables and pick up trash? I suggest they consider that Safeway stores have successfully hired developmentally disabled workers for many years. 

Dorothy Snodgrass 

• 

ANOTHER VIEW OF CIVIL WAR HERO McCLEAVE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In the East Bay Then and Now article entitled "Civil War Hero Established a Military Dynasty," the exploits of Captain William McCleave during the Civil War are described. Several incidents involved battles between the California Volunteers and Indian tribes in Texas and New Mexico. I have a different perspective on his actions there. For example, Captain McCleave and the infamous Kit Carson attacked a Kiowa village of 150 lodges and killed many men, women and children. For this, Kit Carson named him as the officer "deserving highest praise." 

He may have led an honorable and productive life in Berkeley, but his actions against many Indian tribes and individuals during the Civil War do not make him a hero.  

What is ironic is that he left Ireland during the famine that resulted from English policies that favored the rights of the large landowners over the farmers who worked the land. So he and his family and many thousands others were driven from Ireland because of a government policy. Then he comes to the United States and attacks Native Americans who also are trying to protect their ancestral lands and families against a military machine. 

For me the irony is two-fold. My ancestors were driven from their ancestral lands in Scotland in the early 1800s so that large English landowners could use their land to graze sheep for the lucrative wool markets of England. In many cases the families were forced off their land and their houses burned to the ground. My Irish ancestors came to the United States, like Wm McCleave, because they were starving, due to a potato famine and English policy. I wonder why he thought that attacking Kiowa and Comanche villages was honorable, but starving in Ireland was not. 

He may have been a hero to some, but not to me and many of my friends and relatives. 

Will Galeson 

• 

BURMA 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

China is a major trade partner, major arms supplier and major defender of the junta in the international arena, especially in the United Nations Security Council. The military junta in Burma is still in power to this day, despite strong and continuous resistance by the people of Burma, because of China's support. China has provided billions of dollars in weapons, used its veto power at the UN Security Council to paralyze peaceful efforts at change, and unilaterally undermined diplomatic efforts to free the world's only imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize recipient Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners. 

The Olympics begin on Aug.8—the 20th anniversary of Burma's largest national democratic uprising, when millions bravely marched through the streets, and nearly toppled the military regime if they had not been brutally massacred. 

The people of Burma are continually calling for a protection of freedom and human rights and an end to attacks against ethnic minorities. China however continues to send weapons and funds to the Burmese dictatorship, allowing attacks against civilians to continue 

Human rights activists inside Burma have called on people around the world to not watch the Olympic ceremonies because of China's support for the Burmese military. You can still support the athletes in what they do, support the Chinese people, and support the games for what they stand for, but don't support the Chinese government's policies. 

Don Irwin 

Oakland 

• 

WHAT IS THE PENALTY? 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In the event of an earthquake on the Hayward Fault could the university be held liable for any injuries or deaths occurring at or near the (new) sports facility cum stadium given that a reasonable person could (and many have) foreseen such an occurrence and other building options were readily available? Given the likelihood of such an occurrence, would the lack of an adequate disaster plan and evacuation proceeding constitute simple negligence or rise to the level of willful and intentional disregard of human safety and life? Will the liability for any such an event be restricted to the university or can it be extended to any donors, trustees or public officials who knowingly supported the venture despite its risks? Or will the taxpayers be saddled with any liabilities that may occur? 

Should the university be liable to the city for any infrastructure damage or public safety costs caused by the project? Should not users of the facility as well as people who live and work nearby be adequately warned of the dangers and likelihood of a major quake? Would warning labels printed (like on cigarette packages) on tickets along with postings in the area be adequate or should users and property buyers be required to sign documents assuming the risk? Should disaster plans be posted at all entrances and exits to the complex? Should half-time disaster drills become a normal part of every game? 

At what point does potential risk outweigh potential gain? Should not safety be a primary consideration in the creation of any educational facility? Is a sports facility at that location necessary for the diffusion of knowledge? When and how can an institution be judged guilty of betraying a public trust? What is the penalty for that? 

Joanne Kowalski 

• 

THREE CHEERS FOR THE PLANET 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Our great City of Berkeley is known worldwide for its outstanding progressiveness. When Mike and Becky O'Malley purchased the Daily Planet, they created an amazing newspaper that represents that unique, distinguishing quality. No other publication has now, or ever, done that important job. Without getting too maudlin: Three big Berkeley cheers for the O'Malleys! 

Robert Blau 

• 

ON SMOKING 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

A "friend of mine" who is a former smoker (he quit again, just this morning), remembered an incident on Telegraph Avenue, near the Med. He was directed as far from its entrance as possible. Fair enough, I say. 

Standing at the edge of the street where bike riders were exposed to his exhalations (and car exhaust), "he" uttered to a fellow fumer, "We're pushed to the curb with the junkies and pigeons. Oh. Sorry—you don't look like a pigeon." 

I've stopped referring to tobacco addiction as a habit. Not many years ago, there was a running ad in a local paper which read: "Be paid to ridicule smokers." Had that ad been about alcoholics, there would have been quite a negative response from readers. The medical condition of alcoholism has been upgraded to a disease. Remember when those who suffered that affliction were considered by more people as losers and bums? 

Pedestrians are not addicted to car exhaust, nor to the noise they produce. 

If only the mass availability of tobacco had been prevented, especially the most toxic form: cigarettes. 

Ove Ofteness 

• 

FEVERFEW 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Soon there won't be any place in public to smoke. After all, smoking in public makes everyone downwind smoke, too. It's not as unobtrusive as snuff or chaw, after all. It makes the rest of us do the drug, too. A little help for you, Al, and Michael, and other self-loathing smokers: Feverfew. This bitter (God's way of preventing overdosing?) relative of tansy and chrysanthemum contains chemicals called parthenols which do the same thing to your capillaries as nicotine. This gets rid of the dreaded withdrawal migraine. Nicotine's stimulant and anti-depressant affects can be replaced by coffee or tea or chocolate or even guarana, none of which have to be set on fire to tickle the brain and enrage passing crazed bicyclists. Can't find Feverfew? It grows like a weed in this area, freely self-seeding and coming back from mild frosts readily. E-mail me for a plant or five. No more dragon breath, please.  

Linus Hollis 

• 

GIVE IT UP 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Al Winslow’s article “Not A Time To Be A Smoker” illustrates the lengths to which a smoker must go to avoid persecution. I feel bad for those poor addicted people. But smoke—any kind of smoke—causes me to cough and constantly clear my throat. Everyone's right to clean air trumps any perceived right to smoke. 

It is clear that both smokers and second-hand smokers are at risk for a number of diseases and cancers. It’s no wonder, because cigarettes contain a high number of toxic chemicals. 

Smoking organic tobacco and papers still takes its toll on the lungs because of fine particulates, as well as the dioxin that rains down on all crops, whether organic or not. 

Research in the scientific journal Archives of Environmental Health has shown that cigarettes deliver high levels of dioxins that are comparable to those coming out of incinerator stacks. Dioxins are linked to a very wide range of diseases and cancers, some of which have negative effects on the human endocrine system. This makes dioxin an endocrine disruptor, causing inappropriate quantity of hormones—too much, too little or none at all—that affect nearly every bodily function from reproduction and development to memory and body temperature regulation. 

But there are many other toxic chemicals involved in smoking. Alternative ingredients can take the place of real tobacco including but not limited to: loblolly pine cellulose; paper manufacturing waste; agricultural waste; timber products waste; municipal paper waste; and food processing waste. The chlorine-bleached paper it’s typically wrapped in is a source of dioxins. If that isn’t enough then there are radioactive phosphate tobacco fertilizers (Polonium 210); burn accelerants; a wide range of sugars and artificial sweeteners; an abundance of chemicals used in commercial farming; and residue from 400 pesticides registered for use with tobacco. 

To continue smoking is to continue one's self abuse. But please don’t do it around others who did not specifically give permission to smoke nearby. I wish the author and all smokers the will to stop. But just give it up Al. (Please.) 

Paul Goettlich 

• 

GAY MARRIAGE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In his July 31 letter, Ben Padilla attempts to justify his opposition to gay marriage on both historical and biblical grounds. He states that the "personal writings" of our "Founding Fathers" make it clear that they were theists and believed in "the God of the Bible." Probably true, but in their wisdom they set aside their personal beliefs to create a constitution which forbids "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The Bible, like other ancient religious scripts, is a collection of opinion and superstition set forth by pedants whose views, in their time, were surely as bigoted as those of Mr. Padilla, and it has no place in state policy. His own distaste for homosexuality is made vivid by his revulsion at public gay displays. As to his contention that homosexuality is "physically harmful" and damaging to the spirit, I wonder what has so severely damaged his. The glory of democracy is that we all may decide for ourselves what is good for us, or not. 

Jerry Landis 

• 

NO ON PROPOSTION 8 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Our California Constitution—the law of our land—should guarantee the same freedoms and rights to everyone. No one group should be singled out to be treated differently. However, Proposition 8 would deny gay and lesbian couples these freedoms and rights. Regardless of how you feel about this issue, the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society, just like the freedoms of religion and speech. The government has no business telling people who can and cannot get married. Just like government has no business telling us what to read, watch on TV or do in our private lives. We don't need Prop. 8; we don't need more government in our lives. 

Will Weiner 

• 

GOOD SAMARITANS IN BERKELEY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Twice in the past couple of months strangers have come to help when I've toppled over in my electric scooters (two different ones, and the falls were for two different reasons). 

The more recent event was this past Thursday on Haste Street, where some clown was parked in a driveway, narrowing the already narrow sidewalk. Scooter and I went over sideways, with the scooter's falling on top of my leg and pinning me. Fortunately, my service dog managed to steer clear of me. I called for help and four people showed up. The first was a man who kept saying, "I love you, I'm coming to help you," as he piled his packages near a wall. The second, third and fourth were an occupational therapist who undoubtedly works at the Herrick Campus, a FedEx deliveryman and a man in scrubs who could have been anything from a neurosurgeon to a janitor. The first man got the scooter off me. The occupational therapist helped me sit up and lent me her handkerchief, and the FedEx man and the man in scrubs got the scooter upright. 

The earlier event was scary enough that I had a bystander (who'd been all the way across Shattuck) come running across to offer help. Since I'd landed on my head I was concerned about a head injury, so I asked the guy to call 911. Our paramedics are wonderful. They're kind, gentle and very well trained. And they had me sitting up and standing up in a very short time. 

And both times, I found myself thinking how glad I am that I moved to Berkeley, lo these many years ago, because it's a place where people do pay attention when others need help. The purpose of this letter is to say thank you to everyone who helped me and made sure I was OK. 

And for the occupational therapist, I'm going to return your handkerchief, cleaned of blood and as fresh and soft as when you offered it to me. 

Joann Lee 

• 

SHAMEFUL BEHAVIOR 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Over two weeks ago, Dan Mogulof, executive director of UC Berkeley's Office of Public Affairs, criticized Becky O'Malley's editorial for its "personal animus." As yet, you have remained undefended, until now. How does the spokesman for an organization employing for two months the tactic of starving the young people in the oaks dare to claim the higher ground? And even offer a sarcastic lecture in his July letter to the editor? It is UC who has handled the theater of the last year and a half so poorly, so arrogantly considering the amount of neighborhood and citywide opposition to their athletic project. How often do you see Shirley Dean and Betty Olds climbing trees? Of course, remember Dona Spring's appearance at the tree-sit and unanswered plea for reason (food for the protestors)? However this turns out, UC and Mogulof have without a doubt behaved shamefully with unnecessary disrespect to its neighbors and the citizens of Berkeley. 

Charles Pappas  

• 

SURLY CYCLISTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

There is graffiti on the wall at Milva and Channing which says "cars are assholes." In Berkeley it barely raises an eyebrow; if it does you may have chuckled. I no longer drive, but I do walk all over Berkeley. In the past three years I have been hit three times, I have been screamed at, sworn at, and spit upon—not by car drivers but by bicyclists. I'm not speaking about thugs from the lower rungs of society, I'm speaking of UC Berkeley students, 30-something parents towing their toddler buggy, workers heading to their jobs, and younger students heading to classes or parks. 

The City of Berkeley speaks of their master plan for the community, a plan in which they reduce the number of cars and provide incentive for the use of public transport, bikes, foot traffic as alternate ways of moving from place to place. I am all for better living and reducing our dependency on oil and gas by reducing the use of cars, but not if there is no incentive for the police department to enforce public safety. 

I'll put this simply: If you are on wheels you are not a pedestrian and do not belong on a sidewalk. Twice I have been hit in a marked crosswalk (once while pushing a stroller) by a cyclist who blew through a stop sign. Both times, they did not apologize; they just admonished me for not getting out of their way. Once I was hit on a sidewalk because I would not give way after they had shouted "on your left!" 

I see cyclists on the sidewalk all over Berkeley, even on designated bicycle boulevards: Milva, Virginia and Ninth Street. I see cyclists ride against the flow of traffic so they can see cars. I see cyclists ignore traffic lights and street signs. I see people decide they're cyclists until confronted by a red light and then suddenly they become a pedestrian, hoping the curb and turning abruptly to ride through the pedestrian crosswalk; wobbling into pedestrians crossing the street. And then, most disheartening of all, I see the Berkeley police force make the choice to stop a jaywalker downtown and ignore the bicyclist wobbling into the elderly woman with a cane in front of Tullys and the main BART station entrance; within 20 feet of the blue and white sign which says "Walk your bike on the sidewalk." 

What I would like to see is more effort made by all of us to remember that our safety and well-being is tied to the safety and well being of those around us. If you want respect for your chosen mode of transportation, than you need to respect others around you, regardless of their mode of transportation. I would like to see Berkeley step up to the plate and realize that just because you have plans that limit and reduce the use of cars in the city, that does not mean you have reduced threats to public safety. I'd like to see the laws of public safety applied uniformly and safely—not just in the tourist areas or the business districts. We residents, who suffer endure harassment and injury due to the carelessness or ignorance of bicyclists, deserve the support and protection of the law enforcement and the city government. 

Meri Liston 

• 

JUST SAY NIX TO BIG OIL'S QUICK FIX 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

You've heard the lies and alibis  

Of bandits in their suits and ties 

Who'd kill the krill and spoil the soil  

And steal from those who truly toil! 

They'll rob our wealth and hurt our health 

They'll break our banks, not fill our tanks 

So please be wise, don't compromise 

Our pristine shoreline for their moonshine 

Don't let them greenwash smart renewables 

While polluting oceans with dark spewables 

Offshore drilling's just a bag of tricks 

So just say nix to this fake fix! 

Don't fall for Big Oil's greedy gimmick 

Or I'll have to pen yet another lame limerick! 

Paula Wagner 

Albany 

CODY’S REPLACEMENT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Berkeley and the East Bay do not need a replacement for Cody’s. What we need is to throw more of our support behind the remaining independent bookstores that we have to ensure that they stay in business. These remaining stores are still struggling even with the closing of Cody’s. They cannot afford for the citizens to open up a book co-op or the like. Any less business for them and we may not have any bookstores left to walk into anymore.  

Support our local independent bookstores; don’t help put them out of business. 

Scott Parker 

• 

WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Taking a Saturday stroll through the farmers’ market a few weeks past, I came upon a Code Pink member exhorting the shoppers to help out at the Marine recruiting office because “the bikers were in town.” While flattered to be considered for an extra spot in our monthly remake of The Wild Ones, I’ve already been subjected to enough noise on that block. My lack of enthusiasm must have shown because as she passed she muttered, “unless you’re pro-war.” 

To clarify, it’s not pro-war—it’s anti-jerk. 

Now that the Scientologists have moved into Shattuck Square perhaps they, the Marines, Code Pink, and the leather vest-wearing bikers from Lafayette can have an epic Jerk Fest. Those SOS jerks from Telegraph are invited too. I’ll spring for the “music” permit. 

John Vinopal 

• 

REALLY? 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding Becky O’Malley’s July 24 editorial, “Appeal is the Prudent Choice”: Honestly? I knew the Daily Planet was known for provocative work, but comparing the University of California to Hitler might not be part of “all that’s fit to print.” Really, Ms. O’Malley? Really? 

Phil Parent 

• 

CLASSY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Comparing UC Berkeley developing land which it owns to the Nazi occupation of Poland...classy. 

Then I’m guessing you equate cutting down 44 trees (and replacing them at a 3 to 1 ratio) with the slaughter of six million Jews, right? 

And here’s another take: 

Your understanding of history is embarrassing because you have the analogy completely backwards. Poland was once a part of Germany but it became a sovereign country just as the United States was once a part of the British Empire and Kuwait was a part of Iraq. Things change as time moves on, in spite of how much people like you don’t want it to. 

The land on which Memorial stadium was built once belonged to the city, but it was purchased legally and it no longer does. It was Hitler that said he would completely ignore Poland’s legal claims to the land and take it back by force, regardless of the devastating consequences to the Polish people. 

Many decades later the terminally idle of Berkeley are completely ignoring the legal rights of the students and taking back the grove by force, regardless of the cost to the students. 

Did the rule of law stop Hitler from acting out his selfish and evil desires? No. Will the rule of law stop the selfish trespassers in the trees? If Hitler has taught us anything, the answer is also no. 

Will Rohrer 

• 

KNOW WHEN YOU’VE LOST 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

After having read Becky O’Malley’s July 24, editorial, “Appeal Is the Prudent Choice In UC Decision,” I fail to see her logic. I understand the various anti-stadium groups’ basic positions. However, there is no way that an intelligent person who has followed this situation can say that an appeal is a cost-effective measure, as Ms. O’Malley seems to do.  

She bases her position the following: (1) the judge ordered the city to pay the lion’s share of UC’s costs, (2) a successful appeal would make it so the city would not have to pay UC’s costs, and instead recoup its own; and (3) an appeal would most likely be successful.  

First, she underestimates the cost of an appeal. While it would be cheaper than what the city has already spent (a fortune), it is still very expensive to put all of the documentation supporting the appeal together. Further, she does not include the fact that the city will have to continue paying large fees to its attorneys for any appeal to go forward.  

Finally, she misrepresents the likelihood of a successful appeal. Any objective commentator would know that any appellant in a civil case is fighting an uphill battle from the start. Even worse, the judge found that this case was not even close. Chances are that an appeal here would be a loser.  

Ms. O’Malley states that the worst-case scenario for an appeal is that the city loses, and the stadium gets built. The real worst-case scenario is that the city loses, the stadium gets built, and the city pays for the costs of the appeal as well as the costs that they have been ordered to pay already. Apparently, Ms. O’Malley’s philosophy is that when you are in a hole, its best to keep digging.  

The last thing we should want is the city to get gun-shy from the prolonged, costly, beating in court and then shy away from the other upcoming battles with UC. It’s important to fight like a brave for the causes you believe in. However, it is equally important to know when you have lost a battle, and to pull out and prepare for the next one. Trust me, there will be others. For the city to sink its limited resources in this particular battle is foolish.  

Darrell W. Spence 

Sacramento 

• 

BUCKWALD IS A **** 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As I read Doug Buckwald’s distorted and misleading commentary about the Berkeley City Council’s decision not to pursue an appeal against UC Berkeley, I felt as if I was in Orwell’s 1984. 

Buckwald writes how the tree supporters spoke “one after the other, with impassioned and well-reasoned arguments,” but he fails to point out how they shouted down anyone who tried to offer a different viewpoint. The tree supporters were in full mob-rule mode. Not one person who spoke against the appeal was allowed to speak without interruption—not one was saved from insults and jeers. That’s well reasoned? 

Buckwald writes how the City Council “stole democracy.” Ridiculous. The City Council listened, didn’t agree, and voted their conscience. That’s what democracy is. Democracy is not winning just because a foul-mouthed, unshowered group packs a meeting because they do not have jobs to perform or children that need dinner made. Just because these non-Berkeley misfits have nothing else to do in their life does not make their large number at the meeting the only factor that the City Council should vote on. 

And Buckwald refuses to write about how his wonderful democratic supporters dealt with the City Council’s decision. They screamed and hissed. One woman chased the mayor into his office screaming at him with extreme foul language. 

Buckwald should be ashamed to lie in print and try to make his tree-sitting mob anything related to democracy when it is clear they are just unwashed thugs trying to intimidate others. 

Sherman Boyson 

• 

BUCKWALD’S ‘SECRET”  

UC LETTER 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The letter from the university to the City Council was so “secret” that one of the councilmembers showed a copy of it to a group who visited mid-afternoon Thursday. It was so “secret” that it was posted on a website. Councilmembers were talking about the letter to many people throughout the day. But that really isn’t the point. 

The tree-sitters and the Save the Oaks supporters spent 95 percent of their time at the council’s public comment session talking about saving the trees, ignoring the fact that the city’s lawsuit was never about the trees. It was about health and safety at the stadium. I’m surprised the council didn’t label their testimony irrelevant from the beginning of the meeting. But democracy, far from being “subverted” by the council, called for listening to all who came forth, no matter their position. 

Mr. Buckwald claims the council should have let people know about “the topics that they would be focusing on” in closed session. The topic of that session was obvious and listed publicly. They’d be discussing issues pertinent to their lawsuit, not the Save the Oaks lawsuit. That’s why the university’s letter wasn’t addressed to the Save the Oaks Foundation or the Panoramic Hill Association. It was addressed to the City Council and concerned topics related to the city’s lawsuit and possible appeal. 

I and thousands of other citizens of Berkeley are gratified that the council acted responsibly and courageously. Litigation on the public’s behalf should never be used as a political tool or a weapon. If the city’s chances of prevailing on appeal are slim to none, and the potential damage and cost of pursuing an appeal high, the city must take responsible action and move on. 

Linda Schacht 

• 

ROWDY SOUTHSIDE STUDENTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Although I’m a Northside resident, I sympathize with the plight of Doug Buckwald and his Southside neighbors in trying to cope with the rowdy behavior of all-too-many Cal students. I’m curious what measures they suggested to the Chancellor’s Task Force that received a cool reception. I’m a Cal alumnus, and would be happy to write to the chancellor on this issue. Probably others would as well. Let’s face it, though—the more students there are in an area, the more they see it as a neighborhood where “grown-ups’ rules” don’t apply. Perhaps the Southside residents could prevail on Cal to provide some compensation for the aggravation caused by the growing multitude of students that the university is housing in the area. Season football tickets, at least—and if you don’t like football, you can always scalp the tickets. 

