Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won 93.3% of the vote in Berkeley, or 93.7% if write-ins are not included. Donald Trump and his running mate received 4.0%, up from 3.2% in the 2016 election. 

Biden. 59,965 93.7% 

Trump. 2,555 4.0% 

Hawkins (Green) 672 1.1% 

Others 782 1.2% 

Third party voting was down sharply compared to 2016. In that year, 6.5% voted for third party candidates with Green Party candidate Jill Stein coming in second with 4.6% of the vote, putting her ahead of Trump. Third party votes and write-ins totaled only 2.7% this year. 

No city in the United States with a population over 100,000 recorded a smaller percentage of votes for Donald Trump than Berkeley this year. In 2016, Detroit edged Berkeley with 3.1% for Trump in Detroit and 3.2% in Berkeley. Detroit this year does have a slightly higher percentage for Biden. 

Berkeley Turnout and Winners 

in Presidential Elections 

Among cities with populations over 100,000, Washington D.C., Cambridge, MA, and Oakland rank third, fourth and fifth in smallest percentage for Trump. Seattle is the largest city in the U.S. where Trump received less than 10%. 

I have found only one city of any size with a percentage for Trump below Berkeley’s 4%. East St. Louis, Illinois’ Election Commission report that Trump received only 281 votes, or 3.3% of the total. 

Consistent with polls showing massive support for Biden among African American voters, cities with very large percentages of African American residents like East St. Louis; Detroit; Gary Indiana; Chester, Pennsylvania; and Inglewood in Los Angeles County, gave Biden huge margins over Trump. 

Where Trump received less than 10% of the vote 

Northern Alameda County is one of the nation’s most anti-Trump areas. Not only Oakland and Berkeley, but also Albany and Emeryville gave Trump fewer than 10% of their votes. In Oakland, Albany and Emeryville, Biden topped 90%, which Hilary Clinton had failed to do in 2016. 

Cities and towns with large student populations whose major employer is a college or university also tend to be strongly anti-Trump and pro-Biden. In addition to Berkeley, Cambridge and Amherst Mass, Evanston Illinois and the city of Ithaca New York make the list of cities with under 10% support for Trump. 

If you look at cities where Trump got only 10-15%, you’ll find even more college towns, including Santa Cruz, Davis and Palo Alto in California; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Madison, Wisconsin; Boulder Colorado; Charlottesville, Virginia; Hanover, New Hampshire, and Burlington, Vermont. 

Other cities where Trump managed only 10-15% include San Francisco; Portland, Oregon; Baltimore, Maryland; New Haven and Hartford, Connecticut; Richmond, Virginia, and Richmond, California. 

More votes for Trump 

Trump’s vote total in Berkeley this year was actually higher than in 2016 by 524 votes, but Biden’s vote total was 2215 votes higher than Clinton’s in 2016. In 2012, Romney managed to get 4.6% of the vote, while John McCain did a bit better in 2008 with 4.9%. George Bush won 6.6% running against Democratic candidate John Kerry in 2004. 

Higher Turnout but Fewer Votes 

Turnout this year was 81.5% of registered voters in Berkeley, up from 78.1% in the 2016 presidential election. The Covid pandemic, however, reduced the pool of potential voters as the UC student population is currently substantially smaller than normal. The number of registered voters was down from 83,778 in 2016 to 79,072 this year. But interest in the election was so strong that the number of votes cast dropped by only 980 votes. 

Turnout by Council District 

November 3, 2020 Election 

The number of votes cast and turnout both reached record levels in districts 1, 2, 3 and 5, exceeding 2008, when Obama was first elected, the year with the highest number of votes ever cast in Berkeley. The number of votes cast in the other districts, which include student neighborhoods, fell even though turnout was higher due to the reduced number of student voters. In District 7, the student supermajority district, only 3126 votes were cast, down from an already relatively low 4898 votes in 2016. The number of voters was two or three times higher in other districts. 

Turnout also reached record levels in Alameda County as a whole. The number of registered voters set a record, increasing by 8.7% compared to 2016. 114,970 more votes were cast, an increase of 17.2% as turnout increased from 75.4% to 81.3%. A major factor spurring higher turnout was the decision made by Governor Newsom in response to the covid pandemic to send a vote by mail ballot to every voter. The increase in drop boxes in Berkeley and the county also helped. In Berkeley, only 6% of ballots were cast at the polls. 