Steve Meyers 

• 

STADIUM FOLLY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As nature, the economy, civil rights, and news content tank in tandem, as diseases and nukes spread, as food, fish, and fresh water run short, and as we find that our only energy policy is to invade places that still have what we have used up in order to accelerate climate change, what a splendid metaphor the officials of “the world’s greatest public university” provide us with their hugely expensive plan to expand a game facility on one of the most dangerous sites in California in order to distract spectators and their children from what is coming at them. 

Gray Brechin 

• 

SAVE THE OAKS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

White-haired men in suits from the university (all rise and bow) are telling community activists/environmentalists that a grove of oak trees, some over a hundred years old, will be cut down to build exercise rooms for football players. Unfortunately, not too many people give a damn about this kind of thing anymore. Apathy has set in even here in Berkeley. The chains saws will rip these trees out in the next few weeks and an ugly glassy structure will rise up. I’m really disappointed with the youth of this generation if they can’t get out there and breathe a little tear gas. It was the best part of my education.  

(Hint to the more creative protesters: I swore I saw some endangered species of insects at the oaks the other day.) 

Name withheld 

• 

DOWNTOWN BERKELEY  

McDONALD’S 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

If you are a regular customer at the McDonald’s at Shattuck and University in Berkeley, then you may have noticed a change. As of March 18, a new owner took over. Committed and loyal staff were laid off, some relocated. The new owner appears to have decided that he did not need to employ some of those workers who had worked there for over 11 years, some who had worked there for 20-plus years. The employees who were let go were given as little as one day of notice. This location, well known for its employing of older and or disabled staff, has been altered.  

My 83-year-old mother, who wore her uniform with pride, was given one day of notice—“tomorrow will be your last day”—after working at this location for almost 12 years. Heartless. To make the situation feel even worse, the new owner placed a “Now Hiring Crew” sign in their Shattuck-facing window almost immediately. How does he think this made the “leaving crew” feel? Guess he didn’t care. I for one, will never patronize this location again, or any of the franchises that he owns; I will take my business elsewhere. There are plenty of other McDonald’s to patronize. So, when you look for the cute lady with all her sports/holiday pins...she won’t be there. Shameful! 

Cindy Woo 

• 

A GREENER WAY TO SPEND  

$400 MILLION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Bus Rapid Transit is estimated to cost $400 million. That amount of money could buy 10,000 new hybrid cars. If those cars were given away to East Bay motorists, a gasoline-use reduction of roughly 10,000 gallons a day could result. This is over 10 times the reduction in fuel use predicted for BRT, and it raises the question of what the BRT supporters really want. If they want to improve the environment and reduce greenhouse gases, giving away new hybrids could do that 10 times better than BRT, for the same dollar cost. If they don’t want to improve the environment and reduce greenhouse gases, what do they want? 

Why should we waste 9,000 gallons of gasoline every day, over 3 million gallons every year, by spending $400 million on BRT rather than on improving automobile fuel economy? That doesn’t sound very green to me. 

Russ Tilleman 

• 

WHAT RUBBISH! 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Alan Tobey’s July 24 commentary reminds me of the Bush administration’s approach to science: Let the eggheads do their studies. Then, if you don’t like the result, either attempt to discredit the scientists or discredit or suppress their study. 

Mr. Tobey would have us believe that AC Transit paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to a huge team of transportation planners, environmental planners, and engineers just to get a report that “generally describe(s) the (BRT) project.” What nonsense. The professionals who worked on the BRT draft environmental impact report used all the tools at their disposal to try to predict the impacts, costs and benefits of BRT. Mr. Tobey doesn’t like the results. So he resorts to questioning the validity of the report. 

Here are the findings in the draft EIR that Mr. Tobey doesn’t like: (1) BRT would result in a minuscule number of new transit users. (2) BRT would result in no reduction in fuel use. (3) BRT would have a negligible impact on pollutant emissions. (4) BRT would cost taxpayers at least $250 million. These are not my conclusions; they are the conclusions of the professionals who wrote the DEIR. 

Mr. Tobey would have us ignore the draft EIR and take it on faith that BRT would be a “good thing.” Sorry, Mr. Tobey. The fact is that AC Transit has produced four BRT alternatives and studied each extensively. Even a cursory reading of the draft EIR shows that each alternative is a bigger financial boondoggle that the last. Now AC Transit is asking the City of Berkeley to select one of these lemons as a “preferred alternative.” The only rational, fiscally responsible, response from the city is “none of the above.” Let AC Transit go back to the drawing board and come up a project that can be studied by professionals and is actually projected to accomplish something. 

Jim Bullock 

• 

SUICIDE BARRIER 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding the proposed suicide barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge, I strongly oppose said barrier. More people die in car accidents just crossing the bridge than by jumping. Yet nobody is clamoring to install car barriers to prevent head-on collisions or other methods to make it safer for motorists who have to drive across daily. 

Tori Thompson 

• 

UNDERSTANDING SATIRE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The mostly white responses to the mostly black, angry responses to the New Yorker magazine cover in which Barack Obama is portrayed as a Muslim cleric and his wife Michelle as an AK-47-packing Angela Davis are mostly racist. 

African Americans are snootily informed that the magazine cover is political satire and that Obama, as the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for the presidency, black or not, is fair game for political satire. Fair enough. We’re all for political satire. 

The racist assumption here however, seems to be that black folk are too politically naive to understand political satire and their angry responses to the magazine cover are out of bounds. 

However, if you look at the historical record, very few segments of American society have a longer record of political and social satire than African Americans. America’s long drama of oppression and betrayal of our interests and needs has made this so. 

The 19th century’s wildly popular dance craze, the Cake Walk, was political satire of the slavocracy’s cultural and morale standards. Black comedians too numerous to name, but most recently Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle, have pushed political satire way beyond the boundaries of most late-night talk show hosts. African Americans don’t need any arrogant lessons on what is political satire. 

On the other hand it seems some “other” citizens of America need lessons on what is racism. In the midst of a national presidential campaign, images that portray African American candidates in styles of dress that conform to most Americans’ worst fears of terrorism are racist, and to expect the general public to see this as political satire and not racism is itself racist and naive. 

The irony in all this is clear to see. However, the question should be, “Don’t you see the racism?” 

Jean Damu 

• 

WESTERN CLIMATE INITIATIVE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

On July 23, California, six other Western States and four Canadian provinces released their plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, called the Western Climate Initiative. Unfortunately, in this plan, it is not specified whether carbon credits would be given away for free or sold in auction. As a resident of El Cerrito, every day I see pollution billowing out of the Richmond Refinery Plant, and every day I wonder if the people creating this pollution have to pay for contributing to global warming. With the help of the Western Climate Initiative the polluters will have to pay, but only if these carbon credits are sold at auction. So as Californians, and as people of the earth, we must call on Gov. Schwarzenegger to revise the Western Climate Initiative, and make polluters pay for every ton of global warming pollution they produce. 

Wesley Hrubes 

El Cerrito 

• 

BERKELEY COMMUNITY MEDIA  

AT BERKELEY HIGH 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

George Coates writes that Dona Spring helped “rescue Berkeley Community Media from an attempt by its landlord, the Berkeley Unified School District, to convert the Bay Area’s second largest public access TV facility into a dedicated high school classroom.” 

Excuse me, but the Bay Area’s second-largest public access TV facility is occupying space that belongs to Berkeley High School. This school is sorely lacking in classrooms. Please, Mr. Coates, go find your own facilities. Berkeley High School is horribly overcrowded and needs every single classroom it can obtain (of course the space in question was originally a classroom and should be returned to its original purpose). Go take a look at students in hallways, in portables at the nearby elementary school, in moldy rooms in the gym, in the foyer of the theater, and then ask yourself if you should really be taking classroom space away from the high school on its own property. Go ask the Berkeley High School teachers, 30 percent of whom quit every year because they don’t have a classroom of their own, if you have any rights to high school classrooms. 

What is it with our city and local groups that think they have the right to pressure our schools into giving them space that’s desperately needed by the schools themselves? It’s nuts. 

Peter Kuhn 

• 

OBAMA VS. McCAIN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In the July 24 Planet Bob Burnett is perplexed that McCain continues to run close to Obama in the polls. He alludes to the obvious factor of endemic racism, which, if admitted, would probably make the poll numbers even closer. What he may overlook, like many of us in Berkeley, is the simple fact that we live in a nation of semi-literate dolts who have no ear for the subtleties of Obama’s balanced and nuanced reasonings, but respond reflexively to McCain’s jingoistic simplifications (“winning” or “losing” in Iraq). McCain may win the presidency, as Burnett warns. And to those spiteful Hillites who can’t accept the election of the first black president before the first female, consider what a McCain presidency may do to the balance of the Supreme Court—you may well overturn Roe v. Wade. 

At the center of the Republican Party there is a black hole of right-wing power and money that has penetrated and manipulated every aspect of the Bush administration, and despite whatever virtues of character John McCain may exhibit, it will subvert and manipulate his presidency as well. 

Jerry Landis 

• 

EASTSHORE STATE PARK 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I attended the “General Board Meeting” of “Citizens for Eastshore Parks” on July 16 and it was confirmed what I had assumed, that the fence around the “resource protection area” is to keep out the occasional dog-walker who would disobey a leash law. 

I was informed that the area is owned by the State Department of Parks and managed by East Bay Regional Park District. CESP is only an advisory board of those who were part of workshops held about 10 years ago to help the state decide how to manage this land. These workshops were open to the public, though of course I and many others never heard of them, so there were not a lot of people who disagreed with the fence, leaving those who wanted it to get their way. 

I have written about this before and I don’t want to harp on it, but I need to say for the last time that the area extends from University Avenue to what would be Cedar Street and the frontage road to the marina, and to exclude the public from it all because of an occasional disobedient dog-walker is not only draconian but unjust. 

I admit the dog problem is serious, but the fence is more than a terrible solution. I’m all for giving birds the space to nest, but surely they don’t need all of it. They love me, too, I’m sure, and with the help of creative planners instead of the unimaginative we might live together in peace. In my view the wildlife and wildlife lovers were just fine before meddling led to yet another development that has been fenced like private property. Yes, there was a dog problem but education would have been better than imprisonment. 

However I am just one voice in a wilderness and I give up crying about it. Were there others who would join me in petitioning the State Parks Department and the park district, then maybe things might change, but it doesn’t look like this will happen. I haven’t read any other letters about it and I feel alone in my complaint. So never again will I be able to enjoy what was once a wonderful meadow, which is a great loss to me personally, since I paint plein air and used to spend many pleasant hours there. 

Pete Najarian 

• 

GREEN AND HAPPY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

According to recently published research, happiness is based more on two factors—helping others and participating in something larger than oneself —than seeking positive emotion (“Happiness: A better path that may be greener, too,” Christian Science Monitor, July 23).  

Citing the World Values Survey (www.worldvaluessurvey.org) and Happy Planet Index (www.happyplanetindex.org), the research reveals that beyond a certain point, people who value material goods and wealth are treading more heavily on the earth while not getting happier. It turns out that being environmentally conscious—recycling, conserving and implementing sustainable practices—also makes us happier than valuing wealth, power and fame.  

Engagement with community and family, fostering strong social institutions, and seeking adventure and meaning, are all linked to well-being. With only 5 percent of the world’s population, North America accounts for 22 percent of the human footprint, while Africa, with 13 percent of the population, accounts for 7 of the footprint. The United States is 16th on the happiness index, a ranking that has been flat for the past 25 years. All that stuff? We’re not getting happier. In fact, aspiring to a lot of materials goods is unhappiness-producing, while contributing to ecological destruction.  

Not too surprising, then, that as we seek to enrich our lives with the intangibles—beauty, goodness, justice and love, while pursuing a lighter impact on earth’s resources—we’ll find a happiness that is worth pursuing. 

Marilyn McPherson 

• 

TEACHING 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

If we change the existing style and teaching methods and our class curriculum to make it more meaningful to our students, we may become more useful for the student community and will bring more interesting and meaningful subjects in our classroom for them to become interested in learning and acquire the real-life skills to grow and develop as useful persons for themselves and the society. 

Romila Khanna 

Albany 

• 

CELEBRATION AT  

OBAMA FIELD OFFICE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Clearly the place to be this past Saturday was the new East Bay for Obama Field Office in Berkeley. To say that the joint was jumping would be a masterpiece of understatement! Located at 3225 Adeline St., the headquarters was hard to miss because of the soaring archway of red, white and blue balloons, which stretched along the street. Throughout the day hundreds of people crowded into the office, where they were greeted by volunteers, given Obama stickers and registered for various volunteer assignments. In marked contrast to the apathy and somber mood that’s permeated the White House in recent months, there was enough enthusiasm and raw energy in this gathering to provide electricity for the entire city. Obama supporters were in high spirits, sporting colorful T-shirts and caps (I liked the slogan that read “The End of An Error”) and chanting, “Yes, we can—yes, we can.” 

Not only was there nourishment for the spirit, there was a bountiful buffet with food and cold drinks generously provided by local merchants: Domino’s Pizza, Sweet Adeline Bakeshop, the Cheese Board, Nomad Coffee, etc. Children had their own table with crayons and paper for creating very imaginative posters. It was also a field day for dogs. 

At 3 p.m. people gathered outdoors in the brilliant sunshine for brief speeches. Mayor Tom Bates urged supporters to bring cell phones to make out-of-state calls. Barbara Lee had appeared earlier in the day. Cars speeding along Adeline Street honked their horns in approval of the event. 

All in all, it was a wonderful energizing day and one can only hope that the optimism so evident on this occasion will spread around the country, resulting in the election of a charismatic, intelligent and compassionate young man, the total opposite of our present “war president,” George W. Bush. 

Dorothy Snodgrass 

• 

‘CAL FOR BERKELEY’ 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Instead of the organization “Berkeleyans for Cal,” which is advocating for the construction of the unsafe sports training facility, and ignoring the accompanying risks to the city of Berkeley, what is needed is an organization called “Cal for Berkeley.” 

This new organization would advocate for a safe, healthy and cooperative relationship between the university and the city. It would advocate sensible and sustainable university growth and change, in a scale proportional to its host city. 

Cal for Berkeley would advocate for good neighbor relations, discouraging drunken student rampages on the Southside, encouraging better peer “policing” of parties, and perhaps some clean-up and gardening projects that would actually benefit all. 

Cal for Berkeley would also advocate that the university pay its fair share for its impacts on the city, which are otherwise borne by Berkeley taxpayers. This cost is estimated to be $12-$15 million per year, and would include payments for police and fire services, repair of roads, sidewalks, street lighting, and sewer and storm water fees. 

Cal for Berkeley would advocate that the university return to patronizing local businesses (for office supplies and books, for example) instead of the using the current outsourced bulk-purchasing program. 

Cal for Berkeley would also push for the university to reduce its carbon footprint in the city of Berkeley by assisting in arranging carpools or other mass transit for the people commuting in from Marin and Contra Costa counties. 

Instead of dividing the university and the city as Berkeleyans for Cal appears to be doing, this alternative organization would work for a more cooperative and sustainable relationship. 

Anne Wagley 

• 

SEWAGE PLANT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Our sewage in Berkeley flows to an East Bay Municipal Utilities District treatment plant which has no name. Therefore, in cooperation with our sister city across the bay, I strongly recommend that our sewage plant be called “The George W. Bush Smelly Sewage Treatment Plant.” Also, I urge and recommend that cities all across our great nation take up the cry for awarding our president the recognition that he richly deserves by giving treatment plants his name. What shocks me is that we in Berkeley didn’t think of it first!  

Robert Blau  

• 

McCAIN: VOTE LIKE THERE’S  

NO TOMORROW! 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

The Republican Party has been the Keystone Stooges who couldn’t shoot straight. 

Political commentator Chris Kofinis accused McCain’s campaign of being “the Harlem Globetrotters of politics.” A major difference there is that the Globetrotters rarely missed their shots. 

O.V. Michaelsen 

• 

WELL KEPT SECRET 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It’s a shame that in the several visits to City Council and City Hall and through all my efforts to correct the lack of safe, affordable, accessible shelter and housing and supports for my unique set of multiple disabled needs, there has been a total failure of advocacy and support in Berkeley.  

Since November an agency is working on getting the wrongful cuts in September vouchers restored. As there are many who have been literally left in the road, and those with lobbyists get services first, the work has been slow and complicated by misinformation, dirty tricks and failure to preserve evidence.  

No mitigation is planned , so I have still great odds of failure, and still no real hope of getting from homeless back to appropriate work. I have been trying to get help in Berkeley since spring 2007 and I never heard or saw that there was an advocate for people with disabilities on the City Council. Apparently Dona Spring, who had a voice to correct the many wrongs, was absent at all my visits and left as another of Berkeley’s well kept secrets.  

Too bad for her and many others that her best exposure and photo op is in memorial. Please, in the future, when there is the rare someone who can and will help, don’t hold them private until it’s too late!  

Darlene Matthews 

• 

PRAYING, PRAISING FOR  

LOWER GAS PRICES 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It’s interesting that people pray at gas pumps for lower prices, and say praise the same way. The best worldly way to help such praise become frequent is to push for development of a kind of “crude” now produced by algae. Refineries can keep current infrastructure to create products we’ve come to know and love; petroleum came from biota anyway, so the algae-based stuff is as logical as fanciful. Living as near many refineries and other heavy-chemical industry—in the one place I can afford—in a neighborhood where babies are born with asthma and “shelter-in-place” alerts are common, I pray that we’ll soon see genuine alternative fuels that come from and return to the biosphere. Which means we can live with them.  

Megan C. Timberlake 

Richmond 

• 

TWO QUESTIONS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thank you to Becky O’Malley for pushing the city to appeal. I fervently hope they do so within the next 50-odd days. Why? Because the government has a responsibility to us citizens to protect us against foreseeable hazards. The North Hayward fault, which bisects Memorial Stadium, will rupture—that’s a certainty. There’s only two questions about this rupture: 

1. When will it rupture? Will it be tomorrow? Will it be during a big game? Will it be during the current children’s summer camp? 

2. How many people will die and how many people will be mangled? Continuing to put 60,000 people directly on top of an earthquake fault is at minimum gross negligence and at worst involuntary manslaughter. If the city allows UC Berkeley to refurbish the stadium, how many inside of the stadium and its shiny new gym will be crushed? How many outside of the stadium will be doomed by inadequate emergency access and evacuation routes? How many from post-quake fires in the wildfire zone surrounding the stadium? 

I would love to see UC Berkeley’s experts include realistic projections in answer to these questions in their environmental impact report, but somehow I doubt they will. Doing so would force them to seriously consider an obvious choice—moving Cal games to the only local football stadium that’s also served by BART and the freeway: the Oakland Coliseum. (Psst! The UCLA Bruins play off-campus at the Rose Bowl and it seems to work pretty well!) 

Jesse Townley 

• 

CALIFORNIA EDUCATION 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It’s too early to tell how the California Legislature will resolve the state budget impasse and the projected $17 billion deficit. But the choice is plain: cuts or taxes. 

We already know what cuts would look like. The governor’s revised budget proposal: $4.3 billion in education cuts, $2.9 billion in health and human services cuts. The governor is asking those who can afford it least to make the biggest sacrifices to close the budget deficit. 

The cuts to the California public schools are some of the most severe. The Berkeley Unified School District is one of many that have suffered devastating cuts, averaging $481 per student and, $3,982,000 in apportionments and reductions. We are severely endangering the quality of our public education. 

$300 million cuts to community colleges mean larger class sizes, fewer course offerings and longer graduation times. 

Some people don’t like paying taxes, but like them or not, taxes are the price we pay for living in a civilized society—to be educated, to be healthy, to be safe. 

California requires a two-thirds vote to raise taxes, but more than a third of each legislative house is represented by Republicans who have vowed not to vote for any tax increases, no matter how great the need or the nature of the tax. It is an abdication of responsibility for elected representatives to refuse to even consider new taxes. 

It is possible to meet the needs of the people of California through progressive tax policies, and closing tax loopholes. For example, returning the top income tax bracket to where it once was—11 percent—on people who make more than $300,000 a year would net the state $5 billion a year. 

We can also close tax loopholes. Enacting a tax on oil taken from the ground, which is absent in California, could bring $1.5 billion each year. The oil companies are making record profits yet Republicans in the Legislature blocked an effort to close this loophole. 

California can’t let a small group of ideologues stand in the way of quality public education and essential services. 

Cathy Campbell 

President, Berkeley Federation of Teachers 

• 

THE GIFT OF GIFT CARDS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It is not often you can say “You can take $7 and make it $700. You can with a gift card which has a $7 balance if you put it together with 100 other people. There is a place that helps abused spouses and children which could use these funds. If you have a gift card with a left over balance or unused, then you can give without spending money. The money will be spent to help people get on their feet. 

Every year about around $8 billion in gift cards are sold. Twenty percent of that is never used. Since there are so many nonprofits in need of cash, why not send them to one place which will use the $7 you will never spend? 

These cards will be used to buy supplies and miscl needed items for battled partners. So why not use something that is just taking in space to help? Please send to project gift cards at SLCC, 1395 Bancroft Ave., San Leandro, 94577. 

Joel DeWitt 

San Leandro  

• 

PLANETARY AMBASSADOR 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

As I deliver about two dozen copies of the Daily Planet every Thursday around my neighborhood as a volunteer, I am increasingly aware of the value of your newspaper in La-La Land, Berzerkeley, my hometown, or whatever. Front page, editorials, letters-plus, great calendars and excellent reporters and writers! 

Yes, I wish to keep “subscribing.” 

My just emerging “Obama, Of Course” activity is to walk the North Berkeley, Berkeley and Ashby BART stations once a week—probably on Friday, in the morning—pushing a shopping cart or postal cart for visibility and offering occasional handouts of literature.  

I shall be walking the sidewalk above and not the tracks below. 

In closing, Executive Editor Becky O’Malley is my candidate for city attorney should she choose to apply. 

Bill Trampleasure 

• 

NO GUARANTEES 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thanks, Teddy Knight (“At Risk,” Letters, July 24), for reminding is “...that there are no guarantees in raising children.” How many wannabe parents ever ask themselves if it’s ill-mannered to gamble on the life of another person without first getting that parent’s permission? 