State Props and Regional Measures 

Berkeley voters voted by a huge margin, 84.4% to 15.5%, for State Proposition 15, the constitutional amendment that would have required that commercial and industrial properties be taxed based on their market value. Revenue would have gone to school districts, community colleges and local government. Countywide, the measure won 64.9%. Statewide, it lost 52% to 48%. 

Berkeley voters also strongly supported Prop 16 to repeal the ban on affirmative action. They strongly opposed Prop 22, the measure backed by Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies, who spent more than $200 million to pass the measure. The proposition overrides state law treating their workers as employees. 

Berkeley Continues to Support Rent Control 

Berkeley Voters also favored Proposition 21, 61.3% to 38.7%. This ballot initiative would have allowed local governments to enact rent control on housing that was first occupied over 15 years ago. In Berkeley, this would have meant that rent control could have been extended to cover rental units built between 1980 and 2005, and with the passage of time, on units first occupied in subsequent years. The measure passed in only two counties statewide: San Francisco and Alameda, and passed by only slim margins. It would have failed in Alameda County if not for the strong support it received in Berkeley. 

Berkeley voters also supported Measure MM by a 56.8% to 43.2% margin. This local Berkeley measure amends the city’s rent stabilization ordinance to establish emergency eviction limitations to address situations such as the Covid Pandemic; to authorize registration of rental properties exempt from rent control; and to limit the exemption of ADUs from rent control to owner occupied properties with a single family home and no more than one ADU. 

Measure MM was supported by Mayor Arreguin, by progressive councilmembers and rent board commissioners and by the Berkeley Tenants Union. It was opposed by District 1 councilmember Rashi Keserwani, by the moderate Berkeley Democratic Club, and by some former elected officials including former Mayors Bates and Hancock, and former mayoral candidate Laurie Capitelli. 

How Berkeley Voted November 3 2020 Election 

Selected State Propositions, County and Local Measures 

How voted is how voters in Berkeley voted on the prop or measure. 

Ballots cast are total ballots cast Yes or No on measure. A total of 64,450 ballots were cast in Berkeley. On each prop or measure, some voters left the ballot blank. In the presidential race, 63,974 votes were recorded for candidates on the ballot; 311 wrote-in candidates and only 164 voters, or .3% voted for no one. 

% of vote: percent of vote for or against measure in Berkeley 

MM lost in Districts 5 and 6, both predominantly homeowner districts in the hills, falling short with 45% and 44% of the vote respectively. It passed by large margins in South, West and Central Berkeley, with 64% in District 3 (South Berkeley); 61% in District 2 (southwest Berkeley); 58% in District 1 (northwest Berkeley); and 69% in District 4 (central and Downtown Berkeley). These four districts have substantial tenant populations, especially Districts 3 and 4. District 7, the near campus student super majority district, gave the measure 77% of its votes, though the vote margin was smaller than in the abovementioned districts because of the very low turnout there. District 8 (Southwest Berkeley) also approved the measure 57% in favor. In District 8, precincts closer to campus and west of College supported the measure offsetting the majority opposing the measure in the hills above Claremont Ave. 

Rent Board 

Support for rent control can be seen in the outcome of the contest for five seats on Berkeley’s rent board. The Right to Housing slate, selected at the Tenant Convention this summer swept to victory over the Homeowners for Rent Board slate. Members of the Right to Housing slate received a total of 138,953 votes while their opponents received 71,662 votes. 

Members of the Right to Housing slate got more total votes in every council district, and won more votes than the opposing slate in all of the city’s 33 consolidated precincts, except for two precincts in the hills of District 6 where Homeowner slate member Bahman Ahmadi was the top vote getter. The top vote getter on the Right to Housing slate was incumbent rent board commissioner Leah Simon-Weisberg, Directing Attorney for the Eviction Defense Collaborative. The 31,924 votes she received is the highest vote ever received by a rent board candidate in Berkeley. 

The success of the Right to Housing slate and of Measure MM and of Proposition 21 among Berkeley voters is all the more remarkable given that there were fewer student voters this year due to the pandemic and voting was done in the areas that are majority tenant and historically most pro-rent control. The Homeowner slate was probably hurt more than it was helped by all the independent expenditures by outside real estate groups in support of their candidacies. Backing by special interest groups like the National Association of Realtors Fund, even when it’s unsolicited, has not produced the results those groups were seeking in recent elections. 