Art Weber 

El Cerrito 

• 

LETTERS OF PRAISE AND SUPPORT 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I suggest that we should write letters to the supervisors of persons who do something for us that is beyond our usual expectations. 

Some time ago I had a lady at the Solano Post Office come out from behind the counter and hunt me down on the street to return my credit card, which I had left behind or dropped. So I wrote a letter to her boss, telling him or her about what she had done. I recommended that my letter be put in her file, where it would be seen whenever she was up for a promotion. She told me later that letter was passed all around their office. 

In our bureaucratic society, we should encourage persons who give us more than the usual service. 

Charlie Smith 

• 

INDIAN MASCOTS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

It is a crying shame that sports teams still have American Indians as either mascots or logos. Whether it is the professional teams of the Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, Washington Redskins, or the collegiate teams of the Florida State Seminoles, Utah Utes, or the San Diego Aztecs, they make American Indians less than human beings. 

Non-Indians who don’t see a problem with it show their racism and ignorance about American Indians by saying that there are other things that they need to be worrying about. For the sake of treating them as human beings, both the names and the logos must change. 

Billy Trice, Jr. 

Oakland 

• 

THE NEW REAGAN 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

A few months ago all the Republican presidential candidates were claiming to be the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan! Ronald Reagan must be tossing and turning in his grave.  

From a speech given by Reagan Nov. 14, 1974: “Continual deficit financing, year in and year out, is not the path to prosperity. It is the road to national bankruptcy. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy because the more the government goes into debt, the more it must borrow.” 

And that is exactly where we find ourselves today after years of Bush and Republican deficit spending. 

Ron Lowe 

Nevada City 

• 

UNDERCURRENTS =  

UNDERCOURAGOUS 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Let me get this straight. Chinese American author ignores African American contender’s nuts? (UnderCurrents, July 17. ) Could be. While soiled underwear toss out-eyeballs the playoffs? Plausible—BYOB (boys without belts) is most definitely the big-time live action street-side.  

But, that children remain “someone else’s problems” in sick tribute to a long-gone prohibition against enslaved people forming families? And that your columnist wants to allocate more “space” to the invisible hand of over-valued youth culture, immediate gratification, and the inebriants that float that bubble? Honestly, it takes a village idiot! (So let me speak.) Newsflash: Someone’s chickens are already home to roost.  

Enough space, already! Forty dutiful UnderCourageous inches per week! Still trying to relate, I scan my own Czechered lineage for lessons from the smashed and scattered. Some survived, some have overcome. Survivors compose their history; these people veer to the honorable and heroic when allowed. They school me only that yes, we can recover even long-forbidden droll pleasures of community and family. Yes, the enemies banned our omm bomm ba boom. Yes, we were in trouble deep.  

And now? Troubled again, and poised to choose. I hope I’m not the only one who can recall and praise elders whose allegories were slipped past the censors, their wise words lofted even before the heavies hightailed it. I’ll long recall and praise so many of the before-among-around me, who choose individually or collectively, to reclaim, restore, to build anew the lost, the looted, the appropriated, the desired... . The longer-view is necessary. They’re fine folk, I’m betting.  

But of those whose story shakes the trees with each retelling, in pious lamentations of the dark times? Recall and praise, all right. But enough space already. Or as my granny warned, your face will freeze. Turn and choose, yourself: Are you going to ride that sad sorry story from here to next Father’s Day? 

Jay Tharp 

• 

GAY MARRIAGE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Many advocates for gay marriage say that this is a battle over either a “civil right” or some sort of “freedom” from religious repression. They sometimes compare their efforts to civil right activists or to the pilgrims and Founding Fathers escaping persecution. 

In comparing the efforts to attain equality, civil rights marches were very serious, with distinguished minority men, women and children marching for an honorable moral purpose. Often civil right activists were willingly martyrs for this righteous cause. 

In comparison, in their gay-pride marches, gays arrogantly mock heterosexuals, religious clergy and even God. Some men dress like women and sometimes engage in graphic simulated sex in public. 

To use our Founding Fathers’ beliefs, as well as the Constitution, is not only unhistorical, it’s irrational. It’s true the pilgrims escaped persecution, but they were being persecuted for their religion, not because they were gay. The Constitution dated with this specific verbiage, “The year of Our Lord 1780.” Before each meeting, the Founding Fathers prayed and legislated for protection, for their particular religious practice, against any future tyrannical government. If you read their personal writings, it’s obvious that the Founding Fathers were theists (belief in one Supreme Being). It’s also factual that they believed in the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible taught that homosexuality is unnatural, dysfunctional, physically harmful and incompatible, as well as having the inability to naturally reproduce. The God of the Bible also taught that active homosexuality was extremely damaging to their well-being and spirit (Lev.18:22,20:13, Duet 22:5, Rm1:27, 1Cor. 6:9). Using much of the available secular and religious historically preserved documents, it’s impossible for someone with an open mind and common sense to use the Constitution and wishes of our Founding Fathers as an excuse for gay marriages. 

For those gay marriage advocates that are not homosexuals, be honest, are you really interested in homosexuals’ health and well-being (while encouraging destructive behavior), or are you merely using them as pawns in a political game of payback, and are really rebelliously thumbing your nose at anyone politically conservative or religious? 

Ben Padilla 

Fairfield 

AC Transit began displaying a proto-type Van Hool 40-foot, two-door, low-aisle bus in June. After a few mechanical fixes, it is now ready for the rubber to hit the road. And they have prepared a survey for riders.  

But, it seems, from Item 7 on this Wednesday’s AC Transit Board agenda, which talks about the buses’ delivery schedule, it is already a done deal! So before it has been road tested and the survey completed, they are being fabricated in Belgium! And without a true test—a rider comparison to an American true low-floor bus that does not require people to step up to seats on pedestals or ride backwards. 

And the board does not even know how much they cost! At the April 4, 2007 board meeting, the general manager stated that they would cost $400,000 each “including delivery and sales tax.” Since then, the board has approved adding air-conditioning at the cost of about $16,000. So it seems to be about $416,000/bus, but have they seen an invoice? The order is for 50 buses even though only eight 40-foot buses are due for replacement. And with little or no increases in local ridership, why would more buses be needed? 

So these 50 unneeded buses would cost $20.8 million—about what they say their budget gap is! 

All the buses should be air-conditioned. Every new one and, since AC Transit receives generous federal funds for preventative maintenance, they can retrofit existing buses. In fact, Cal-OSHA has cited AC Transit for violation of their heat illness standards. Heat inside buses can be as high as 107 particularly in the Hayward area. Hearings on this are continuing. 

AC Transit has been on a bus-buying binge since its “special partnership” began with Van Hool in 2002. It has driven their decisions. While other agencies are buying diesel electric hybrid buses to cut down on fuel costs, air pollution and greenhouse gases, AC Transit has continued to buy diesel buses because Van Hool does not make hybrid buses. Van Hool is in the driver’s seat in the “special partnership.” 

After years of pressure, particularly from me, this proto-type 40-foot, two-door bus is inching closer to the American low-floor design. But it is too little, too late. They managed to get more seats at floor level but because of the awkward location of the engine in the middle of the bus, people in wheelchairs are relegated to the left over space opposite the motor. This makes accessing the space more difficult and their vision blocked by the motor. And if there are two wheelchairs, one has to ride backwards and passengers have to exit between them.  

If more 40-foot buses are really needed, why not go for the real deal instead of a pale imitation and stop sending jobs overseas! An American true low-floor bus places equipment under a low mezzanine level in the rear instead of in the middle of the bus and they have no seats facing backwards or on pedestals. And they cost about $75,000 less! 

Another waste of public funds is the fuel cell program. While most bus agencies with fuel cell programs are cutting back or eliminating them because they are very expensive and ineffective, AC Transit is expanding theirs. Presently it consists of three Van Hool fuel cell buses that keep breaking down. And the hydrogen for them is produced from natural gas, a by-product of which is methane gas, one of the worse greenhouse gases. In spite of this experience, AC Transit has ordered eight more Van Hool fuel cell buses at $3 million each! That $24 million could have purchased 48 American low-floor diesel hybrid electric buses with up to 100 percent federal funding. According to the AC Transit staff member who manages funding, the Van Hool buses are paid for with operating funds, which are then back-filled with federal preventative maintenance funds. But, she insists, all the federal funds for preventative maintenance are used for maintenance! Amazing! 

On the November ballot, AC Transit will be asking for an extension on their parcel tax with an increase of a mere $4/month, the cost of a gallon of gas. As a candidate for the Board, I would like to see that pass and it requires 67 percent. This order of 50 unnecessary buses is a test for the board. The ballot statement reads, in part, “To preserve affordable local public transportation that allows seniors and people with disabilities to remain independent ……and all money staying local.” If the board votes for these untested buses that make bus riding difficult for “seniors and people with disabilities” and sends funds overseas, will voters trust them with their money? 

I am going to try hard to convince voters to vote for the parcel tax by informing them that there are now three on the board, including Greg Harper, that are questioning the Van Hool partnership and if I am elected there will be four. And on a seven-member board it takes four to tango. But it would certainly help if the present board would do the right thing NOW! 

Joyce Roy is the Reform candidate for the at-large seat on the AC Transit board. 

I believe that actions taken by the City Council during its July 24 closed session are in violation of the Brown Act, California’s “sunshine” law. The City Council needs to take action immediately to correct that violation and put in place a procedure that enhances the public’s right to know information vital to their comments regarding subjects to be discussed in closed sessions.  

The City Council met in closed session regarding the lawsuit concerning the University of California’s Student Athlete High Performance Center, one of several SCIP projects. By the 5 p.m. beginning of the meeting, seven members of the council were present. Council Chambers was full with a line of speakers standing in the middle aisle waiting to give public comment. An unknown number of speakers also formed a line outside of the chambers. Some 70 people gave public comment. An unknown number of speakers were denied the opportunity to speak when public comment was cut off and the Council went into closed session at approximately 6:55 p.m.. The council emerged some two hours later and the mayor announced that there weren’t “enough votes to appeal” the court’s decision. No information was provided regarding any votes. In comments after the closed session, the mayor referred to a settlement offer contained in a letter to the council dated July 24 from Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom, but did not provide copies to the public or news media. 

While I have several comments regarding the highly questionable decision to hold this meeting in a place that could not accommodate the number of people who wanted to attend, and the conduct of the meeting which cut off waiting speakers, in this article I am addressing only the issue of a violation of the Brown Act and the public’s right to know information that is of grave concern to them. 

The Brown Act requires that following a closed session, the council must announce to the public any action taken and the votes of each of the members of the council regarding that action, even if the action fails.  

The Brown Act defines a disclosable “action taken” as a “collective decision made by a majority of the members of a legislative body, a collective commitment or promise by a majority of the members of a legislative body to make a positive or negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a legislative body when sitting as a body or entity, upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order or ordinance.” 

According to the mayor’s statement at the end of the closed session, the majority’s “collective decision” was a negative one. By any account, taking no action is still an action. The mayor and council had to know, by one way or the other, that no action would be taken, otherwise no such statement at the end of the closed session could have been made. The Brown Act is clear that actions must be reported to the public and as such, must include the “votes” of each individual member of the City Council.  

Additionally, the July 24 letter from Vice Chancellor Brostrom which the council received prior to going into closed session should have been disclosed to the public before it was discussed in closed session. The key decision to be made by the council during the closed session was whether the council should appeal Judge Miller’s decision. Obviously any settlement offers by the opposing party would impact the council’s decision. By not disclosing the letter, the public, deprived of the knowledge of such offer, could not address this key issue.  

The central element of the Brostrom letter is that the settlement offer was “…contingent on the city’s agreement not to file an appeal to the current litigation and not to file any future legal challenge to the Memorial Stadium project.” (Emphasis added.) By anyone’s estimate, the yet-to-be-determined valuation of the stadium and the university’s compliance with Alquist-Priolo is a matter which is more than likely to engender considerable debate. Any settlement or discussion of settlement with this contingency is a matter of enormous public concern. There is no question that the public interest would have been best served if the letter had been disclosed prior to the closed session. This clearly goes to the spirit of the Brown Act. 

I have asked the City Council to take three actions as follows: 

1. The immediate release of a written statement of any and all actions taken by the council during the July 24 closed session, with the yeas, nays, abstentions, or passes of each councilmember present. 

2. A commitment from the city that if any closed session is held between now and the council’s next regular meeting in September, any proposals, whether in written, electronic or oral form, regarding settlement of any lawsuit be presented to the public prior to the council entering into closed session to discuss the matter. 

3. Placement on the agenda of the next regular council meeting the addition of a provision to the council’s rules of procedure codifying the procedure as indicated in no. 2 above. 

No matter what position a member of the public might take regarding the Memorial Stadium, or for that matter, regarding any particular issue, everyone will benefit from the City Council taking the above steps.  

Shirley Dean is a former Berkeley mayor.

As reported in the Berkeley Daily Planet, no city official will disclose which members of the Berkeley City Council supported or opposed the possible appeal of what may be the city’s most controversial court loss this year.  

The council met in closed session for more than two hours last Thursday to consider its options, and afterward all that Mayor Tom Bates would say was that it would have taken five votes of approval for the city to appeal a recent judge’s decision allowing UC Berkeley, contrary to the city’s policy, to remove dozens of trees next to its Memorial Stadium to make room for a planned athletic training center. And there weren’t five votes, he said.  

Beyond that neither he nor anyone else would clarify who if anyone favored appeal, who opposed it or whether anyone even made a motion on the matter.  

Upon a challenge to the council by former mayor Shirley Dean—who is hoping to regain the office from Bates in the November election—to be more forthcoming, no member would comment and the city attorney said that the council did not decide either for or against appeal. 

The Brown Act states that "Approval given to its legal counsel to . . . seek or refrain from seeking appellate review or relief" constitutes one kind of "action taken in closed session" that must be reported, together with the "vote or abstention of every member present." Moreover the act states: 

As used in this chapter, "action taken" means a collective decision made by a majority of the members of a legislative body, a collective commitment or promise by a majority of the members of a legislative body to make a positive or a negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a legislative body when sitting as a body or entity, upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order or ordinance. 

It seems evident that the Legislature wanted every “collective decision” reported, even if “negative,” once there is a “motion” or “proposal.” The City Council’s position, apparently based on the city attorney’s advice, is that this evident accountability thrust can be dodged simply by avoiding a vote. Avoiding a vote, according to this rationale, excuses the council from even explaining who if anyone favored appeal, who argued against and who simply kept silent. 

That this is not consistent with the Brown Act is suggested by three points.  

First, when inaction on a clear governmental option has great consequences, the decision-maker(s) solely vested with authority to act cannot avoid accountability by claiming not to have made a decision. A governor or a court declining to intervene in the execution of a prisoner can hardly insist that no decision was made. Members of a Sacramento legislative committee refusing to give a bill even a courtesy motion cannot plausibly insist they are not responsible for the measure’s death. Recently it was revealed that the White House, presented last December with an e-mail from the Environmental Protection Agency with a proposed regulation of greenhouse gases as pollutants, avoided engaging with the matter by returning the e-mail unopened. Not even the president’s staunchest partisans would deny that, whatever the legal viability of this maneuver, it could not be defended in the political sphere as neutral. The choice to take no action is not action, but it is a decision. 

Second, the very purpose of the Brown Act has always been, as its preamble first declared 55 years ago, political accountability: “The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.” A self-imposed vow of silence about how members dealt with a matter of heated public controversy mocks this legislative intent, especially when disclosure would have no prejudicial effect on the city’s position in a litigated matter. What it would do is allow constituents who want to see an appeal—the city still has about two months to file such a notice with the court—to know which anti-appeal members of the council need to be converted. Such an exposure of litigation decisions to popular persuasion or pressure is typically repugnant to the attorneys in charge, of course, but the Brown Act does not authorize the total blackout on lawsuit-related communications to and from the public that the attorneys would find most convenient. And even if it did, there remains the First Amendment right to petition. 

Third, speaking of constitutional considerations, the Brown Act language requiring disclosure of closed session decisions is, under Proposition 59 of 2004 (amending Article I of the California Constitution), one of those statutes that “shall be broadly construed if it furthers the people's right of access” to the meetings of public bodies such as city councils. The Brown Act provision on closed session action reporting does not make the disclosure obligation dependent on whether there was a formal vote or not, or on the form used to present a proposal for action, or whether the result was a positive or negative decision. In the light of Proposition 59, should the Brown Act language be understood to allow a local body to keep silent—and thus insulate members from either personal accountability or informed persuasion—about who made what motion(s), who provided a second and who, instead of voting No, deprived the proposal of oxygen by simply refusing to vote? 

This contrived secrecy may help those who don't want their positions known, but it needn't hinder those who do. 

The Brown Act forbids members of local bodies from taking it upon themselves to reveal publicly the specifics of just who said what in closed session, assuming that the discussion was lawfully confidential in the first place. But no law prevents a member from telling the public his or her position on a matter discussed in closed session, so long as that disclosure does not reveal what the member learned from being present in the discussion. Any member of the Berkeley City Council, that is, is free to say something like, "I'll let the others speak for themselves, but here's how I'd like to see the appeal issue resolved—and here's why." 

As the U.S. Supreme Court has said, "The role that elected officials play in our society makes it all the more imperative that they be allowed freely to express themselves on matters of current public importance" (Wood v. Georgia, 370 U.S. 375, 1960). 

Terry Francke is general counsel for Californians Aware, a center for public forum rights. 

Last Thursday night, the Berkeley City Council threw its citizens out of the lifeboat again—this time in a special closed council meeting called by the mayor to decide whether or not the city would appeal Judge Barbara Miller’s recent ruling in the Memorial Stadium oak grove case. The city decided not to appeal, thus also tossing overboard the quarter million dollars it has already invested in the case. Not only that, the City Council appears to have violated the Brown Act in the process, and may be about to give up all rights to any future court challenges to the university’s legally questionable plans for the reconstruction of Memorial Stadium. This goes beyond simple sell-out and ventures into the realm of serious civic misconduct. 

Unfortunately, the city’s refusal to go forward with an appeal leaves the remaining two plaintiff groups, the California Oak Foundation and the Panoramic Hill Neighborhood Association, likely to face a huge financial hurdle—a requirement to post a bond of a million dollars or more per month to avoid dissolving the injunction—that would effectively end the protection for the oak trees and allow the university to chop them all down. It did not have to be this way. If the city had decided to join the appeal, there would have been no bond requirement, because municipalities are categorically exempt from such obligations. The city may have just slammed the door on the community’s legal chances to save the oak trees. 

The city’s collusion with the university against its own residents regarding this issue is part of a disturbing pattern of city councilmembers completely ignoring strong public opinion about an issue and then voting the other way—almost always (not surprisingly) to the benefit of parties with an economic interest in an issue and to the detriment of citizens whose quality of life will suffer from the decision. The additional problem faced by residents impacted by university expansion is that the substantial detriments of this growth (traffic, noise, pollution, loss of parking, loss of trees and green space, construction impacts, and student disturbances) are disproportionally borne by relatively few citizens. The closer you live to the campus, the worse off you are. The farther away you live, the easier it is to ignore these problems. 

Even so, the oak grove issue has galvanized attention and support from across the city (not to mention around the world). So, on Thursday night, there was a massive show of support in favor of the appeal. It was inspiring to witness the turnout of people who lined up out into the hallway and spoke, one after the other, with impassioned and well-reasoned arguments. They showed the council and the community the diverse nature of their coalition, consisting of an impressive variety of people and groups from across Berkeley. Those in the community working to save the oak grove should all be proud of the effort they have made to get all these individuals to work together. This is in the great tradition of democracy.  

In spite of this sizeable turnout, the city completely disregarded the views of the community and made a decision that will harm its own citizens. When things like this happen repeatedly, it should be clear to all that the council has another agenda: It seems that the council wants to manage us, rather than represent our views. 

In this case, the city acted in a completely deceptive and manipulative manner. The mayor failed to divulge the contents of a letter the City Council had received from UC Berkeley Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom, and so prevented the public from commenting on it at the meeting—even though it was discussed later in the closed session. Without a doubt, Mayor Bates took these steps intentionally to curtail the democratic participation of the very people he is supposed to serve. In short, Thursday night the mayor and our City Council stole democracy from us. 

It apparently was against the law what they did, too—a direct violation of the Brown Act. The city clerk should have had copies of the letter available at the meeting, and should have allowed the public to know about them and view them. Furthermore, after the closed session was concluded, Mayor Bates refused to offer an accounting of the votes that had been taken; this, too, was an apparent violation of the Brown Act. This kind of secrecy flies in the face of our city’s longstanding commitment to citizen participation in government. 

Please read the letter to the council from Nathan Brostrom. It is mostly composed of recycled statements from an earlier, widely discredited “settlement offer” UC Berkeley made before the initial hearing in the case, but with a few new vague and equally meaningless statements added. One consistent theme throughout is this: Nothing is guaranteed at all, and most of the concessions are merely offers to delay certain objectionable aspects of the stadium area projects until some later date. Also, readers should bear in mind some advice as they peruse the document: UC Berkeley officials are known for saying things that sound vaguely good, but when you read carefully you discover that what they are really saying is exactly the opposite of what they want you to think they are saying. It is diabolical. 

But the last paragraph is the most revealing. It strongly suggests that a deal may be in the works, one that requires the city “not to file an appeal to the current litigation and not to file any future legal challenge to the Memorial Stadium project.” It is astonishing that the council would even consider foregoing any future reexamination of the university’s plan to try to rebuild a huge crumbling stadium that sits right on top of an earthquake fault. The fact that they are doing so shows how far out of touch they are with average residents—not to mention common sense. Worse yet, it shows that they are far more interested in representing the interests of UC Berkeley than they are in representing us, the people of Berkeley. 

Also, Nathan Brostrom’s letter clearly gives the lie to the so-called mediation efforts that the university has been crowing about. They never intended any true cooperation with the community. The few small meetings they scheduled with selected neighbors were held for two strategic purposes: First, to further the university's specious claims that they are “cooperating with the community” and “working with the neighbors.” Second, to look for opportunities to divide and conquer neighborhood opposition. All along, the university was preparing to try to cut a deal with the city that would leave the residents out of the process. 

It’s no wonder the mayor did not reveal the university’s letter before the meeting. He did not want the public to offer intelligent comments about it. By keeping it secret from us, he was able to present it to the council in closed session as a reasonable document—instead of the ridiculous, disingenuous, shameful thing it really is.  

All of those in the community trying to save the oaks should recognize the importance of the work they are doing. Besides revealing the value of this special urban woodland and these magnificent trees to the world, they are revealing the profoundly undemocratic nature of our own city government. 

Doug Buckwald is director of Save the Oaks. 

I have not written to the Daily Planet often in the past few years because the current state of our city is so depressing that I don’t know where to start. But the passing of Dona Spring has made me start thinking again of all the work that needs to be done.  

To be clear: the ideals shared by most people in Berkeley continue to make this city a candle in the night, a symbol of hope, unafraid to speak truth to power. At least on the national and international stage, but our local government is a sad disappointment. Dona understood more then most that while the Berkeley City Council must address important global issues, we could not afford to neglect the local issues that are so important. She understood we need both affordable housing and landmarks preservation. She was unafraid to speak out against the bombing of Afghanistan, despite knowing she would be personally attacked, and she opposed the shameful deal council voted on to cede development over the entire downtown area to the university. 

What will happen now that she is gone? Dona was very lonely in these last years on the City Council, often treated disrespectfully and often voting in the minority. And though the spirit of Berkeley has not died, as is still evident in such actions as the council’s decision to ask the Marine recruiters to leave our town, the sad truth is Berkeley no longer leads on progressive issues. 

Since Tom Bates has been mayor, Berkeley has fallen seriously behind, making a protest vote for Zachary Running Wolf an easy option, but if Shirley Dean runs for mayor, Bates could face a serious challenge. Given a real opportunity to actually unseat Bates I hesitate to say that I can’t be certain how I’ll vote. I hesitate, not because I’m shy, but because I value the Daily Planet and don’t want Bates to toss 500 or so issues in the trash, as he did with the Daily Cal during the 2002 campaign. After his re-election two years ago, I commented on this in a letter. A supporter of Mayor Bates wrote back claiming my mention of the incident showed there were “no real issues” upon which Bates should be criticized, essentially missing the point that silencing criticism, not the disposal of newspapers, was the very issue being raised. 

Something both I and Dona Spring very much regretted is the role we played in getting Bates elected. Almost immediately after the election, Bates began efforts to stifle public discussion by creating an “Agenda Committee.” Before the Agenda Committee existed, a citizen needed only one councilmember who agreed, and the City Council would address an issue in public session. The Bates proposal denied an individual councilmember direct access to the council agenda and gave the mayor and two other councilmembers the power to delay proposals or kill items, thus encouraging sleazy back room deals. 

Dona Spring, myself and a few others opposed the plan, and the council changed the rule to require commission proposals be placed directly on the agenda, thus ensuring a way to get things on a City Council agenda without interference. But without public scrutiny, this rule was not honored. At an early meeting of the Agenda Committee the city manager recommended removing a proposal that battery recycling bins be located in the lobbies of city buildings so people could drop the batteries off and the city could arrange for proper disposal. I objected to removing the item from the agenda, stating that it was an Environmental Commission proposal, but the Agenda Committee approved the action and the proposal was never heard of again. 

That one action, taken without public scrutiny, meant tons of batteries that should have been properly disposed of instead wound up in landfills where they leech poison into the soil and water. The poisoning of our environment by tons of toxic batteries is one sad legacy of the Bates administration that all the thousands of press releases by the mayor’s office cannot change. 

For the past six years the silencing of criticism has become a hallmark of the Bates administration. He has hand-picked task forces to circumvent more independent-minded citizen commissions, instigated a practice of placing deceptive descriptions of ballot measures before the voters so citizens are confused as to the purpose and effect of the proposed measures, and interfered with public comment before the City Council. When a group threatened to sue for denying citizens the right to public comment, Bates allowed the comment, but began arbitrarily changing when people could speak, reducing comment time from three to two or sometimes to one minute, telling people they had to wait until an item was called before they could speak (previously public comment took place at the beginning of the meeting), and otherwise arbitrarily changing procedures, creating uncertainty as to if or when people could speak, thus causing potential speakers to get discouraged and go home. 

So I should not have been surprised at the council meeting two days after the death of Dona Spring, when 10 or so friends of Dona’s came to the meeting to mourn her death and speak for two minutes each in her memory. Bates was so disturbed that some would praise this woman who had fought so hard against some of his polices that he actually said “be brief, this wasn’t on the agenda.” 

Maybe I should not have been surprised, but such callous disrespect is shocking nonetheless. Seriously, I ask you, is this the type person who should represent our city? 

Elliot Cohen sits on the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission. 

As predicted, Judge Miller’s decision enabled the university to “find” their way out of it, with minimal environmental commitments. (Those promises about stadium use, etc., should be recorded as were the UC commitments when they acquired the blind school for Clark Kerr.) I am a bit surprised that she (to use the Planet’s phrase) sliced and diced the costs; that is her discretion and proves, as does her final order, that she really believed that UC won the case as originally decided. 

At least this time other plaintiffs still control the destiny of the litigation, in contrast to the unfortunate Long Range Development Plan outcome. They will need to file an appeal this coming week and simultaneously seek a writ of supersedeas and immediate stay from the Court of Appeal. This can easily be done by competent counsel; it’s been done before on one day’s notice. The immediate stay should be easy, to preserve the status quo while the court evaluates the claims for the writ (equivalent of a preliminary injunction). The potential appellants have a roadmap and in my view should follow it. Not only can they force reconsideration of the project; they could obtain all their costs and potential fees as well. 

The City of Berkeley presents a sad example when it comes to litigation against UC. If you are going to war, you resolve to complete the task; now, not unlike Vietnam and Iraq, they are forced into a distasteful withdrawal because of poor foresight, planning, and resolve. Of course the comparison breaks down because the former were mistakes ab initio and post hoc, but in the stadium case there are several outcomes still possible much better for the university, the city and the community. 

You don’t bring a case like this without expecting that your victory will need to come on appeal. 

Antonio Rossmann is an environmental attorney who teaches land-use law at UC Berkeley’s law school. 

I’ve had the honor and pleasure of being able to participate in the oak grove tree-sit for the last 600-plus days. I’ve had the opportunity to meet members of my community who feel the same way I do about the state of the world, the state of our country, and the state of our city. I’ve been able to see and experience how “police state” and “fascism”—words that I usually associate with some other country in some other time period—are actually a lot closer to home that I thought. The UC Berkeley Police Department, however unprofessional and unreasonable they have been, I now see are quite predictably acting in service of their chancellor and UC Regent masters. 

However, when we turn our peaceful protest towards those decisionmakers (i.e. Chancellor Birgenau), we are punished. It is a scary time, when planting a tree can be considered vandalism, when being on a “public” university is trespassing, and when coming together with 50 others to participate in a sacred ceremony to honor life, death, and re-birth (and commemorate the life of Dona Spring) is conspiracy. 

I’ve had the opportunity to have been born and raised in Berkeley, and to experience the many different colors and sounds and faces and opinions, which have shaped me to become the person I am today. I want to see Berkeley as a place where bicycles can roam free, where trees are respected, and a diverse community can exchange ideas and opinions, express their dissent and stand up for what they believe in without being incarcerated. Berkeley is a haven to those who believe in a better world. 

I’ve had the opportunity to attend UC Berkeley, and graduate with a bachelor’s degree in environmental science. I’ve had the opportunity to meet and exchange ideas with my student peers, and take with me a wide range of insights and opinions that I would not otherwise have been exposed to. However, after more than $20,000 in tuition fees, I soon realized that the university is, for the most part, a mind-control machine to process its students into an obedient, conforming, working-class member of society, who goes to a job, pays taxes, pays rent, and who doesn’t question this capitalistic system of mindless entertainment, consumeristic values, and endless war. Only a handful of courses I took encouraged critical thinking, community service, real democracy, and interpersonal relationships. 

We are living in a time, where torturing and killing animals, whether for food or scientific research, seems to be normal and accepted by most of society. We are living in a time where monoculture farm plots sprayed with pesticides and fertilizers, polluting water and eroding soil, seems normal and accepted. We are living in a time when destroying ancient forests and clearing tropical rainforests, seems normal and accepted. We are living in a time when economic development is considered more valuable than life. Worst of all, we are living in a time when concerned members of the community who stand up in opposition to these atrocities, are being arrested and incarcerated by our government. 

This short-term thinking, profit maximizing, third world country exploiting, industrial capitalistic economic system, is doomed. I think each and every one of us knows this in our heart, no matter how hard we try to justify our modern lifestyles. However, we don’t have to abandon the city and live in an eco-village in the country to solve these problems. We can act in our own communities to support the ongoing struggle against the corporate industrial machine that is running rampant and unchecked. If you, personally, cannot take part in such actions, the least you can do is support those who are putting their bodies on the line, who are willing to suffer the consequences of their dissent, to protect our heritage, for us and for our children. 

We need to get back in touch with the earth. She is screaming to be heard, but we continue to cover our eyes and ears, pretending that everything is fine. The city of Berkeley (the community, not the City Council) can lead us into the next age of truth, reconciliation, and sustainability, if we, as a community, come together in support of such a transformation. We don’t need Obama or the UC Berkeley football team (although they are welcome to participate); we need to honor and acknowledge those working in our community now, with real moral consciousness; those who set an example of taking action congruent with their vision of a better world. 

Kingman Lim is a 27-year Berkeley resident, a certified arborist, and a graduate of UC Berkeley’s environmental science department. 

EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the first installment of a two-part commentary. The second will run in the coming weeks. 

Fact: Alcohol is the leading contributor to the leading cause of death of young people. Fact: Every weekend Berkeley is home to out-of-control teenage parties and they always involve alcohol and drugs, often violence and rape. 

A third fact is that the City of Berkeley has allowed a dangerous alcohol environment to continue for two years after a young man lost his life at a teen party in North Berkeley. Now this spring a second alcohol-involved stabbing death, this of a UC Berkeley engineering student at a fraternity house, has occurred. And in May yet another young man died the day after he graduated when he fell from a third story roof. According to the police, “alcohol may have been involved,” but the toxicology report has not been released. In March, 2004, a UC Berkeley student died as a result of participating in a contest to see who could consume the most alcohol, and other Berkeley youth have come close to dying of alcohol poisoning. If we accept the premise that adults have ultimate responsibility for the local environment in which our children are finding their way, we should know the facts. 

Early onset drinking is more likely to lead to alcohol dependence. One recent study suggests that youth who start drinking by age 15 are four times more likely to develop alcohol dependence problems, and 2.5 times more likely to abuse alcohol than those who begin drinking at age 21. Age at first use is also associated with a variety of other health problems, including early and unwanted pregnancy, depression, and suicide. Teen suicide, the third leading cause of teen death, is associated with alcohol and other drug use. If you have children who are drinking at this age, you should be concerned about the consequences of this behavior and concerned about where they are getting their alcohol. 

Alameda County reports that Berkeley High School students show significant alcohol use. In their 2005 survey, more than half (58 percent) of Berkeley High and 90 percent of Berkeley Alternative High respondents said they have used alcohol in the last month. The majority of both schools’ respondents began drinking between the ages of 11 and 15. The Berkeley cohort was the only one in the county that had more female respondents using alcohol than males (64 percent females vs. 37 percent countywide). Who is looking out for the health and safety of these young women in Berkeley? 

Adolescent brains—including frontal brain systems that underpin self-control and mature judgment regarding long-term goals and consequences—continue to mature into early adulthood. Thus, the drives, impulses, emotions, and changes in motivation that accompany puberty arise before self control and judgment are fully developed. Furthermore, the complex neurobehavioral changes that occur in adolescence interact with the social context of adolescence in ways that may further increase risk. 

Young people today, at least in the West, grow up in a culture that puts few controls and restraints on them. Instead, youth culture itself has become the dominant environment from adolescence until adulthood. As our offspring attain physical freedom from our household, they are naturally subject to powerful forces beyond our control, especially status among peers. 

Evidence is increasing that alcohol-dependent young people experience deficits in cognitive functioning as well as heightened sensitivity of the female brain to alcohol effects. One study revealed decreased activity in the areas of the brain associated with memory. Young women (18-25 years old) tested three days after their last drink showed significantly poorer memory task performance than their non-drinking peers.  

In another study, cognitive functioning was examined in adolescent subjects recruited from in-patient alcohol and drug abuse treatment centers. In order to allow the dependent adolescents time to detoxify, testing took place in the third week of treatment. Compared with matched controls, alcohol-dependent teens showed impaired memory, altered perception of spatial relationships, and poorer verbal skills. These results, taken with other studies, suggest that problems with cognitive functioning are detectable among adolescents with histories of extensive alcohol use. These deficits may put alcohol-dependent adolescents at risk for falling farther behind in school, putting them at an even greater disadvantage relative to nonusers. 

There is growing evidence that early onset of drinking is a powerful predictor of lifetime alcohol abuse and dependence. One study revealed that adults who started drinking at age 14 were three times more likely to report ever driving after drinking too much in their lives than those who began drinking after age 21. This study also demonstrated that crashes were four times more likely for those who began drinking at age 14 when compared to those who began drinking after age 21. 

Binge drinking is predominantly an upper-middle class problem—because this group has the money to spend. Nearly half (44.2 percent) of UC Berkeley students report having binged in the last two weeks.  

Finally, the volume of alcohol sales is shown to be directly related to risk of being hospitalized for assault. At peak times of sales, the risk was 41 percent higher. About one third of injuries were due to a sharp or blunt weapon. The researchers suggest that the cognitive impairment caused by alcohol puts young men in urban settings especially at risk. The risk of injury due to alcohol became a death sentence for at least three young men in Berkeley.  

Karen Klitz, Laura Menard and Ralph Adams are members of Berkeley Alcohol Policy Advocacy Coalition (BAPAC), coalition of individuals from the community, research groups, and public agencies who have been meeting since 2004 to address our concerns regarding alcohol-related problems, to learn what others are doing to address these issues, and to work together to find and implement a solution. A comprehensive, prevention-based proposal was presented by BAPAC to the City Council on April 16, 2006. For more information or a complete version (with citations) of this commentary, contact BAPAC at BAPAC2006@earthlink.net.

They say that a loss is an opportunity for gain and that a trial simply fuels the flames of passion. In my case, I have seen what struggle looks like firsthand, in the form of undergoing a forced eviction due to circumstances beyond my control. 

In the middle of my final semester at UC Berkeley, with six classes to concern myself with near midterm time, I suddenly had to worry about soon not having a roof over my head. I sifted through Craigslist ads only to discover that there were few units I could afford on a student’s income. Those few that were priced within my reach quickly filled up. In order to avoid having to pay hefty “storage fees” for every day that I was late in moving out, I had to cancel my attendance at a close friend’s funeral in Los Angeles.  

Ultimately, I did find another place. I was lucky. Too many tenants simply ache under the pressure of making enough to afford rents and move out of Berkeley, taking their unique talents and attributes with them. This trial left me with a newfound appreciation for the Rent Stabilization Board’s existence. A fire has been lit under me to ensure other Berkeley residents will avoid having to undergo the turmoil that can only result from a lack of security, equitability, and habitability in tenancy. 

With Dona Spring’s sad passing, Berkeley—and the progressive movement—lost a giant. She left immense shoes to fill, and we must work together as a community to carry forward the bright torch she’s borne for decades. I want to do whatever I can to do my small part. As her appointee to the Labor Commission, and now its chair, I’ve worked to protect working families in our community—and as your Rent Board commissioner, I’ll fight to continue her legacy of protecting the most vulnerable among us. I believe that my unique perspective as a young UC Berkeley alumnus with degrees in mechanical engineering and political science, together with my passion for the pursuit of progressive policy, will be a well-matched addition to the body. But perspective and passion can only go so far. When I represent the needs of those tenants who struggle with hardships, I will never forget what that hardship looked like for me just four months ago. 

In addition to fulfilling the responsibilities expected of every Rent Board commissioner, I emphasize three critical issues. 

Interactive outreach to all Berkeley tenants 

Historically, the Rent Board has been on the front lines of educating legions of Berkeley tenants on their rights and responsibilities and providing legal advice or dispute mediation in the unfortunate event when this becomes necessary. I will work tirelessly to help the Rent Board continue on an upward trajectory of outreach. This past year, as the UC Berkeley student government’s city affairs adviser, I worked with the Rent Board and various student organizations to organize the most successful Tenants’ Rights Week in school history. Collectively, we educated dozens of students on their rights as tenants and enticed many others to participate in a debate on Propositions 98 and 99. Through the use of novel outreach tools and various media, I hope to follow up this result with other victories as we educate tenants of all backgrounds about their basic rights. 

A sound ordinance on seismic retrofitting 

Most rent-controlled housing in Berkeley is incapable of withstanding a magnitude 7.0 or higher earthquake, of the sort that is predicted to occur along the Hayward Fault in the next 20 years. Soft-story buildings pose an additional risk of total collapse as a result of the nascent seismic activity. Both of these facts, if unresolved, will lead to gruesome results when the next “big one” wreaks its havoc on the Bay Area. To minimize the impacts on lives and livelihood, I would like to work with the Rent Board, relevant commissions, and the City Council to push for a strong ordinance that would secure all unsecured housing at a minimal cost to all parties involved, including the tenants.  

Effective grassroots organizing at local level 

Like the Labor Commission on which I serve, the Rent Board provides an important and irreplaceable resource, but cannot do everything from the dais. It is incumbent upon progressive Rent Board officials to complement their policy work by outreaching to those tenants who would otherwise fall through the cracks, encouraging them to organize against unjust conditions, and upholding the Berkeley law to protect them against any landlord-borne retaliation if they do so. I envision large delegations of tenants—not just from Berkeley, but throughout the Bay Area—who mobilize to use various negotiation and direct action tactics to effect change. We may never have the funds enjoyed by the Howard Jarvis Foundation, but we certainly have the heart, minds, and mettle to match it if all work together. 

Though I am the youngest candidate and the only recent college alumnus thus far to have asked for the support of the progressive community, my experiences as a city official, a former three-year student government officer who has held both elected and appointed posts, and an active member of various community organizing causes in Berkeley have each endowed me with the tools to represent this city with policy depth and a passion for organizing. My successful record in reconciling opinions on People’s Park, crafting the nation’s first sweatshop-free ordinance in a medium-sized city, and bringing together neighborhoods for a fifty-attendee-strong safety walk-through attests to my ability to effectively integrate the needs of tenants into the mosaic of progressive values that make this city a household name.  

This Sunday, Aug. 3, between 4 and 6:30 p.m., you will have an opportunity to speak with me at a progressive convention that determines which candidates will represent the Committee to Defend Affordable Housing (CDAH) slate this year. I look forward to seeing you at the North Berkeley Senior Center (1901 Hearst Ave.), and I hope for your support. 

Igor Tregub is a Berkeley resident and a candidate for Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board. 

Why are Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, William Perry and Sam Nunn writing opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons? It’s a good question and the reasons are worth thinking about.  

Keep in mind, these four people are not just major defense hawks. People like Kissinger and Nunn helped push through the single most dangerous and destabilizing innovation in nuclear weaponry, the arming of missiles with multiple warheads. All four have supported every conflict the United States has engaged in since World War II, all have enthusiastically supported nuclear weapons, and none has suddenly gone kumbaya on us. But all have concluded that nuclear weapons no longer serve the interests of the great powers. Why the change of mind? The answer has some disquieting aspects. 

The sudden concern with nuclear weapons is, in large part, due to the steady erosion of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPF) and the real danger that the Big Five—China, Russia, the United States, France and Britain—may one day confront a host of nations so armed. Countries like Brazil, Argentina, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, Egypt, Taiwan, and South Africa could all produce nuclear weapons in less than a decade if they wanted to. Several of these countries had begun the process before mothballing their programs several decades ago. 

Israel, Pakistan and India, of course, already have nuclear weapons In the past, wars with countries like Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq involved loss of life and wealth—far greater for them than for us—but the countries we attacked then never presented a serious obstacle to our use of military power. We might not “win” these wars in the conventional sense of the word, but none of these nations could prevent the United States from attacking them. 

Nuclear weapons change all that.  

The Bush administration demonizes North Korea, but it has been careful not to let things get out of hand. Of course there are numerous reasons why White House rhetoric has not led to a war on the Korean peninsula, some of which have nothing to do with the fact that the North Koreans have nuclear weapons. But if North Korea (and any other nation) infers that their nuclear weapons program plays a role in holding the U.S. military at bay, it is hard to argue with that conclusion. 

The Bush administration has invaded one member of its “axis of evil” and is threatening to attack a second, Iran. However, it is treading lightly in North Asia. If small countries threatened by big countries conclude that the key to avoiding an invasion is to acquire nuclear weapons, one can hardly blame them. 

This is the proliferation conversation that few people are comfortable with, partly because of the nature of the beast. 

It is a misnomer to talk about nuclear weapons as “weapons” in any meaningful sense. As John Hersey noted more than 60 years ago, the bomb that flattened Hiroshima was not just a bigger bomb. What it inflicted on that city and its residents is almost beyond human comprehension. Throughout his Pulitzer Prize-winning book he struggled with how to make his readers understand what happened in Hiroshima, occasionally resorting to the devices of fiction to get his point across.  

And that bomb was the equivalent of a firecracker compared to today’s nuclear weapons. “Fat Boy,” the weapon that flattened an entire city in a millisecond, was 15 kilotons. The average warhead today is between 150 and 250 kilotons, and there are monsters out there whose power is measured in megatons. 

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan—something both countries came perilously close to at Kargil in 1999—would do more than kill tens of millions of people. According to the “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA,” if both sides exchanged 50 warheads the size of the Hiroshima bomb, it would destroy 70 percent of the ozone in northern latitudes, and 45 percent of the ozone in the mid-latitudes where most of the world’s population resides. The loss of the earth’s protective ozone would mean a sharp rise in skin cancers and cataracts from massive increases in ultraviolet radiation. 

One hundred Hiroshima bombs equal 0.03 percent of the explosive power of the world’s nuclear weapons stockpiles.  

In short, a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan—two minor nuclear powers—could derail the economies of nations across the globe, in particular those in the United States and Europe, whose northern latitude position would make particularly vulnerable to ozone depletion. 