Too Many Taxes? 

Berkeley voters approved Measure FF, the parcel tax to fund Berkeley emergency services by an almost 3-1 margin, and approved Measure GG that taxes rides on Uber and Lyft. Berkeley voters also favored Alameda County’s Measure W. However, Berkeley voters rejected Measure HH which would have increased the city’s Utility Users Tax, which appears on everyone’s PG&E bill. The revenue would have funded a Climate Action Fund. The Measure, which required 50% to pass, gained only 47% of the vote. The measure did worst in District 6 which often records the lowest level of support for tax measures, but it also failed in Districts 1, 2 and 3, and in District 5. It passed in Districts 4 and 7 with 50.3% and 53.4% respectively, and in District 8 by a margin of only three votes. 

Measure W 

The large margin of votes in Berkeley in favor of Alameda County Measure W, helped offset the margins against the measure in much of the eastern and southern part of the county. The margin for the measure was 20,075 votes in Berkeley; the measure passed countywide with only a slim 1311 vote margin (50.09% to 49.91%). The measure increases the sales tax rate from 9.25% to 9.75%, and would fund county services including housing and homeless services. It was ahead at the end of election night, but it’s lead dwindled as more votes were counted, and briefly fell behind until the final batches of votes restored a slim lead. 

Easy Wins for Most Council Incumbents 

Incumbent Mayor Arreguin, and incumbent councilmembers Bartlett, Hahn and Wengraf, won re-election by large margins, with the mayor and Councilmember Hahn winning with a record number of votes for a mayoral or council candidate. 

While her colleagues won easy re-election, incumbent District 2 councilmember Cheryl Davila lost by a big margin. When Davila ran in 2016, she won 31.0% of the first choice votes. She defeated incumbent Darryl Moore, who had 39.7% of the first choice votes, by getting most of the second choice votes of the third candidate Nancy Armstrong Temple. 

This year, Davila received only 29.5% of the first choice votes; her successful challenger Terry Taplin received 39.3% of the first choice votes and was easily elected when ranked choice voting allocated the second choice votes of the other two candidates. Davila’s 29.5% is the lowest level of support that any incumbent councilmember seeking re-election has received since District elections were implemented in 1986. Terry Taplin was endorsed by all but one member of the City Council, along with other elected officials who represent Berkeley. 

Endorsements may have made the difference in the School Board race this year as the two winners, Laura Babitt and Ana Vasudeo, had the most support among elected officials and had the backing of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers. 

Health officers in five Bay Area counties announced Friday that they will implement a new stay-at-home order to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, requiring most nonessential businesses to close all indoor and outdoor operations. 

Under the order, businesses like restaurants, wineries, hair and nail salons, cardrooms and fitness centers will be required to temporarily stop all indoor and outdoor activities while retail stores must limit indoor capacity at 20 percent.  

Schools that have already reopened in-person classes will be allowed to continue and such decisions will be left to officials in each county. The order - affecting Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Francisco and Marin counties and the city of Berkeley - pre-empts the state's stay-at-home order, which Gov. Gavin Newsom formally announced Thursday.  

Contra Costa County Health Officer Dr. Chris Farnitano said the Bay Area's recent coronavirus surge has resulted in numbers of new cases and hospitalizations higher than the region's summer surge.  

"The dark COVID winter that we feared would come has arrived in the Bay Area," Farnitano said Friday during a virtual news conference with health officials from all six jurisdictions to announce the stay-at-home order.  

"I, and other county health officers in the Bay Area, don't think we can wait for the state's new restrictions to go into effect later this month," he said.  

The state's order does not take effect until a region has less than 15 percent of its intensive care unit beds available. Newsom said Thursday the Bay Area as a whole was unlikely to meet that threshold until mid-December.  

"We want to mitigate mixing. Period, full stop," Newsom said Thursday of the state order. "We want to diminish the amount of mixing ... and we need to create less opportunities for the kind of contact and extended period and extended time of contact that occurs in many of these establishments, that's why we are moving forward." 

The five Bay Area counties and the city of Berkeley chose to implement the order now as new cases and hospitalizations skyrocket around the state. Los Angeles County has already done so as well.  

Santa Clara County Health Officer Dr. Sara Cody said Santa Clara County already has less than 15 percent of its intensive care unit beds available, and all six health officers agreed it was a matter of when, not if, the same happened across the region.  