Enter Kissinger, Nunn, Perry and Schultz. Nuclear weapons were fine with them when the Big Five and Israel held a monopoly on the devices. But India and Pakistan have joined the club, and several others are waiting in the wings. However, if the “Big Five plus three” proliferation dam has cracks in it, they are wholly self-inflicted. 

When 181 nations signed onto the 1968 NPT, they thought they were taking the first step toward the abolition of nuclear weapons. In short, they took the treaty seriously, for example, Article VI of the NPT, which states: “Each of the parties to the treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measure relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international controls.” 

The heart of the NPT is Article VI. The only reason why smaller countries would forego nuclear weapons is that the nuclear powers would agree to scrap theirs and, further, disarm their conventional forces. Instead, the Big Five increased the number of warheads in their arsenals and raised their military budgets. Finally, they even began threatening non-nuclear countries with nuclear weapons, a violation of a 1978 addendum to the NPT (and reaffirmed in 1995). 

President George W. Bush used such threats against Iraq, Syria and the Sudan, and in 2006, former French President Jacques Chirac warned “states that use terrorists means against us” risk a “conventional” response, but “it could also be a different kind.” 

As for the section of Article VI that requires disarmament: the official U.S. military budget for fiscal 2009 will be $522 billion, but that figure doesn’t include nuclear weapons, Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, and a host of military programs in the State Department, Justice Department, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Excluding the interest we pay on past military debts ($207 billion), the real figure is $728 billion. 

Even using the faux $522 figure, however, U.S. military spending makes up 47 percent of the world’s total. If one adds to that the military expenditures of our NATO allies, that figure jumps to 70 percent. 

In comparison, our “enemies”—Cuba, Syria, North Korea, Iran and Sudan—make up 1 percent of the world’s arms spending. Iran, which President Bush calls the most dangerous country in the world, spends $5 billion on armaments, about what one could find rummaging through couch pillows at the Pentagon. Teheran’s entire budget could buy two and a half B-2 bombers. 

There is certainly a growing sentiment to get rid of the world’s nuclear weapons. In Germany, the increasingly popular Left Party is pressing for the removal of U.S. nuclear weapons. “If the federal government has some spine, it would immediately call on the U.S. to remove all nuclear weapons,” Gregor Gysi, co-leader of the Left Party told Der Spiegel, “and preferably by destroying them.” 

Pressured by the Left Party, the Social Democratic Party, a minority member of Germany’s ruling coalition, is moving in the same direction. Niels Annen, the Party’s foreign policy expert, told the Berliner Zeitung that removing nuclear weapons from Europe “would be a huge step forward in terms of nuclear disarmament.” 

The United States is estimated to have between 150 and 240 B-61 warheads in Germany, Holland, Italy, Belgium, and Turkey. 

Australia’s Labor Party Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has called for establishing an “international commission on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament” to lay the groundwork for reviewing the NPT in 2010 and begin the process of abolishing nuclear weapons. 

In the United States, 79 religious organizations, representing Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims have demanded that the Bush administration end its plans to reactivate U.S. nuclear weapons plants. “We call on our political leaders to show the moral and political courage necessary to bring about a shift in our nation’s nuclear weapons posture,” the organizations wrote in a letter to the Energy Department. “Today we have an historic opportunity to begin the journey out from under the shadow of nuclear weapons.” 

Presidential candidate Barak Obama said in October, “America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons.” 

But any successful movement to abolish nuclear weapons will not only have to see that Article VI of the NPT is carried out; it will also have to address the treaty’s preamble: “[I]n accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State…” 

As long as the great powers maintain the ability to invade countries, overthrow regimes, or bomb nations into subservience, weaker countries will inevitably try to offset those advantages. The quickest and cheapest way to do that is to develop nuclear weapons.  

The threat of nuclear proliferation will not end until all nations have given them up. And the danger of nuclear weapons will not disappear until the weak need no longer fear the strong.

The question of the day in the American presidential race appears to be: Why is Barack Obama not further ahead of John McCain, given the current political climate and recent developments? 

After eight years of George W. Bush, an ailing economy, record budget deficits, a political stalemate in Iraq and a deteriorating military situation in Afghanistan, American voters have certainly indicated a preference for a change in the country’s direction. Meanwhile, Mr. Obama has had one of the best couple of weeks imaginable for a presidential candidate, with the roaring success of his overseas trip combined with fumblings and missteps by his Republican opponent, Mr. McCain. 

And yet, Mr. Obama’s lead in the polls over Mr. McCain hovers somewhere between four and six points, with Mr. Obama’s national approval rating hovering naggingly under 50 percent. Unlike many of my fellow political analysts, I don’t think there is anything Mr. Obama’s campaign is doing “wrong,” nor is there much that can be done—outside of what they are already doing—to “fix” the problem. I think this is something that will work itself out on its own, or not. 

The first barrier to Mr. Obama breaking the 50 percent national approval barrier—or jumping to a double-digit lead over Mr. McCain—is still the newcomer factor. In presidential politics, this is a two-stage process. The first stage comes as voters make themselves used to the idea that a particular candidate might actually become president of the United States. Then and only then do those voters begin to take the candidate seriously, and examine her/his biography and positions with an intense and critical eye. 

And so, for many voters, Mr. Obama was still a novelty candidate at the first of the year, a mere tune-up for Hillary Clinton, who—it is difficult to recall, now—was considered the inevitable Democratic Party nominee. Up until the last primaries, in fact, many thought that somehow the “relentless, never-say-quit Clintons,” the quintessential comeback kids, would somehow pull out the nomination by some final, clever stroke. It was only when they did not—and the probability of a Democratic victory in November loomed—that many voters began to take their first, sustained, serious look at Mr. Obama and his wife, Michelle, trying to imagine what it would be like for them to be in the White House. 

One of those considerations—and one can never discount this in America—is imagining an African-American president in the White House. While most of the country has accepted this idea in theory and as something that would someday come about—at least since the days of the first Jesse Jackson campaign—it is a fact now staring the country in the face, altering the nation’s entire view of who we are, and who represents us. For many Americans—what exact percentage, no one can say for certain—that is a difficult bit of soul-searching. 

Myself, I wouldn’t begin to guess at how that is going to come out. 

Meanwhile, let us deal with the silliness that’s in front of us. 

It is always a source of wonder how much our good conservative friends—who let no opportunity pass to remind us of the need to wrap ourselves in the whole cloth of the nation’s constitutional legacy—are so quick to abandon that legacy, without a whimper of protest, when it suits their political necessities of the day. 

One could do a lifetime of writing on how the Founding Fathers impressed upon their contemporaries and future Americans the necessity of safeguarding civilian control over the military. There was a real concern in 18th-century America over a military coup or hijacking of the political direction of the country. One of the main reasons George Washington was the popular choice for the first president was that in 1783, following the end of the American Revolution, he voluntarily resigned his commission as commander in chief of the Continental Army, pushing the country in the direction of a political republic rather than a military dictatorship under his control. 

And so, in Section 8, the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare War (it is capitalized in the original), and in Section 2 designates the president as Commander in Chief of the army and navy. 

Anyone with a decent understanding of military hierarchy knows what “commander in chief” means. This is the person with ultimate and final authority over the troops and, when the nation is at war, over the conduct of the war. On this point, the Constitution is unobscure, and unambiguous. 

Nothing in this doctrine should be confused by the fact the American presidents, while maintaining their ultimate authority, often give their generals and military commanders wide discretion in the actual conduct of war. Abraham Lincoln—arguably the country’s greatest wartime president—did not even ask General Ulysses Grant the details of his plans after Grant was appointed general-in-chief of the Union armies. Similarly, Franklin Roosevelt gave General Dwight Eisenhower wide latitude in his military responsibilities as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe during World War II. 

Mr. Lincoln, by the way, was deferential only to Mr. Grant, whose judgment and abilities he trusted. The Civil War president famously fretted over the reluctance of one of Mr. Grant’s predecessors—John McClellan—to go on the offensive with the Army of the Potomac, once telling a couple of general officers that “if McClellan doesn’t want to use the army for awhile, I’d like to borrow it from him and see if I can’t do something or other with it.” 

When the Army of Northern Virginia—under Mr. Lee—invaded Maryland and Pennsylvania in the summer of 1863, Mr. Lincoln differed sharply with union commander Joe Hooker, who wanted to take it as an opportunity to capture the Confederate capital at Richmond. The differences eventually led to the resignation of Mr. Hooker while Confederate armies were still marching on northern soil, and the selection by Mr. Lincoln of General George Meade as Mr. Hooker’s replacement. But Mr. Meade came under sharp criticism from Mr. Lincoln after the Confederate defeat at Gettsyburg, when Mr. Meade allowed the Army of Northern Virginia to retreat, unimpeded, back across the Potomac and into Virginia. Eventually, Mr. Lincoln’s disaffection with Mr. Meade led to the appointment of Mr. Grant as commander in chief. 

If our conservative friends have ever criticized the handling of generals or general wartime strategy by Mr. Lincoln—who was both the first Republican president and a man relatively inexperienced in military matters prior to his election—then they—our conservative friends—are not making a public fuss about it. They appear to get the whole presidential commander-in-chief doctrine all ass-backwards and confused only when it comes to applying it to modern times, and potential Democratic presidents. Witness the response when General David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, disagreed with Mr. Obama over setting a timetable for U.S. withdrawal from that country. 

On July 18, the Lonely Conservative blogger writing out of New York posted a short entry whose heading said it all: “Who do you trust on the Iraq war, General Petraeus or Senator Obama?” 

On July 22, on the website The Patriot Room (guess which political persuasion they belong to), Bill Dupray writes “And Amateur Hour continues apace. ABC’s Terry Moran asks Obama about what Petraeus thought about Barry’s 16-month pullout plan. Obama breaks out the leisure suit, starts dancing, and finally says, “You know, I, I, umm, uhh, I mean, uhh, you know, well ... Screw Petraeus, I’m the boss and I’ll decide when the hell we’re gonna pull out.” 

And on July 28, the Gateway Pundit, another conservative blogger, wrote, “Here’s a major blow to the mainstream media and their non-surge supporting darling, Barack Obama. General Petraeus is sticking with Bush and McCain and has decided to win the War in Iraq rather than withdraw U.S. troops based on the latest popularity polls back at home. General Petraeus will not endorse Obama’s hasty retreat plans and will base further troop withdrawals strictly on conditions on the ground.” 

And, most telling, Mr. McCain himself told NBC News on July 21 that “I think we should trust the word of General Petraeus, who has orchestrated this dramatic [recent military] turnaround” in Iraq. 

A theme emerges. Not content merely to argue that Mr. Obama is wrong either on the effects of the surge or a timetable of withdrawal—those are, after all, arguable points—many of our conservative friends, including Mr. McCain, apparently, when it comes to applying doctrine to Mr. Obama—appear to be arguing against civilian control of the military. Presuming that Mr. Obama is only talking about being the “boss” when and if he is elected president, if he is not the boss at that point, who is? 

This is sheer madness. By this reasoning—that presidents ever and always should bow to the wisdom of the generals—then President Harry Truman should have allowed General Douglas MacArthur to invade China in the midst of the Korean War in 1951. I don’t think Mr. McCain actually believes this—he would almost certainly make his own military decisions if it were he who were the president, rather than trusting them solely to the generals—and I don’t think any rational American believes that Mr. MacArthur was right in 1951, and the country, and the world, would have been better off had the nation gone to war with China. But that’s what comes from partisan-situational thinking, when the doctrine changes to fit the politics and the opponent of the moment. 

It also goes to show that for too many of our conservative friends, the Constitution is a pointed staff on which to impale their enemies, hip and thigh, rather than a foundation doctrine providing common shelter for us all. 

Years ago, probably while watching a bird or watching for a bird, I saw a dandelion move. Not a breeze-driven sway, but a sort of convulsive shudder. And then it slowly retracted into the ground. It was like watching one of those nature-documentary time-lapse sequences in reverse. Then I realized a pocket gopher must be at work. 

The presence of a gopher is usually detected by the earth mounds from its excavations (not to be confused with mole hills) or the damage it does to plants. But sometimes you can see the actual critter as it shoves dirt out of its tunnel system. It’s a chunky, virtually neckless, beady-eyed rodent with alarming yellow incisor teeth. Those teeth are used like a bulldozer blade to push loose soil. 

You seldom see more than the gopher’s head and shoulders; it keeps its lower body anchored in the burrow in case a fast retreat is needed. The effect is rather hand-puppet-like. Usually retiring, gophers may engage in vigorous territorial defense; I once saw one rear back and squeak defiantly at a German shepherd. 

The teeth are part of the gopher’s suite of adaptations to life underground. Both the upper and lower sets project through the rodent’s lips and are exposed even when it closes its mouth, so it can dig or bite into roots without getting a mouthful of dirt. Its forelimbs, heavily muscled and equipped with long claws, are also efficient digging tools. Loose skin allows it to turn around in the confined space of its burrow, where it can move backward or forward with equal ease. A gopher’s tunnel system can extend over 100 feet and includes a grass-lined bedroom and several latrines. 

Unlike the colonial prairie dog, gophers are about as social as tigers, tolerating each other’s company only during the mating season. Females may have several litters each year. When they are two months old the young leave their mother’s burrow, traveling above ground at night to find suitable digs of their own. But the housing market can be tight; an acre of good habitat may contain a hundred gophers, each defending its turf fiercely.  

You may have wondered where a pocket gopher keeps its pockets. They’re fur-lined external pouches in its cheeks into which it stuffs food to be transported to storerooms in its burrow complex. (More typical rodents, like chipmunks, have internal cheek pouches). The pockets can be turned inside out for cleaning; a special muscle snaps them back into place, like a cheap change purse. 

Gophers browse on leaves and grasses around their tunnel openings and harvest roots and tubers underground. They’ll eat just about any kind of plant, given the opportunity, and our farms and gardens are gopher buffets. They’re fond of alfalfa and of root crops like carrots, potatoes and sugar beets. Some nurseries sell a plant called gopher purge that’s said to repel them, but I’m told its effect is mostly mythical. 

The gopher lineage goes back at least four million years in the fossil record. (Some early models had horns, an unusual departure for a rodent.) The lice that live in their fur have evolved along with them. Most gopher species have their unique species of louse, the parasite’s mouthparts fitting the host’s hair like a lock and key. 

Four million years represents a lot of digging time, and a significant environmental impact. Although we tend to think of it as a uniquely human trait, Homo sapiens is not the only species that alters its environment in a major way: think of beavers’ engineering feats, or the foraging activities of creatures as disparate as leafcutter ants and African elephants. The pocket gopher has a definite place on that list. 

Back in the 1920s Joseph Grinnell, a pioneer student of western mammals and birds, wrote an article titled “The Burrowing Rodents of California as Agents in Soil Formation.” Noting Darwin’s study of how English earthworms circulated topsoil, he claimed a similar role for North American pocket gophers. He estimated the amount of earth moved by gophers in Yosemite National Park during the winter as 3.6 tons per square mile, and extrapolated that to 8000 tons each year.  

Grinnell didn’t minimize the threat gophers posed to crops. But, long before “ecology” was in vogue, he saw the rodents as a vital part of natural systems: “We do not agree with the policy of wholesale extermination advocated by some persons for all areas alike … We hold that our native plant life, on hill and mountainside, in canyon and mountain meadow, would soon begin to depreciate, were the gopher population completely destroyed … On wild land the burrowing rodent is one of the necessary factors in the system of natural well-being.”  

I suspect that philosophical stance would be difficult to maintain if your own carrots were going missing.

Years ago, when my girls were little, I began to realize that the world, my world really, was partitioned up into two distinct groups. People that had kids and those who didn’t. Now that I had found myself in the former group I slowly started to see some underlying differences between people in the two groups. These are, of course, generalities and there are lots of exceptions but it is clear that those who carry the unflagging responsibility for other people are altered by the process and forced, as I certainly was, to grow up. This is, naturally a very broad statement and I think can only be seen in relative terms.  

I am absolutely more grown up, more mature, today for having been dropped into parenting with none of the innate skills or essential predilections required. An ice cube in a hot cup of tea, I was psychically cracked and melted and I’m a different person for it. I think I’m a better person but there are days when this is not at all clear. Oh well, that’s how life works.  

Some people just naturally think of others before themselves, children or no children. Neuroscience will doubtless give us some more specifics about this aspect of human mentality in the near future but for now, we rely upon folk knowledge, psychology and sociology. 

Our differences as givers, takers and sharers inform our choices about living arrangements. Anyone who has every lived in a group house, knows this firsthand. Some are well suited to group living because they can manage to balance their own needs with those of others. Too much one way or another and it can be a trial living with others, whether they are partners, lovers, children or simply roommates. Those with a facility for this juggling act learn the benefits of cooperative living early on and tend to seek it out as their lives progress. 

The term intentional community goes back at least as far as the 1940s when the Fellowship for Intentional Community (FIC) formed in 1948. I heard this term first while studying architecture here at Berkeley in the 1970’s and coincidentally living in a group household. My friend David Dobkin, a specialist in socially responsible investing and a financial planner here in Berkeley likes to refer to the this kind of community as having “obligations with perks” (and says they tend to run about equal in his experience). David is one of the founding members of Berkeley Cohousing, a movement and a form of home-ownership that began to take hold in America after Berkeley architects Katie McCamant and Chuck Durrett spent a year in Denmark where cohousing was active in the 1980’s and returned to write: Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves first published by Habitat press in 1988 and now available through Ten Speed press. 

David and a group of cohorts who had recently attended a conference on anti-war tax resistance called “Lives of Resistance, Communities of Support” decided to test their conviction by forging a group that would explore intentional community as a way of living out their political beliefs. They spent an entire year just meeting and talking about how they could do this. Most members read Cohousing and many long meetings bound a coalition that began to search for a site.  

From 1991 when they had attended the conference to 1994, they met and ultimately searched for a place to create Berkeley Cohousing. As many as 40 people moved through the original group that ultimately became the original 10 unit inhabitants but by the time they had bought their Sacramento Street property the group was tempered into something that would last. There are 14 units now and unlike many early groups (Berkeley was one of the first ten in the nation), their group had shown little attrition.  

Cohousing, it turns out, isn’t for everyone. My friend (and Facebook buddy) Julia McCray-Goldsmith says, “If you think marriage is hard, try cohousing.” Julia, Ministry Development Officer for the Episcopal Diocese of California, and her husband John, a public finance banking expert for Lehman Bros. live in Emeryville’s Doyle St. Cohousing. The authors of cohousing, Katie and Chuck had been her neighbors and she told me that Chuck once said that, in cohousing, the biggest problem wasn’t that your neighbor could be a jerk (Chuck apparently used a naughtier word). It was realizing that you were the jerk that was the hard part. 

Cohousing is about cooperation and participation, not just group home ownership. Most cohousing sites have a group kitchen in which meals are shared several times a week and several committees that take care of the business of day to day living, such as hiring the painter, doing the household accounting, cutting the grass, etc. Both Berkeley and Doyle have several “standing” committees. Berkeley’s includes finance, maintenance, landscaping and “people” (a committee designed to facilitate better communication when things get sticky).  

Although a political bent was part of the original concept, David admits that there is little of that in the daily workings of Berkeley Cohousing today. I would disagree. There is something absolutely subversive and potentially earthshaking about the day to day investment in this housing form. Clearly, it is inherently ecological in the lack of 14 yards, 14 lawnmowers not having been built and bought and so forth. A detailed study of the ecology of this way of living would surely show a greatly reduced carbon footprint as is clearly the case whenever people live in close proximity sharing services, tools and essential activities. 

Cohousing is also a challenge to our isolation and neediness. It’s a challenge to sharing and it doesn’t always work out. Cohousing membership isn’t always stable, although Berkeley Cohousing has broken the odds over their 14 year history. This may be due to their having spent a great deal of time developing a set of practices and working out how differences will be managed. Other groups formed more quickly and with fewer meetings do not seem to have done as well.  

Cohousing is not for the lazy. Everyone has a job to do but the benefits are clearly substantial. At both Berkeley and Doyle, dinners get made by each member roughly once a month with another member doing assistance or clean-up. (Cook four times a quarter and clean six times a quarter at Berkeley). There are other chores and they are sorted by preference (or tolerance) and then there are the committee and general meetings which take place monthly, more or less. 

One thing I was stunned to learn was that nobody gets kicked out for failure to participate. You can’t be forced to sell or move but somehow, the culture keeps things in line. 

Julia made the point that success in this manner of living is not a matter of extroversion vs. introversion. Both seem to do well, but isolating behavior would not seem to work well in cohousing. Thinking of others in all our daily affairs was a sentiment that both David and Julia echoed again and again. Amusingly, David would use the language of sociology or politics (A very polite radical, that David) while Julia used the language of spirituality. Julia referred to this lifestyle as “an ongoing practice of repentance and reconciliation”. 

Buying into cohousing is not unlike buying a condo on your own, in terms of cost, and the units, at least locally, are often modern and appointed much like a provide condo. Despite sharing a commons with a kitchen, cohousing units generally have all their own facilities. Many communities are owned as condominiums although some are co-ops and a few are individually owned homes with the commons and ground owned by a home owners association. 

Berkeley Cohousing currently has 20 adults and eight kids. Children are a big part of everyone’s lives in most cohousings. Julia said that raising her children in cohousing has made all the difference. Julia mentioned one child she knew quite well that had originally been diagnosed as having a form of high-function autism similar to Asperger’s. Today, she says, this young man would probably fail to be diagnosed at all, as a simple function of the social learning environment that this housing form fostered. Perhaps the Mayo clinic needs to take a look at cohousing too. 

I should revise one figure here and that is that Berkeley Cohousing has increased by one adult member as David prepares to wed his new love, Dr. Judy Gumbo Albert, a retired fund-raiser. We wish them incalculably long lives of marital bliss and perhaps just the occasional night off from doing the dishes. 

THURSDAY, JULY 31 

FILM 

Hecho por México: The Films of Gabriel Figueroa “Days of Autumn” at 6:30 p.m. and “Macario” at 8:30 p.m. at the Pacific Film Archive. Cost is $5.50-$9.50. 642-0808. www.bampfa.berkeley.edu 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Wendy Lesser examines the intersections between life and art in “Room for Doubt, Except in Regard to Mark Morris” at 7:30 p.m. at JCC of the East Bay, 1414 Walnut St. 848-0237. 

Annie Barrows reads from “The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society” at 7:30 p.m. at Mrs. Dalloways, 2904 College Ave. 704-8222. 

Country Joe McDonald Open Mic Night at 7 p.m. at Cafe de la Paz, 1600 Shattuck Ave. 843-0662. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Midsummer Mozart Festival Piano Recital with Nikolai Demidenko, at 7:30 p.m. at First Congregational Church of Berkeley. For ticket information call 415-627-9141. www.midsummermozart.org 

AileyCamp “...ism” Young dancers from Alvin Ailey’s summer program perform at 7 p.m. at Zellerbach Hall, UC Campus. 642-9988. www.calperformances.net 

Kaz George Group at noon at the downtown Berkeley BART station, Shattuck at Center St. 

Sean Hodge with High Heat at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $5. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Richard Baskin Group at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

The Jake Blackshear Quartet, The Bridge Crawl, Settledown at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $7. 841-2082  

Saul Kaye, Jewish blues, at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10. 849-2568.  

Fred O’dell and the Broken Arrows at 9:30 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790.  

The Django Festival with Dorado Schmidt and Larry Coryell at 8 and 10 p.m., through Sun. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $14-$26. 238-9200.  

FRIDAY, AUGUST 1 

THEATER 

Actors Ensemble of Berkeley “The Matchmaker” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m. at Live Oak Theater, 1301 Shattuck Ave., through Aug. 16. Tickets are $10-$12. 649-5999. www.aeofberkeley.org  

Altarena Playhouse “Hay Fever” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at Altarena Playhouse, 1409 High St., Alameda, through Aug. 9. Tickets are $17-$20. 523-1553. www.altarena.org 

Central Works “Midsummer/4” Thurs.-Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 5 p.m. at Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave., through Aug. 24. Tickets are $20. 558-1381. www.centralworks.org 

Contra Costa Civic Theater “Kiss Me Kate” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at 951 Pomona Ave., El Cerrito, through Aug. 3. Tickets are $15-$24. 524-9132. www.ccct.org 

Subterranean Shakespeare “The Merry Wives of Windsor” Thurs.-Sat. at 8 p.m. at The Berkeley Art Center, 1275 Walnut St., through Aug. 9. Tickets are $12-$17. For reservations call 276-3871.  

The Wild Party Performances Fri.-Sun. at 8 p.m. at The Black Repertory Group, 3201 Adeline St. 652-2120 BWLEM@aol.com  

EXHIBITIONS 

“East Bay Regional Parks Wildlife: Past & Present” Photographs by Jeff Robinson on display at the Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park, through Aug. 30. Closed Mondays. 525-2233. 

“Present Tension” Works by Jerry Carniglia, Judith Foosaner and Ann Weber. Reception at 6 p.m. at Chandra Cerrito Contemporaty, 25 Grand Ave., upper level, Oakland. www.chandracerrito.com 

“Cycles in Nature” Sculpture using materials found in the natural world by Deborah Yaffe. Reception at 7 p.m. at Oakopolis, 447 25th St., Oakland. Open Sat. from 2 to 5 p.m. 663-6920. 

“Rooted in the Bay Area” Works by Makhael Banut. Reception at 7 p.m. at The Compound Gallery, 6604 San Pablo Ave., Oakland. Exhibition runs to Aug. 12. 655-9019. thecompoundgallery.com 

“Accordion Dreams” Paintings by Julie Alvarado and “Slipping (Into Something)” paintings by Kathleen King. Opening reception at 6 p.m. at Mercury 20 Gallery, 25 Grand Ave., Oakland. 701-4620. www.mercurytwenty.com 

“home bound” Mixed media paintings by dj whelan. Artist reception at 5 p.m. at Awaken Cafe, 414 14th St., Oakland. 836-2058. info@awakencafe.com  

“Toasting the End of Capitalism” Collage and photography by Maria Gilardin. Artist reception at 6 p.m. at NoneSuch Space, 2865 Broadway at 29th Street, 2nd fl., Oakland. 650-224-3108. annskinnerjones@yahoo.com 

FILM 

ITVS Community Cinema “Chicago 10” A documentary directed by Brent Morgan at 6:30 p.m., followed by discussion, at Oakland Museum of California, 1000 Oak St., Oakland. Part of the Port Huron Project 5. 238-2200. www.museumca.org 

Sunset Cinema “Paperback Dreams” the story of two independent bookstores, at 7:30 p.m. in the garden of the Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak St. 238-2022. 

The Dark Cinema of David Goodis “Dark Passage” at 7 p.m. at the Pacific Film Archive. 642-0808. www.bampfa.berkeley.edu 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Studio One Reading Series with Jaarrod Roland and Kaya Oakes at 7:30 p.m. at Studio One, 365 45th St. at Broadway, Oakland. Suggested donation $3-$15. 597-5027. 

Noelle Oxenhandler reads from her memoir “The Wishing Year: A House, A Man, My Soul” at 7:30 p.m. at Mrs. Dalloways, 2904 College Ave. 704-8222. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Birdlegg and the Tight Fit Blues Band at 5 p.m. at Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak, Oakland. Cost is $5-$8. 238-2022. www.museumca.org 

The Black Diamond Band, rhythm and blues, at 5 p.m. outdoors at Broadway at Water St., Jack London Square, Oakland. at 9 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $12. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Glenn Miller Orchestra at 8 p.m. aboard the USS Hornet at Pier 3, Alameda. Tickets are $45-$95. 521-8448, ext. 282. www.hornetevents.com 

Alfredo Naranjo y El Guajeo, from Venezuela, at 9 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $16-$18. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Grace and Julian at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Grace Woods Trio at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

A Tribute to Utah Phillips with Rebecca Riots and Hally Hammer at 8 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $10 and up. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Claudia Russell & the Folk Unlimited Orchestra at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Emith, Mary Redente Duo at 7:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

Pat Nevin’s Ragged Glory in a benefit for the Jerry Day Foundation, at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Slick 46, Harrington Saints, Leif Erickson at 8 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $5. 525-9926. 

The P-PL at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

Shawn Brown, R&B, at 9 p.m. at Maxwell’s, 341 13th St., Oakland. Cost is $10. 839-6169. 

The Django Festival with Dorado Schmitt and Larry Coryell at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square, through Sun. Cost is $16-$26. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

SATURDAY, AUGUST 2 

CHILDREN  

Sandi & Stevie Sing Bug Songs at 2 p.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. For ages 3 and up. 524-3043.  

Puppet Show “The Adventures of Peer Gynt” Sat. and Sun. at 11 a.m., 2 and 4 p.m. and “Aesop’s Fables” at 12:30 and 3:30 p.m. at Children’s Fairyland, 699 Bellevue Ave., Oakland. Cost is $6. 452-2259. www.fairyland.org 

Saturday Stories: “The Foolish Tortoise” Listen to the story, then create an art project related to the story, at 1 p.m. at The Museum of Children’s Art, 538 9th St., Oakland. 465-8770. www.mocha.org 

THEATER 

Port Huron Project 5: The Liberation of Our People a reenactment of the 1969 speech by Angela Davis at 6 p.m. at the original site of DeFremery Park, 1651 Adeline St., West Oakland. 238-2200. www.museumca.org 

Ka Lei Maile Ali’i - The Queen’s Women Protest re-enactment play performed by members of Ka Lei Maile Ali’i Hawaiian Civic Club from Honolulu at 7 p.m. at Redwood Gardens Community Room, 2951 Derby St.  

San Francisco Mime Troupe “Red State” at 2 p.m. at Willard Park. Free, donations accepted. 415-285-1717. www.sfmt.org 

Shotgun Players “Ubu for President” An adaptation of the plays of Alfred Jarry, Sat. and Sun. at 4 p.m. at John Hinkel Park, Southampton Ave., off the Arlington, through Sept. 14. Free, donations accepted. 841-6500. www.shotgunplayers.org 

Stone Soup Improv at 8 p.m. at Temescal Art Center, 511 48th St. at Telegraph. Cost is $6-$9. 415-430-5698. info@stonesoupimprov.com 

Prism Stage “The W. Kamu Bell Curve” Sat. and Sun. at 8 p.m. at Pro Arts, 550 Second St., Oakland, through Aug.10. Tickets are $15-$20. 848-0237. 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Wildlife Photography of Jeff Robinson” A slide show of wildlife photographs from around the world at 2 p.m. at the Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

FILM 

The Dark Cinema of David Goodis “Shoot the Piano Player” at 7 p.m. at the Pacific Film Archive. 642-0808. www.bampfa.berkeley.edu 

San Francisco Jewish Film Festival, Sat.-Sat. at the Roda Theater, 2015 Addison St. All Festival Pass is $225. Group rates and specials for students and seniors are available. 925-275-9490. www.sfjff.org 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Port Huron Project 5: The Liberation of Our People A reenactment of the 1969 Angela Davis speech at deFremery Park, 1651 Adeline St., between 16th and 17th St., Oakland. Sponsored by the Oakland Museum of California. 238-2200. 

Bay Area Poets Coalition open reading, 3 to 5 p.m., at Strawberry Creek Lodge, 1320 Addison St. Park on the street, not in Lodge parking lot. 527-9905. poetalk@aol.com 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Ballet Afsaneh “Safar-e Bienteha - Eternal Journey” at 8 p.m. at Julia Morgan Center for the Arts, 2640 College Ave. Tickets are $24 and $100. 800-838-3006. www.brownpapertickets.com 

Duo Amaranto, in a concert honoring Julie Winkelstein, at 2 p.m. at the Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720, ext. 16. 

Glenn Miller Orchestra at 8 p.m. aboard the USS Hornet at Pier 3, Alameda. Tickets are $45-$95. 521-8448, ext. 282. www.hornetevents.com 

Gateswingers Jazz Band at 8 p.m. at 33 Revolutions Record Shop and Cafe, 10086 San Pablo Ave., El Cerrito. 898-1836. 

Mariachi Monumental de México de Juan Reyes at 8:30 p.m., panel discussion at 7:30 p.m., at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10-$12. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Frankye Kelly & Her Quartet at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

The Phenomenauts with Kepi Ghoulie Electric, Vic Ruggiero and The Secretions, at 9 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $110-$12. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com  

Anna Laube, Garrick Davis at 7:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

Geroid O’hAllmhurain & Barbara Magone at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $19.50-$20.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Kyle Athayde, trumpet, at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10. 845-5373.  

Planet Loop at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790.  

Izabella, Sugar Shack at 9:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082.  

Portraits of Past, Yaphet Kotto, La Quiete at 7:30 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $10. 525-9926. 

SUNDAY, AUGUST 3 

THEATER 

San Francisco Mime Troupe “Red State” at 2 p.m. at Willard Park. Free, donations accepted. 415-285-1717. www.sfmt.org 

FILM 

United Artists: 90 Years “Broken Blossoms” at 5 p.m. at the Pacific Film Archive. 642-0808. www.bampfa.berkeley.edu 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Oakland Municipal Band at 1 p.m. at the Lakeside Park Bandstand. Bring your beach chair and picnic. 339-2818. 

Ethiopian Arts Forum Ethiopian poetry and music at 3 p.m. at Julia Morgan Center for the Arts, 2640 College Ave. Cost is $112 at the door.  

Kaz George Quartet at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Ron Thompson at 11 a.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

Kapalakiko Hawaiian Band, Regina Wells in a cultural celebration of Hawaiian Independence at 7 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $10. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Tamar Sella and Shynell Blanson, vocalists, at 4:30 p.m. and Michael Coleman, Nick Lyons Quartet at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10 for each concert. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Po’ Girl at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Krum Bums, Verbal Abuse, Peligro Social at 4 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $5. 525-9926. 

MONDAY, AUGUST 4 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Virago Theatre Company: Visions and Voices Play Reading Series at 7 p.m. at Freank Bette Center for the Arts, 1601 Paru St., Alameda. Cost is $10. www.viragotheatre.org 

Poetry Express with Avotcja at 7 p.m. at Priya Restaurant, 2072 San Pablo Ave. 644-3977. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Downtown Jam Session with Glen Pearson at 7 p.m. at Ed Kelly Hall, Oakland Public Conservatory of Music, 1616 Franklin St., Oakland. Cost is $5. www.opcmucsic.org 

Avotcja’s Birthday Bash at 7 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10-$20. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

John Ellis & Double-Wide with Jason Marsalis, Matt Perrine and Wil Baldes at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $10-$16. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 5 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Freight and Salvage Open Mic at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $4.50-$5.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Creole Belles with Andrew Carierre at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cajun dance lesson at 8 p.m. Cost is $10. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Singers’ Open Mic with Ellen Hoffman at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $5. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Tony Furtado at 8 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $14. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6 

CHILDREN 

Peace Day Crane Making and reading of Eleanor Coerr’s “Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes” from 2 to 5:30 p.m. in the 4th flr. story room, Berkeley Public Library, 2090 Kittredge St. 981-6121. 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Berkeley Poetry Slam with host Charles Ellik and Three Blind Mice, at 8:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $7. 841-2082 www.starryploughpub.com 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Summer Sounds at Oakland City Center with The Sun Kings, Beatles tribute, at noon at 12th and Broadway, Oakland.  

Whiskey Brothers, old-time and bluegrass at 9 p.m. at Albatross, 1822 San Pablo Ave. 843-2473. www.albatrosspub.com 

Nick Lyons/Michael Coleman Quartet at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Bass Culture Revue with Nex B and Moraima at 8:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $tba. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Quake City, jug band, at 7 p.m. at Le Bateau Ivre, 2629 Telegraph Ave. www.lebateauivre.net 

Molly’s Revenge with Moira Smiley at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Willie K at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square. Cost is $20. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

THURSDAY, AUGUST 7 

FILM 

The Dark Cinema of David Goodis “Nightfall” at 6:30 p.m., “The Burglar” at 8:30 p.m. at the Pacific Film Archive. 642-0808. www.bampfa.berkeley.edu 

San Francisco Jewish Film Festival, through Sat. at the Roda Theater, 2015 Addison St. All Festival Pass is $225. Group rates and specials for students and seniors are available. 925-275-9490. www.sfjff.org 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Meg Waite Clayton reads from her second novel “The Wednesday Sisters” at 7:30 p.m. at Mrs. Dalloways, 2904 College Ave. 704-8222. 

Rafaela G. Castro reads from “Provocaciones: Letters from the Prettiest Girl in Arvi” at 7 p.m. at Rebecca’s Books, 3268 Adeline St. 852-4768. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Jazzschool Student Vocal Showcase at noon at the downtown Berkeley BART station, Shattuck at Center St. 

Clinton Fearon at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $12-$15. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Ledward Kaapana & Mike Kaawa at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $22.50-$23.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Jazzalicious at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $8. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Owen Roberts, The Ben Benkert Trio at 9 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $7. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Noche de Maestros with Marcelo Ledesma from Buenos Aires at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $12. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Fleeting Trance at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

FRIDAY, AUGUST 8 

THEATER 

Actors Ensemble of Berkeley “The Matchmaker” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m. at Live Oak Theater, 1301 Shattuck Ave., through Aug. 16. Tickets are $10-$12. 649-5999. www.aeofberkeley.org  

Altarena Playhouse “Hay Fever” Fri. and Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 2 p.m. at Altarena Playhouse, 1409 High St., Alameda, through Aug. 9. Tickets are $17-$20. 523-1553. www.altarena.org 

Central Works “Midsummer/4” Thurs.-Sat. at 8 p.m., Sun. at 5 p.m. at Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave., through Aug. 24. Tickets are $20. 558-1381. www.centralworks.org 

Stage Door Conservatory Teens on Stage “Anything Goes” Fri.-Sat. at 7:30 p.m., Sun. at 5 p.m. at Julia Morgan Center for the Arts, 2460 College Ave. Tickets are $10-$20 at the door. 521-6250. 

Subterranean Shakespeare “The Merry Wives of Windsor” Thurs.-Sat. at 8 p.m. at The Berkeley Art Center, 1275 Walnut St., through Aug. 9. Tickets are $12-$17. For reservations call 276-3871.  

Woodminster Summer Musicals ”Seussical” a musical based on the works of Dr. Seuss, Fri.-Sun. at 8 p.m., at Woodminster Amphitheater in Joaquin Miller Park, 3300 Joaquin Miller Rd., Oakland. through Aug. 17. Tickets are $23-$38. 531-9597. www.woodminster.com 

EXHIBITIONS 

“888 Pieces of We” A photo memoir by Keba Armand Konte Reception at 8:08 p.m. at Oakland Art Gallery, 199 Kahn’s Alley, Oakland. 637-0395. www.oaklandartgallery.org 

“Our Quiet Earthquake” Mixed media works by Aunia Kahn. Opening reception at 7 p.m. at Eclectix, 7523 Fairmount Ave., El Cerrito. Exhibition runs through Aug. 31. www.eclectixgallery.com 

“New City Scenes and Landscapes” Paintings by Jerome Carlin on display at Caffe 817, 817 Washington St., Oakland to Aug. 14. 271-7965. 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Adam David Miller and Rita Flores Bogaert will read at 7 p.m. at Nefeli Caffe, 1854 Euclid Ave. 841-6374. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Bobby Young Project, old school rock, at 5 p.m. outdoors at Broadway at Water St., Jack London Square, Oakland.  

Point Richmond Summer Music with Rock Soup Ramblers and Houston Jones, at 5:30 p.m. outdoors at Park Place in downtown Point Richmond. www.pointrichmond.com 

Ben Bolt, guitar, at 8 p.m. at the Hillside Club, 2286 Cedar St. at Arch. Cost is $10-$15. 845-1350. www.hillsideclub.org/concerts 

University Summer Symphony Orchestra at 8 p.m. at Hertz Hall, UC Campus. Sliding scale donation at the door. 642-4864. http://music.berkeley.edu 

Marvin Sanders, flute, Lena Lubotsky, piano perform works by Bach, Mozart, Haydn and Debussy, at 8 p.m. at Giorgi Gallery 2911 Claremont Ave. Cost is $10. 848-1228. www.giorgigallery.com 

Jon Fromer, CD release concert at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $12. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

David Hunter Quartet at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Jack Pollard & His Trio at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $14. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Marley’s Ghost at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Antioquia, Last Legal Music at 9 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Drumm Workshop at 8:30 p.m. Cost is $8-$20. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Greenmountain with members of Hamsa Lila will play sacred world dance music at 9:30 p.m. at Numi Tea Garden, 2230 Livingston St., Oakland. Donation $5-$10. 

Oh Shasta, Amy Meyers at 7:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

The Free Peoples, Burglars Wine at 9:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $10. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

The Dave Matthews Blues Band at 8:30 p.m. at Royal Oak Pub (formerly Baltic), 135 Park Place, Point Richmond. 232-5678. 

Say Bok Gwai, La Grita, Colectivo Error at 8 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $5. 525-9926. 

Red, R&B, at 9 p.m. at Maxwell’s, 341 13th St., Oakland. Cost is $10. 839-6169. 

3rd Date at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

SATURDAY, AUGUST 9 

CHILDREN  

Puppet Show “The Adventures of Peer Gynt” Sat. and Sun. at 11 a.m., 2 and 4 p.m. and “Harvest a the Lake” Native American Stories at 12:30 and 3:30 p.m. at Children’s Fairyland, 699 Bellevue Ave., Oakland. Cost is $6. 452-2259. www.fairyland.org 

THEATER 

Shotgun Players “Ubu for President” An adaptation of the plays of Alfred Jarry, Sat. and Sun. at 4 p.m. at John Hinkel Park, Southampton Ave., off the Arlington, through Sept. 14. Free, donations accepted. 841-6500. www.shotgunplayers.org 

Prism Stage “The W. Kamu Bell Curve” Sat. and Sun. at 8 p.m. at Pro Arts, 550 Second St., Oakland, through Aug.10. Tickets are $15-$20. 848-0237. 

FILM 

“Sisters of ‘77” Archival film of the struggles and triumphs of the equal rights movement at 2 p.m. at the Rockridge Library, 5366 College Ave. Sponsored by Oakland Eastbay NOW, AAUW-Oakland-Piedmont Branch and Alameda County Commission on Status of Women. 251-0559. 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Dreams in Metaphor” Black and white photographs by Moja Ma’at. Opening reception at 6 p.m. at Photolab Gallery, 2235 Fifth St. Exhibition runs through Aug. 30. 644-1400. www.photolaboratory.com 

Auto Erotica “It’s All About The Car” A group show by Phillip Hall, Bill Silveira and Laurell True. Opening party at 6 p.m. at Float Gallery, 1091 Calcot Place, Unit #116, Oakland. Exhibition runs to Sept. 6. 535-1702. info@floatcenter.com 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Barbara Quick reads from her novel “Vivaldi’s Virgins” with musical accompanient on the cello by Tessa Seymour, at 4 p.m. at Mrs. Dalloways, 2904 College Ave. 704-8222. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

University Summer Symphony Orchestra at 8 p.m. at Hertz Hall, UC Campus. Sliding scale donation at the door. 642-4864. http://music.berkeley.edu 

Global Voices of Resistance Benefit for La Guinera Community Center in Cuba, at 8 p.m. at La Peña Cultural Center. Cost is $10-$20. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

Carmen Jones at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $15. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Bongo Love at 9:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Drum workshop at 8:30 p.m., bring your own drum. Cost is $12-$15. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com  

Ari Chersky Trio at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Mike Zawitowski, Laura Zucker at 7:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

High Country at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

Kurt Ribak Jazz Group at 9:30 p.m. at Albatross, 1822 San Pablo Ave. Cost is $3. 843-2473. www.albatrosspub.com 

Charlie Wilson’s War at 10 p.m. at Beckett’s Irish Pub, 2271 Shattuck Ave. 647-1790. www.beckettsirishpub.com 

The Sleepy Alligators, Seconds on End, in a tribute to Jerry Garcia at 9:30 p.m. at The Starry Plough. Cost is $8. 841-2082. www.starryploughpub.com 

Attitude Adjustment, Part Time Christians, Zombie Holocaust at 7 p.m. at 924 Gilman St., an all-ages, member-run, no alcohol, no drugs, no violence club. Cost is $8. 525-9926. 