"We hope that by acting early and by acting as a region, we will have the best chance of bending the curve faster, and of getting out of this difficult situation sooner and saving more lives," Cody said  

The six health officers acknowledged that the order was likely to compound the economic hardship already experienced by many businesses across the Bay Area that have had to shut down at some point during the pandemic or have had to operate at reduced capacities.  

"This is a hard way to close what's been a really hard year," Marin County Health Officer Dr. Matthew Willis said. "We're just beginning to receive the first doses of vaccine, so there's light on the horizon. 

"Unfortunately, we're seeing surges in cases and we need to hold the line, at least through the end of the year," he added.  

Marin County was the only one of the five included in the order that was not in the most-restrictive "purple" tier of the state's pandemic reopening system prior to Friday.  

Joanne Webster, the president and CEO of the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, called the new order a "massive blow" to Marin County's restaurants and other businesses that will have to close as a result of the order. 

"Being in the 'red' tier, we were really proud of the work that we've been able to do and everybody complying," she said. "With all that said, we understand that people travel, they do business, they have leisure and they go outside of the county, and so we want to do what we have to do in order to keep the hospitalizations down."  

"It's really tough," Webster added. "It's just a really, really hard call to make." 

San Mateo County's absence from the order did not go unnoticed and prompted the county to issue a statement saying that although the county is seeing increases in new cases and hospitalizations, it would follow the state's existing guidelines for the time being.  

"We acknowledge the reality of the pandemic fatigue that residents are experiencing and the need to find sources of support through this challenging period," San Mateo County health Chief Louise Rogers said in a statement. "Our collective focus must be on finding ways to support each other through this crisis safely while limiting gathering and adhering to face covering." 

Berkeley Health Officer Dr. Lisa Hernandez warned Bay Area residents to avoid socializing with people with whom they don't live and, particularly, avoid traveling and holding large, in-person gatherings for the upcoming holidays. 

State and local health officials have warned that coronavirus transmission data just from Thanksgiving will begin trickling in soon and is likely to add even more new cases and hospitalizations. 

"Do not let this be the last holiday with your family," Hernandez said. "Show your family how much you care, let them know that you'll choose safer options." 

The order will take effect on Sunday at 10 p.m. in Contra Costa and Santa Clara counties, on Monday at 12:01 a.m. in San Francisco and Alameda counties and the city of Berkeley and Tuesday at noon in Marin County. The restrictions will remain in effect through Jan. 4.

State and local public health officials have encouraged Bay Area residents to exercise outdoors during the region's stay-at-home order, but doing so with people from other households is fully prohibited in most cases.

Health officers in Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties and the city of Berkeley issued the stay-at-home order Friday to prevent coronavirus hospitalizations and intensive care unit admissions from reaching critically high levels.

The order shut down both outdoor and indoor operations for most non-essential businesses like restaurants, hair salons and barbershops, cardrooms and family entertainment centers.

Indoor activities at gyms and fitness centers were also curtailed under the order, allowing only outdoor fitness and dance classes in which participants are at least 8 feet from each other, wearing face coverings and not sharing equipment.

"You should not meet in-person with anyone you do not live with even in a small group and even outdoors with precautions," Berkeley Public Health Officer Dr. Lisa Hernandez said Friday during a briefing to announce the order.

"If you have a social bubble, it is now popped," she said. 

The five-county order pre-empted the state's stay-at-home order, which Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Thursday. The state's order would have gone into effect once the region's ICU capacity fell below 15 percent.  

As of Monday, the greater Bay Area's ICU capacity sat at 25.7 percent, according to Newsom.  

But despite the order closing most gyms and fitness centers entirely, Bay Area residents not participating in a fitness or dance class still have options to recreate safely.  

"Members of the same household are encouraged to maintain physical and mental health by safely going to a park, a beach, hike, walk or bike ride with members of their own household," according to the state's Department of Public Health. 

That guidance, and the state and local orders as a whole, are intended to prevent social mixing, according to Newsom, who last week acknowledged the mental stress of remaining indoors for long periods of time.  

"We want to encourage activity, and activity that's not focused indoors, not in congregate facilities, not where there's a tremendous amount of mixing," he said Thursday.  