Yellowjackets with Mike Stern at 8 and 10 p.m. at Yoshi’s at Jack London Square, through Sun. Cost is $26. 238-9200. www.yoshis.com 

SUNDAY, AUGUST 10 

EXHIBITIONS 

“Fire & Flora” Hand-built ceramic vessels by Will Johnson and landscape paintings by Karen LeGault. Artists reception at 2 p.m. at the Community Art Gallery, Alta Bates Summit Medical Center, 2450 Ashby Ave. Exhibition runs through Sept. 4. 204-1667.  

Samplings 2008: A Festival of Textiles with demonstrations of quilting, lace-making, needlepoint, knitting, spinning and more, from noon to 4 p.m. at Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak, Oakland. Free. 238-2022. www.museumca.org 

READINGS AND LECTURES 

Architecture Tour of the Oakland Museum of California Meet by the Admissions Desk on the second level at 1 p.m. at Oakland Museum of California, 10th and Oak, Oakland. Free. 238-2022. www.museumca.org 

Arte Poetica, The Dream Poetry Team at 7 p.m. at La Peña. Cost is $5. 849-2568. www.lapena.org 

“Fat Man, Little Boy, and the Mushroom Cloud” Poets reflect on the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at 6:30 p.m. at Revolution Books, 2425 Channing Way. Admission is free, donations encouraged. 

“The Music of the Word” The Petaluma Poetry Walk Antholog celebartion and reading at 3:30 p.m. at Rebecca’s Books, 3268 Adeline St. 852-4768. 

MUSIC AND DANCE 

Trio Mopme at 8 p.m. at Anna’s Jazz Island, 2120 Allston Way. Cost is $10. 841-JAZZ. www.AnnasJazzIsland.com 

Redwing at 11 a.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344. www.nomadcafe.net 

Café Bellie at 7:30 p.m. at Ashkenaz. Cost is $10. 525-5054. www.ashkenaz.com 

Jesse Scheinin Group at 4:30 p.m. Nebula Explosion at 5:30 p.m. and Christine Donaldson at 8 p.m. at the Jazzschool. Cost is $10. 845-5373. www.jazzschool.com 

Australian Bebop Ragas at 8 p.m. at Freight and Salvage. Cost is $18.50-$19.50. 548-1761. www.freightandsalvage.org 

A prosperous—and obstreperous—dry goods merchant in Belle Epoque suburban Yonkers forbids his daughter to marry a young artist, all the while planning a marriage himself, bride-to-be as yet unknown. Having engaged a matchmaker of great certitude and byzantine machinations, the shopkeeper prepares to descend on Manhattan with his counselor to visit his apparently intended, a millineress.  

Meanwhile, his daughter and artist beau elope, and the mild-mannered young men who slave for the merchant, given the run of the shop in his absence, decide to close up for the day and go wild on a cheap fling in the big city. With wry inevitability, in comedy born of romance (if not exactly the romances in a few young heads), all their paths converge in the trackless metropolis, and out of silly mayhem, a charming happy ending befalls everyone. 

Thus, The Matchmaker, Thornton Wilder’s hit from 1955, with later collateral hits from Hello Dolly, was originally a flop when it first ran in New York in 1938, a contemporary of his magnum opus, Our Town.  

Wilder, a former Berkeleyan (he went to high school here), was already a successful novelist when he essayed the theater. Both Our Town and what was then titled The Merchant of Yonkers were nostalgic Americana in great part. Our Town is about generations of backwater hamlets, a kind of inward panorama, and The Merchant/Matchmaker is a farce of innocence that pretends it is knowing, set in the big city, a big city of horsecars and Victorian ladies cinched tight in corsets, riffling their skirts as they stroll. 

Based on an old Viennese farce of Nestroy’s, The Merchant of Yonkers may have nose-dived because the typical Broadway burlesque of the ’20s, the parody melodrama, had been replaced by more exotic, if no less parodic fare, like Dracula. Perhaps the sophistications and breezy screwball-ity of Viennese farce didn’t match up to the darkening, prewar mood. Or perhaps it reminded audiences of the “semiclassical” operettas of their parents. 

Success only came after another world war brought even more of a sense of distance from the material—and Wilder tinkered with The Merchant, fleshing out the now-title character of Dolly Levi, the matchmaker, as well as lifting a running gag from Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. In any case, a charming romp in what must have looked like more carefree times suddenly seemed appealing. 

Director Matthew Travisano has added some nice touches to the Actors Ensemble production at Live Oak Theater, decorating this layer cake mit schlag, Viennese waltz music. When the millineress (Mary Kidwell as Irene Molloy) is introduced in her shop, her youthful assistant, Minnie Fay (Heather Morrison) whirls in a waltz before the two are embroiled in an adventure with the two errant clerks (Justin Wheeler and Ariel Herzog), who pose as big spenders.  

Familiar faces Maureen Coyne as Dolly and Louis Schilling as the ever-complaining but somehow compliant merchant, Horace Vandergelder, bounce off each other and everybody else, including an offbeat Pennell Chapin as Flora Van Huysen, the merchant’s trustworthy (though not to him) relation, his daughter Ermengard and beau (Meira Perelstein and director Matt Travisano in artist drag), his cross-eyed new sideman, Malachi Stack (Kevin Watkins) and the various servants, waiters, cabbies and barbers, some played by the likes of Martha Luehrmann and Jose Garcia, also familiar Actors Ensemble faces. 

“Even if I dig ditches for the rest of my life, I will be a ditch digger who had a wonderful day.” The dialogue has great whimsical charm: “I like it in here; it’s a woman’s world, and very different ... can I take my shoes off?” and wryness: “Take my word for it, Minnie, the best of married life is a fight. The rest is just so-so.”  

And even a kind of common coin wisdom: “if a man has no vices, he is in great danger of making vices of his virtues. Nurse one vice in your bosom, give it the attention it deserves, and let your virtues spring up modestly around it,” and “Everybody always talks about breaking into houses, but more want to break out of houses.” 

After all the innocent fun—leisurely breakneck pursuits, genial hoodwinking and silly disguises carried over into ridiculous (but effective) transvestism—a character can truly exclaim, “Oh dear, Nobody’s anybody anymore!”  

But absurdity leads to a realization of happiness, and the tight-fisted merchant himself comes to the realization that “Money, money, money ... Like the sun we walk under, it can kill and it can cure.” 

THE MATCHMAKER 

8 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays through Aug. 16 at Live Oak Theater, 1301 Shattuck Ave. $10-$12. 649-5999, www.oeofberkeley.org.

Above a leaf-pattern carpet, the narrow eyes and wry smile of a strange man look out through foliage, a funny portrait above the mantel. Or are the leaves growing from his face? (The painting is King of the Green Men, by Brian Froud.) 

This is the set of Midsummer / 4, Gary Graves’ new play for Central Works at the Berkeley City Club. 

Below this picture, along the mantel, a bottle of spirits and many books ... a spectator pauses on the way to his seat to check out the titles. One with prominent lettering on its spine reads “Maerchen” fairytales. 

There’s an oddly neat heap of clothing on the floor. 

A few moments later, the play begins, with a young woman quietly writing in a notebook, seated on the floor by the hearth. 

One after another, people abruptly appear, rummage through the clothing, act stunned or disoriented, asking what happened or exclaiming that the place is a nuthouse—then, just as abruptly, race out. It’s funny, and nerve-wracking. 

Finally all four, two women and two men, confront one another in the room, talking about leaving immediately, suspicious of one another, unwilling to ride together back to the bay from this spot, an old estate in the Sierras. But they finally start sharing fragmented memories of the night before, narrating— 

and hopefully navigating—themselves through a grand confusion, a kind of half-slapstick comedy of manners, trying to capture what occurred in multiple, blurry perspective. 

The story starts out simply enough before it weaves itself into a tale, then tangles. Two best friends, Raissa (Leontyne Mbele-Mbong) and Lena (Arwen Anderson), are sharing a summer getaway, Raissa a writer who’d like to stay away reflecting forever, Lena who’s seeking love—or, as she says later, to be loved. She’s met a guy at an eye-gazing party, and thinks he might be the one—and has impulsively asked him to join them for the weekend, to Raissa’s discomfort. And her new friend (Armond Dorsey as Dex) has invited his buddy Larry (John Patrick Moore) to accompany him—or is it to take care of his new girlfriend’s companion? 

Add a bottle of locally distilled absinthe, and the midsummer’s eve customs, bonfires and reputedly wild behavior, of the mountain locals (the owner of the estate is mayor of Athens, the nearest town, and friend to Raissa’s father), and the stage is set—if the unwitting players are not—for a gyroscopic dance on the thin, intersecting filaments of the consciousness and affections of each, as they trade off in romantic fervor and distain, pursuit and flight, and uneasy awareness, even panic, over some other, unworldly presence. 

Central Works cofounder Jan Zvaifler has directed this tight little ensemble through every facet of this fractured crystal, bringing out the considerable comedic skills of its quartet without losing the lingering, provocative eeriness that plays around the edge of their confusion. Is it something in them—or something that’s got into them—that makes them act this way, and every which-way?  

Graves’ play, developed with the actors, works like other adaptations he’s done for the company he cofounded, miniaturizing his original into a chamber drama, then slightly burlesquing it. This even works with comedies being burlesqued, in this case, like the lamp seller in ‘Alladin,’ a new romantic (and fantastic) comedy exchanged for old: the situation of the lovers, lost in the Attic wood, from A Midsummer Night’s Dream, but treated in some ways like a Feydeau door-slammer. 

The ruse works. Arwen Anderson is funny and touching, Armond Dorsey exuberantly funny, John Patrick Moore deadpans a perfectly sincere, aspiring nerd and Leontyne Mbele-Mbong lends a certain grave elegance she has to Raissa, with gaiety, hilarity even, breaking through. All sing, carry on, get caught up in their own head as well as in the other three, a round robin of collective solipsism cut with abandon. 

Greg Scharpen helps localize the insanity with a sound design that plays off the corners of the City Club’s room and echoes through the atrium outside. Two of the players, Anderson and Dorsey, are new to the Central Works process of putting on a collaborative show, demonstrating the success of the method and adding to it with their presence. 

MIDSUMMER / 4 

8 p.m., Sun. 5 p.m Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays through Aug. 24 at Berkeley City Club, 2315 Durant Ave. $20. 558-1381. www.centralworks.org.

Alabama churchgoers sway in their pews, back and forth between testifying with a sanctimonious air and buzzing with gossip. “Lord, it’s hot! Hot as Hades ... in a gut-bucket town, a hundred degrees ... nowhere to go, too hot to drive around, too hot to leave the house!” Some suddenly freeze in attitudes of suspicion as the ensemble builds to a crescendo, writhing, rubbing their hands and exclaiming in unison: “We’re hot—because our church is on fire—and we’re trapped!” 

The first of two staged readings of Marcus Gardley’s play in development, every tongue must confess—as vigorously performed by a cast of nine with the direction of Traveling Jewish Theatre Artistic Director Aaron Davidman for the ongoing Bay Area Playwrights Festival at the Magic Theatre in Fort Mason—got off to an explosive start. 

Davidman, a Berkeley High alumnus, directed Shotgun Players’ successful production of the work they commissioned from Gardley about South Berkeley, Love Is a Dream House in Lorin, in 2006. 

“What Aaron and the actors have done forces me to look at what I’m doing here,” said Gardley of the unusually active staged reading. “He believes the work can’t be seen until the actors are on their feet, moving around, not with their scripts on music stands. We have such a shorthand between us, but it’s amazing to me he can do that. There’s always some major visual moment in my work, which can be described only by physical action. One old friend of mine calls me a visual thinker, but my plays are so heavy language-wise, both Aaron and I feel they need the action, not to overwhelm the audience with language. I hear that all the time: ‘It’d be great as a radio play!’ But only the action truly represents what I want to say.” 

Gardley’s work-in-progress has something of the quality of a parable, though one told by and through many voices. There’s something of the air of another spinoff of Southern Romance (and Gothic), Faulkner’s Light in August, to it. Many of the characters and dramatic actions have a semi-mythical quality to them, the words Jorge Luis Borges used to describe Walt Whitman’s persona as a poet, and perhaps a fundamental American stance that combines a desire for storytelling, nostalgia for roots and a way of coming to grips with the multiplicity and confusion of the present moment by harnessing those urges.  

every tongue must confess weaves a web of characters and incidents that include a young woman (Rebecca White) gone mute, returned to her cracker father (Michael Oakes) after her mother’s (Julia McNeal) shooting by her boyfriend (Mujahid Abdul-Rashid); a gravedigger (Robert Hampton) discovering a Bible with a strange family tree in an empty grave; a forceful stranger just called Blacksmith (also Abdul-Rashid), a kind of Stagolee figure, fleeing something and moving in on prophet and healer Mother Sister Madkins (C. Kelly Wright) and her son, Shadrack (Roy Ellis), who dreams of running off to Nashville to play spoons; a chorus that takes up the community’s voice, led by Myers Clark, and a kind of counter-chorus, a reporter (Pjay Phillips) on TV, spieling out the events as news.  

Each thread is tangled with the others; there is much symbolism but also humor. “Marcus’ humor lets us show difficult things without them getting too dark,” said actor P. J. Phillips.  

“I’m most interested in what leads up to the burning,” said Gardley. “I set out to understand a question: what would make someone want to burn a church? I found out in a case down South the arsonist was also part of the relief committee, rebuilding churches he’d burnt down. I want to go deeper, raise questions for the audience to answer, take it a step further.” 

Gardley’s father was a pastor for the City of Refuge, East 14th and National in Oakland. Studying poetry, he took a class in playwrighting, “and that led to a deep love of the theater. We did plays in church, but they weren’t very well written.” 

Often compared to August Wilson, Gardley said, “It’s a great compliment. I met him a couple of times. He was writing about a very specific community in Pittsburgh, and became so well-known and so specific in his work, I think that in the end he found it hard to write outside his box. But we both write about black communities in transition. And he also was a poet.” 

Another playwright Gardley talked about was Eisa Davis, who grew up in South Berkeley (and has said she didn’t know her neighborhood was called Lorin until Gardley’s play came out) and also had her Pulitzer Prize-nominated play Bulrusher produced by Shotgun.  

“I’m a big fan of her work,” he said. “I’d heard of her, but never met her until she became my first mentor. She doesn’t like me calling her that, because we’re close in age, but when I was in graduate drama school, New Dramatists in New York, which assigns members to young playwrights as mentors, gave me to Eisa. It was a great day. We found out we were from the same area. It’s great to have someone who’s gone through the same doors you have, to advise you. She’s one of those people who can sense you need something, very attuned. When I taught a class at USF, I used Bulrusher and she came to talk to my students.” 

“There was a time we and other Bay Area playwrights felt we were not being paid attention to here,” Gardley went on, “that they hadn’t even heard of us. We were known in other places. There’d be a national search by a theater here, and they’d come up with someone they didn’t know was from here. I’d get asked, ‘Who are the Bay Area playwrights?’ I don’t even live here anymore and I know who they are.” 

Gardley, who now teaches at Columbia University, has received a commission from Berkeley Rep to do a play about Oakland, which he’ll base on the Icarus myth, and set in the Acorn-area projects—“all torn down now for new apartments”—he was born in West Oakland. “There’ll be a mythic element, but it’ll be grounded in real people I grew up with.” 

Gardley talked about “liking going back and forth between New York and here, that being here “gives the golden opportunity to do community work. The history of this area is important to me. What the Bay Area provided was a close-knit community—why my plays require a large cast: so many people had a hand in my growing up, so many opinions. The Bay Area has many voices. It’s diverse, but it’s a specific diversity.” 

There is one more staged reading of every tongue must confess at 4 p.m. Sunday Aug. 3 at the Magic Theatre 2008 Bay Area Playwrights Festival, produced by The Playwrights Foundation. (415) 626-0453 x105, www.playwrightsfoundation.org.

Bookstore shelves groan with volumes on how the world is out to get us. Authors tell us that what we eat, drink and breathe are just a slow way to commit suicide. The media is full of crime stories, drug busts and murders. It’s a wonder people get out of bed in the morning.  

But since hiding in the house is not an option, people search for solutions to protect themselves. Chemicals in the water? Drink bottled water or buy a filter. Pesticides in the food? Go organic. Crime worries? Move to a gated community. 

Those “solutions” are what sociologist Andrew Szasz, in his new book Shopping Our Way to Safety, calls “inverted quarantines,” and they are likely to produce exactly the opposite of what people intend. “Act jointly with others?” asks the author. “Try to change things? Make history? No, no. I’ll deal with it individually. I’ll just shop my way out of trouble.”  

Inverted quarantines—erecting barriers to wall off threat—are hardly new. “Separating and distancing oneself from threatening social conditions” is as old as walled villages, writes Szasz, but what is different about today is that “inverted quarantine has become a mass phenomenon. Millions—many millions—do it.” 

Szasz, a professor at UC Santa Cruz, begins his study with an examination of the fallout shelter hysteria of the 1950s and early ’60s, which eventually collapsed in the face of the obvious fact that no one would survive a nuclear war. Szasz points out—with a certain amount of wry delight—that one of the major boosters of fallout shelters, Nobel laureate and former chair of the Atomic Energy Commission Willard Libby, lost his shelter to a brushfire in Bel-Air. “This suggests,” writes Szasz, “that it may not have been sturdy enough to withstand a multimegaton detonation over Los Angeles.” 

But that didn’t stop Americans from trying to shop their way to safety. 

In 1975, the average American consumed a gallon of bottled water a year. By 2005 that figure had grown to 26 gallons. In 1970 there were approximately 2,000 gated communities in the United States. By 1997 that figure had grown to 20,000. 

Take, for instance, suburbanization—a subject the book examines in detail. What’s the problem with a little peace, quiet and crabgrass? According to Szasz, plenty. 

“The suburbs’ gains were the cities’ losses,” argues Szasz. Federal money went toward highway construction instead of mass transit. Industry moved out of the cities because transport costs were reduced, thus depressing urban tax bases. That in turn created underfunded schools, deteriorating infrastructure, and the problems of urban America: poverty, crime and drugs.  

It is fairly easy to make an argument that bottled water is a bad idea, even that the suburbs create more problems than they solve. But is organic food really a bad idea? 

Szasz argues it is. It is not that the author is Pollyannaish about the variety of awful things people ingest in their food, or that eating organic food doesn’t lower the chemical and toxic load we all carry. 

But this is a book about social consequences, not how to dodge the latest designer pesticide, and his logic about the downside of organic food is hard to fault. Szasz argues that the combination of growing wealth inequality, with the expense of organic food, means there is “a class dimension” to eating right.  

Those shut out of the organic food market because of cost represent the bulk of the population, and it is a sector that likely will increase. This will result in “two agricultural systems side by side: a large conventional sector that grows affordable, if slightly contaminated, food stuffs for the majority, and a smaller one producing organic alternatives for a minority, largely made up of affluent health seekers.” 

This two-tier system for what we eat, drink and breathe creates a kind of “anesthesia” that, according to Szasz “impedes the development of public sentiment that would support a broader reconsideration of the toxic mode of production in general.” 

Inverted quarantines are also a lot of work. “When inverted quarantines become one of the central organizing principles of a person’s life, freedom of movement incrementally decreases. The person voluntarily imprisons herself or himself, restricting movement in social space…living in an ever shrinking life-world.” 

Shopping Our Way to Safety will make the reader uncomfortable (although Szasz’s dry wit and engaging prose makes the book a pleasure to read) precisely because he doesn’t give easy answers. But the book is hardly apocalyptic. The author gives a number of historical success stories wherein people repudiated the inverted quarantine and sought solutions within a wider social framework. The resistance by peace activists and nuclear scientists to the fallout shelter mania was an important part of why people eventually rejected it. 

“It is heartening to remember that the shelter critics won their struggle to convince Americans that building fallout shelters was folly and suicidal. Rationality prevailed over the illusory siren song of individual self-protection. That fight needs to be fought—and won—again, this time concerning environmental threats, not nuclear ones.” 

Rejecting the inverted quarantine, he says, is like refusing to make a wrong turn. In and of itself, that choice does “not guarantee anything,” but it creates “the possibility that better choices could yet be made. But that is a lot.” 

Conn Hallinan is a former provost in journalism at UC Santa Cruz. 

SHOPPING OUR WAY TO SAFETY: HOW WE CHANGED FROM  

PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT TO PROTECTING OURSELVES 

By Andrew Szasz, professor of sociology at UC Santa Cruz.  

University of Minnesota Press. $24.95.

Years ago, when my girls were little, I began to realize that the world, my world really, was partitioned up into two distinct groups. People that had kids and those who didn’t. Now that I had found myself in the former group I slowly started to see some underlying differences between people in the two groups. These are, of course, generalities and there are lots of exceptions but it is clear that those who carry the unflagging responsibility for other people are altered by the process and forced, as I certainly was, to grow up. This is, naturally a very broad statement and I think can only be seen in relative terms.  

I am absolutely more grown up, more mature, today for having been dropped into parenting with none of the innate skills or essential predilections required. An ice cube in a hot cup of tea, I was psychically cracked and melted and I’m a different person for it. I think I’m a better person but there are days when this is not at all clear. Oh well, that’s how life works.  

Some people just naturally think of others before themselves, children or no children. Neuroscience will doubtless give us some more specifics about this aspect of human mentality in the near future but for now, we rely upon folk knowledge, psychology and sociology. 

Our differences as givers, takers and sharers inform our choices about living arrangements. Anyone who has every lived in a group house, knows this firsthand. Some are well suited to group living because they can manage to balance their own needs with those of others. Too much one way or another and it can be a trial living with others, whether they are partners, lovers, children or simply roommates. Those with a facility for this juggling act learn the benefits of cooperative living early on and tend to seek it out as their lives progress. 

The term intentional community goes back at least as far as the 1940s when the Fellowship for Intentional Community (FIC) formed in 1948. I heard this term first while studying architecture here at Berkeley in the 1970’s and coincidentally living in a group household. My friend David Dobkin, a specialist in socially responsible investing and a financial planner here in Berkeley likes to refer to the this kind of community as having “obligations with perks” (and says they tend to run about equal in his experience). David is one of the founding members of Berkeley Cohousing, a movement and a form of home-ownership that began to take hold in America after Berkeley architects Katie McCamant and Chuck Durrett spent a year in Denmark where cohousing was active in the 1980’s and returned to write: Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves first published by Habitat press in 1988 and now available through Ten Speed press. 

David and a group of cohorts who had recently attended a conference on anti-war tax resistance called “Lives of Resistance, Communities of Support” decided to test their conviction by forging a group that would explore intentional community as a way of living out their political beliefs. They spent an entire year just meeting and talking about how they could do this. Most members read Cohousing and many long meetings bound a coalition that began to search for a site.  

From 1991 when they had attended the conference to 1994, they met and ultimately searched for a place to create Berkeley Cohousing. As many as 40 people moved through the original group that ultimately became the original 10 unit inhabitants but by the time they had bought their Sacramento Street property the group was tempered into something that would last. There are 14 units now and unlike many early groups (Berkeley was one of the first ten in the nation), their group had shown little attrition.  

Cohousing, it turns out, isn’t for everyone. My friend (and Facebook buddy) Julia McCray-Goldsmith says, “If you think marriage is hard, try cohousing.” Julia, Ministry Development Officer for the Episcopal Diocese of California, and her husband John, a public finance banking expert for Lehman Bros. live in Emeryville’s Doyle St. Cohousing. The authors of cohousing, Katie and Chuck had been her neighbors and she told me that Chuck once said that, in cohousing, the biggest problem wasn’t that your neighbor could be a jerk (Chuck apparently used a naughtier word). It was realizing that you were the jerk that was the hard part. 

Cohousing is about cooperation and participation, not just group home ownership. Most cohousing sites have a group kitchen in which meals are shared several times a week and several committees that take care of the business of day to day living, such as hiring the painter, doing the household accounting, cutting the grass, etc. Both Berkeley and Doyle have several “standing” committees. Berkeley’s includes finance, maintenance, landscaping and “people” (a committee designed to facilitate better communication when things get sticky).  

Although a political bent was part of the original concept, David admits that there is little of that in the daily workings of Berkeley Cohousing today. I would disagree. There is something absolutely subversive and potentially earthshaking about the day to day investment in this housing form. Clearly, it is inherently ecological in the lack of 14 yards, 14 lawnmowers not having been built and bought and so forth. A detailed study of the ecology of this way of living would surely show a greatly reduced carbon footprint as is clearly the case whenever people live in close proximity sharing services, tools and essential activities. 

Cohousing is also a challenge to our isolation and neediness. It’s a challenge to sharing and it doesn’t always work out. Cohousing membership isn’t always stable, although Berkeley Cohousing has broken the odds over their 14 year history. This may be due to their having spent a great deal of time developing a set of practices and working out how differences will be managed. Other groups formed more quickly and with fewer meetings do not seem to have done as well.  

Cohousing is not for the lazy. Everyone has a job to do but the benefits are clearly substantial. At both Berkeley and Doyle, dinners get made by each member roughly once a month with another member doing assistance or clean-up. (Cook four times a quarter and clean six times a quarter at Berkeley). There are other chores and they are sorted by preference (or tolerance) and then there are the committee and general meetings which take place monthly, more or less. 

One thing I was stunned to learn was that nobody gets kicked out for failure to participate. You can’t be forced to sell or move but somehow, the culture keeps things in line. 

Julia made the point that success in this manner of living is not a matter of extroversion vs. introversion. Both seem to do well, but isolating behavior would not seem to work well in cohousing. Thinking of others in all our daily affairs was a sentiment that both David and Julia echoed again and again. Amusingly, David would use the language of sociology or politics (A very polite radical, that David) while Julia used the language of spirituality. Julia referred to this lifestyle as “an ongoing practice of repentance and reconciliation”. 

Buying into cohousing is not unlike buying a condo on your own, in terms of cost, and the units, at least locally, are often modern and appointed much like a provide condo. Despite sharing a commons with a kitchen, cohousing units generally have all their own facilities. Many communities are owned as condominiums although some are co-ops and a few are individually owned homes with the commons and ground owned by a home owners association. 

Berkeley Cohousing currently has 20 adults and eight kids. Children are a big part of everyone’s lives in most cohousings. Julia said that raising her children in cohousing has made all the difference. Julia mentioned one child she knew quite well that had originally been diagnosed as having a form of high-function autism similar to Asperger’s. Today, she says, this young man would probably fail to be diagnosed at all, as a simple function of the social learning environment that this housing form fostered. Perhaps the Mayo clinic needs to take a look at cohousing too. 

I should revise one figure here and that is that Berkeley Cohousing has increased by one adult member as David prepares to wed his new love, Dr. Judy Gumbo Albert, a retired fund-raiser. We wish them incalculably long lives of marital bliss and perhaps just the occasional night off from doing the dishes. 

THURSDAY, JULY 31 

Parks for Peace Visit the rennovated Studio One Art Center, located between the North Oakland Temescal Pool and Oakland Technical High School at 365 45th St., with activities for children from 1 to 7 p.m. 597-5096. 

Community Meeting on Pacific Steel Casting at 7 p.m. at Berkeley Mt. Zion Missionary Baptist Church, 1400 8Th St. at Camelia. 233-1870. gcmonitor.org 

Berkeley Communicators Toastmasters meets at 7:30 a.m. at Au Coquelet, 2000 University Ave. Flammia@gmail.com 

Diabetes Screening Drop in anytime between 8:30 and 11:30 a.m. at Savo Island Community Room, 2017 Stuart St. Do not eat or drink anything for 8 hours, with the exception of water, before the test. 981-5367. 

“Growing Food, Growing Community: Food Access Through Urban Gardens” A panel discussion of the ideas and projects of the late Karl Linn at 7 p.m. at the Ecology Center, 2530 San Pablo Ave. 548-2220, ext. 233. www.ecologycenter.org 

Teen Book Cub meets to celebrate Harry Potter’s birthday at 4 p.m. at the Claremont Branch Library, 2940 Benvenue at Ashby. 981-6107.  

Fitness Class for 55+ at 9:15 a.m. at Jewish Community Center, 1414 Walnut St. 848-0237. 

Baby & Toddler Storytime at 10:15 and 11:15 a.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Three Beats for Nothing South Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Thurs. at 10 a.m. at the South Berkeley Senior Center, Ellis at Ashby. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

FRIDAY, AUGUST 1 

“Witnesses to History: Conveying the Tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki” Opening reception with special guests Nagasaki A-bomb survivor, Nabuaki Hanaoka at 5 to 8 pm at Oakland City Hall rotunda, 3rd floor, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, between 14th and 15th St. Exhibition provided by the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation runs to Aug. 15. 839-5877. www.nuclearfreefuture.org 

“A World Beyond Violence” CA 2008 U.S. Dept. of Peace Conference at UC Berkeley, Fri.-Sun. Keynote speaker Marianne Williamson at Wheeler auditorium. Conference cost $105. Call regarding sliding scale tickets. 527-6062. 

Introduction to Pilates at 10:30 a.m. at Elephant Pharm, 1607 Shattuck Ave. 549-9200. 

Fearless Meditation I at 7 p.m. at Center for Urban Peace, 2584 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. Sliding scale fee $20-$30. 549-3733, ext. 3.  

Berkeley Women in Black weekly vigil from noon to 1 p.m. at Bancroft and Telegraph. Our focus is human rights in Palestine. 548-6310. 

Three Beats for Nothing Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Fri. at 10 a.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, Hearst at MLK. 655-8863. asiecker@sbcglobal 

SATURDAY, AUGUST 2 

Summertime at the Ponds Learn about life in the ponds, then use nets to investigate this dynamic habitat, from 10:30 a.m. to noon at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

“Wildlife Photography of Jeff Robinson” A slide show of wildlife photographs from around the world at 2 p.m. at the Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. 525-2233. 

“Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historic Park” Hear National Park Ranger Betty Reid Soskin share the overlooked stories and contributions of the “Rosies” and other Americans on the Home Front during World War II, at 2 p.m. at Dimond Library, 3565 Fruitvale Ave, Oakland. 531-4275.  

Oakland Heritage Alliance Walking Tour: The Civil War at Mountain View Meet at 10 a.m. at Chapel of the Chimes, 4499 Piedmont Ave. Cost is $10-$15. 763-9218. info@oaklandheritage.org 

Got a problem in the garden? Want expert advice on watering, plant selection, lawn care, or pest management? Visit the master gardener booth from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Berkeley Farmers’ Market, Center Street between ML King and Milvia. 639-1275. 

Port Huron Project 5: The Liberation of Our People a reenactment of the 1969 speech by Angela Davis at 6 p.m. at the original site of DeFremery Park, 1651 Adeline St., West Oakland. 238-2200. www.museumca.org 

Nature Detectives at the Hayward Shoreline Interpretive Center Discover the fascinating world of arthropods by exploring our channels, meeting a resident crab in our touch tank, and making a craft to take home. For 3 to 5 year olds and their caregivers, at 11 a.m. at 901 Breakwater Ave., Hayward. Cost is $5, registration required. 670-7270. 

Walk the Line & Connect to the Home Front Walk the line of history and the keel of a victory ship, and learn about the men and women who contributed to victory on the home front during World War II, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. followed by optional 45 min. Bay Trail stroll. Meet park ranger at memorial by main parking lot at Rosie the Riveter Memorial, Marina Bay Park, Melville and Regatta, Richmond. 232-5050. www.nps.gov/rori/ 

All Hands on Deck: Building the Ships that Kept Democracy Afloat Learn about the 747 ships built at the Kaiser shipyards and the people that built them, from 2 to 3 p.m. at Historic Shipyard No. 3, 1337 Canal Blvd., Berth 6A, Richmond. Park outside SS Red Oak Victory gate. 232-5050. Directions to shipyard 237-2933. www.ssredoakvictory.com/contact.htm 

Common Agenda Regional Network on reordering federal priorities from the military to human and environmental needs, meets at 2 p.m. at Peace Action West, 2800 Adeline at Stuart. 524-6071. 

US Tennis Association Girls’ 18 National Championship Aug. 2-10 at the Berkeley Tennis Club and the Claremont Resort, Tunnel Rd. at Domingo. www.USTAgirls.org  

Summer Board Game Days from 1 to 4 p.m. at the Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720, ext. 17. 

LakeFest 08 A festival along Lakeshore Ave. in Oakalnd Sat. and Sun. from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. 834-9198. www.oaklandevents.net 

Free Meditation Workshop at noon at 7th Heaven Yoga Studio, 2820 7th St. 665-4300. 

Free Garden Tours at Regional Parks Botanic Garden Sat. and Sun. at 2 pm. Regional Parks Botanic Garden, Tilden Park. Call to confirm. 841-8732. www.nativeplants.org 

Around the World Tour of Plants at 1:30 p.m., Thurs., Sat. and Sun. at UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. 643-2755. http://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu 

The Berkeley Lawn Bowling Club provides free instruction every Wed. and Sat. at 10:30 a.m. at 2270 Acton St. 841-2174.  

Oakland Artisans Marketplace Sat. from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sun. from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at Jack London Square. 238-4948. 

SUNDAY, AUGUST 3 

Berkeley Rent Board Nominating Convention Help nominate a progressive rent board slate for the November election, at 4 p.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center. Donation $3-$10, no one turned away. 549-0534. 

Lazarex Cancer Foundation “Hope in Motion” 5/10 K Walk/Run, at 8 a.m. at Lake Merritt, 568 Bellevue Ave., Oakland. Cost is $30-$35. 925-820-4517. www.lazarexfoundation.org 

Trash to Treasure at the Hayward Shoreline Interpretive Center. Get some creative reuse ideas as we turn our old and/or ripped pants into a small pillow, from 12:30 to 2 p.m. at 4901 Breakwater Ave., Hayward. 670-7270. 

Social Action Forum with Antonio Medrano on his work in Mexico for Amnesty International at 10 a.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Berkeley, 1 Lawson Rd., Kensigton. 525-0302, ext. 306. 

Free Hands-on Bicycle Clinic Learn how to do a safety inspection, from 10 to 11 a.m. at REI, 1338 San Pablo Ave. Bring your bike and tools. 527-4140. 

Yoga and Meditation at 9:15 a.m. at Elephant Pharm, 1607 Shattuck Ave. 549-9200. 

Lake Merritt Neighbors Organized for Peace Peace walk around the lake every Sun. Meet at 3 p.m. at the colonnade at the NE end of the lake. 763-8712. lmno4p.org 

Berkeley Chess Club meets every Sun. at 7 p.m. at the Hillside School, 1581 Le Roy Ave. 843-0150. 

Sew Your Own Open Studio Come learn to use our industrial and domestic machines, or work on your own projects, from 4 to 8 p.m. at 84 Bolivar Dr., Aquatic Park. Also on Fri. from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Cost is $5 per hour. 644-2577. www.watersideworkshops.org 

MONDAY, AUGUST 4 

Butterflies and Butterfly Gardening with Sal Levinson, entomologist, butterfly gardener, at 7 p.m. at Albany Community Center, 1249 Marin, at Masonic. 848 9358. www.fivecreeks.org 

“A Zoo at the Library” Small animals visit the Bayview Branch of the Richmond Public Library at 11 a.m. at 5100 Harnett Ave. 620-6566. 

“The Reflecting Pool” A new take on 9/11 at 7 p.m. at Pacific Film Archive, 2575 Bancroft Way. www.reflectingpoolfilm.com 

Castoffs Knitting Group meets at 7 p.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043. 

JourneyDance with Toni Bergins at 7:30 p.m. at Rudramandir, 830 Bancroft Way. Cost is $25. 486-8700. 

World Affairs/Politics Discussion Group, for people 60 years and over, meets at 9:45 a.m. at Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Ave, Albany. Cost is $3. 

Berkeley CopWatch organizational meeting at 8 p.m. at 2022 Blake St. 548-0425. 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 5 

Tuesdays for the Birds Tranquil bird walks in local parklands, led by Bethany Facendini, from 7 to 9:30 a.m. Today we will visit Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline. Call for meeting place and if you need to borrow binoculars. 525-2233. 

National Night Out Meet your neighbors in community-building events at 7 p.m. in neighborhoods all over the East Bay. To host an event or for more information in Berkeley call 981-5808; in Oakland see www.oaklandnet.com  

“Ethics in Project Management” An all-day conference at Haas School of Business, UC Campus. for information see http:// 

execdev.haas.berkeley.edu/bes 

“Away With All Gods” Discussion group meets to discuss Part 3 of the book by Bob Avakian at 7 p.m. at Revolution Books, 2425 Channing Way. 848-1196. 

Family Storytime at 7 p.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Walk the Line & Connect to the Home Front Walk the line of history and the keel of a victory ship, and learn about the men and women who contributed to victory on the home front during World War II, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. followed by optional 45 min. Bay Trail stroll. Meet park ranger at memorial by main parking lot at Rosie the Riveter Memorial, Marina Bay Park, Melville and Regatta, Richmond. 232-5050. www.nps.gov/rori/ 

All Hands on Deck: Building the Ships that Kept Democracy Afloat Learn about the 747 ships built at the Kaiser shipyards and the people that built them, from 2 to 3 p.m. at Historic Shipyard No. 3, 1337 Canal Blvd., Berth 6A, Richmond. Park outside SS Red Oak Victory gate. 232-5050. Directions to shipyard 237-2933. www.ssredoakvictory.com/contact.htm 

Butterfly Basics Learn how a caterpillar changes into a butterfly at 10:30 a.m. at the West Side Branch Library, 135 Washington Ave., Richmond. 620-6567. 

Tuesday Tilden Walkers Join a few slowpoke seniors at 9:30 a.m. in the parking lot near the Little Farm for an hour or two walk. 215-7672, 524-9992. 

End the Occupation Vigil every Tues. at noon at Oakland Federal Bldg., 1301 Clay St. www.epicalc.org 

Berkeley Camera Club meets at 7:30 p.m., at the Northbrae Community Church, 941 The Alameda. Monthly field trips. 548-3991. www.berkeleycameraclub.org 

St. John’s Prime Timers meets at 9:30 a.m. at St. John’s Presbyterian Church, 2727 College Ave. 845-6830. 

Yarn Wranglers Come knit and crochet at 6:30 p.m. at Nomad Cafe, 6500 Shattuck Ave. 595-5344.  

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6 

Tilden Tots Join a nature adventure program for 3 and 4 year olds, each accompanied by an adult (grandparents welcome)! We’ll study reptiles, from 10 to 11:30 a.m. at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. Cost is $6-$8. Registration required. 1-888-EBPARKS. 

Tilden Mini-Rangers Hiking, conservation and nature-based activities for ages 8-12. Dress to ramble and get dirty. From 3:30 to 5:30 p.m. at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. Cost is $6-$8, registration required. 1-888-EBPARKS. 

Peace Day Crane Making and reading of Eleanor Coerr’s “Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes” from 2 to 5:30 p.m. in the 4th flr. story room, Berkeley Public Library, 2090 Kittredge St. 981-6121. 

Stand Strong Against Nuclear Weapons on the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima at noon at Marine Recruiting Center, Shattuck Ave. Sponsored by CodePINK, MECA, Courage to Resist, Women in Black, Gray Panthers. 

White Mountain in a Wheelchair: An inspirational climb with Boob Coomber at 7 p.m. at REI, 1338 San Pablo Ave. Bring your bike and tools. 527-4140. 

Grief Workshop “Memorial Tile Making” at 6:30 p.m. at Pathways, 333 Hegenberger Rd., Suite 700, Oakland. Free. 613-2092. 

American Red Cross Blood Services Volunteer Orientation from 10 a.m. to noon at 6230 Claremont Ave., Oakland. Advanced sign-up is required; please call 594-5165.  

Summer Board Game Days from 1 to 4 p.m. at the Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 526-3720, ext. 17. 

Walk Berkeley for Seniors meets every Wednesday at 9:30 a.m. at the Sea Breeze Market, just west of the I-80 overpass. Everyone is welcome, wear comfortable shoes and a warm hat. 548-9840. 

Berkeley Peace Walk and Vigil at the Berkeley BART Station, corner of Shattuck and Center. Sing for Peace at 6:30 p.m. followed by Peace Walk at 7 p.m. www. 

geocities.com/vigil4peace/vigil 

Teen Chess Club from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the North Branch Library, 1170 The Alameda at Hopkins. 981-6133. 

Spanish Conversation Classes Wed. and Thurs. at 9:30 a.m. at North Berkeley Senior Center, 1901 Hearst St. 981-5190. 

Theraputic Recreation at the Berkeley Warm Pool, Wed. at 3:30 p.m. and Sat. at 10 a.m. at the Berkeley Warm Pool, 2245 Milvia St. Cost is $4-$5. Bring a towel. 632-9369. 

Berkeley CopWatch Drop-in office hours from 6 to 8 p.m. at 2022 Blake St. 548-0425. 

Stitch ‘n Bitch at 6:30 p.m. at Caffe Trieste, 2500 San Pablo Ave., at Dwight. 548-5198.  

THURSDAY, AUGUST 7 

Tilden Tots Join a nature adventure program for 3 and 4 year olds, each accompanied by an adult (grandparents welcome)! We’ll study reptiles, from 10 to 11:30 a.m. at Tilden Nature Center, Tilden Park. Cost is $6-$8. Registration required. 1-888-EBPARKS. 

“Obama: New Day for Black People or New Face on Same Setup?” A presentation by Sunsara Taylor at 7 p.m. at Revolution Books, 2425 Channing Way. 848-1196.  

An Afternoon of Board Games for children of all ages at 3 p.m. at the West Side Branch Library, 135 Washington Ave., Richmond. 620-6567. 

Three Beats for Nothing South Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Thurs. at 10 a.m. at the South Berkeley Senior Center, Ellis at Ashby. 655-8863.  

Emergency Preparedness For Older Adults & Caregivers at 1:30 p.m. at the Albany Library, 1247 Marin Ave. 745-1499. 

Portrait Drawing Classes every Thurs. at 12:30 p.m. at the South Berkeley Senior Center, 2939 Ellis St. at Ashby Ave. 981-5170. 

Baby & Toddler Storytime at 10:15 and 11:15 a.m. at Kensington Library, 61 Arlington Ave. 524-3043.  

Avatar Metaphysical Toastmasters Club meets at 6:45 p.m. at Spud’s Pizza, 3290 Adeline. namaste@avatar.freetoasthost.info  

Healing Yoga for High Blood Pressure at 7:30 p.m. at Elephant Pharm, 1607 Shattuck Ave. 549-9200. 

Fitness Class for 55+ at 9:15 a.m. at Jewish Community Center, 1414 Walnut St. 848-0237. 

World of Plants Tours Thurs., Sat. and Sun. at 1:30 p.m. at the UC Botanical Garden, 200 Centennial Drive. Cost is $5. 643-2755.  

FRIDAY, AUGUST 8 

“The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How The War on Terror Became a War on American Ideals” with New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer at 7:30 p.m. at First Congregational Church of Berkeley, 2345 Channing Way. Tickets are $10. 848-3696. www.brownpapertickets.com/event/38919  

Mare Island Shoreline Heritage Preserve Faire, Fri. from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. , and Sat. from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. with tours of the Preserve’s historic, natural and scenic features. www.mareislandpreserve.org 

Introduction to Pilates at 10:30 a.m. at Elephant Pharm, 1607 Shattuck Ave. 549-9200. 

Summer Outdoor Movie Series “Mostly Martha” at 8:30 p.m. at Charles Chocolates, 6529 Hollis St, Emeryville. Free. Bring a chair or blanket. 652-4412, ext. 311. 

“What is Jewish Mysticism?” at 6:15 p.m. at JGate near El Cerrito Plaza and BART station. RSVP to get directions and food assignment for pot-luck. 559-8140. rabbibridget@jewishgateways.org 

Berkeley Women in Black weekly vigil from noon to 1 p.m. at Bancroft and Telegraph. Our focus is human rights in Palestine. 548-6310. 

Three Beats for Nothing Mostly ancient part music for fun and practice meets every Fri. at 10 a.m. at the North Berkeley Senior Center, Hearst at MLK. 655-8863.  

SATURDAY, AUGUST 9 

Native Medicinal Plants of California We will explore many of the plants used in Western American herbalism, with a focus on historical as well as modern use, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Regional Parks Botanic Garden. Cost is $30-$35. Bring lunch. To enroll call 841-8732. www.nativeplants.org