The California Fitness Alliance, a trade organization for the fitness industry, lauded Newsom Monday for allowing state residents to continue exercising outdoors, whether outside of a fitness center or on their own. 

"Access to exercise is especially important to combat the stress and emotions many struggle with during the holidays, which will be heightened this year due to the pandemic and limitations on travel and family gatherings," the CFA said in a statement.  

Private gatherings of any size are also not permitted both under the state's pandemic health guidance and the Bay Area's stay-at-home order.  

That can include even meeting with people from another household in a park or other public outdoor space, even if everyone involved is wearing a face covering and social distancing.  

"The top-line point of the regional stay-at-home order is the focus at staying at home," state Health and Human Services Secretary Dr. Mark Ghaly said Monday.  

"If it's not essential for you to leave your home, if you aren't doing one of the outdoor activities with your household with quite a bit of space between you and others, the point is to stay at home during this critical time to bring transmission rates down, to help us get this under control."

So, the dust from the national election has settled a bit, though we still don’t know exactly where we are. Much hinges on Georgia’s Senate seats, not to be decided until next year, and meanwhile the pandemic is even worse than it was in the first place. It’s a good time to stay home and pray for vaccine. There’s a lot of talk about how to force vaccination on QAnon science deniers and their ilk, but why do that? It’s a problem to address after everyone who wants the vaccine gets it, which won’t be for quite a while.

Meanwhile, wear masks and holler at those who don’t. No more nice guy.

All this time at home does provide ample opportunity to contemplate the future of democracy and/or Democrats. The bizarre Trump/Giuliani axis is trying hard to destroy the small-d version by pretending fair elections are fake, but perhaps the recent emergence of backbones in a few of Georgia’s Republican electeds will thwart that plan.

What’s to become of the big-D Democrats? As long at the barbarians are at the gates, they’re sticking together, barring an occasional spat or snide tweet. (Tell me one more time: Exactly what’s wrong with Neera Tanden?) But if things ever calm down, we can resume microanalyzing the Democratic Party.

Let’s start with California. In fact, let’s stick with our home state for today.

We have become a Democratic super-majority state. No one who runs for office in a super-majority of state legislative districts would dare to claim to be anything but a Democrat.

There’s been a bit of nattering in the daily press about how many kinda-sorta liberalish propositions went down to defeat just as the Dems continued to win offices, but that’s over-simplified. It’s well-known that if voters don’t understand ballot measures they vote no, and that explains much of this year’s results. Ideology has nothing to do with it.

In districts like ours in Berkeley, we’re all Democrats all the time. The real decisions are made in the primaries, where lots of people never vote, especially with the top-two rule that can end up with two “Democrats” opposed in the general elections. If we agree that voters are confused by ballot propositions, we can be sure that they’re also confused by candidates these days.  

There are many more hot-button issues that candidates in this area must agree on than disagreements. That’s why a cute blonde from out of town with a nice smile and an earnest manner can parachute into Rockridge from a national Democratic campaign career in order to end up representing her new home town in Sacto.  

As issues go, or would if they were honestly debated in primaries, the most controversial one, the one which thoroughly divides self-identified “progressive” “Democrats”, is how to handle development. There’s big money to be made in construction, no surprise there, and lots of pols are eager to have some of that cash sticking to their hands when projects are approved and contracts are executed. 

The San Francisco press is full of stories these days about city officials who’ve been bought and sold by development interests, and for embarrassingly small rewards: a trip to Hong Kong, free auto repair, that kind of thing. In most of these reports the name Walter Wong is prominent. Evidently he’s singing and they’re caught. 

What I find most shocking is that long ago, 15 or 20 years back at least, some people I knew were trying to remodel a South of Market warehouse into a loft to live in. They were told, way back then, that you couldn’t get permits in The City without an “expediter”—a fixer, preferably one named Walter Wong. And here he is, still around, still doing it after all these years. Even though all San Francisco supervisors might claim to be “progressive Democrats”. It’s not what you believe—it is, as ever, who you know. 

It’s even possible to “expedite” a San Francisco project without exactly breaking the law. The laws are pretty hazy. But, you say, big cities are always evil. Surely not Berkeley? 

If you have observed the permitting process in Berkeley for as long as I have(considerably more than 20 years) you will be aware that a large percentage of project proposals presented to deliberative bodies—the Zoning Adjustment Board, the Landmark Preservation Commission, the Design Review Commission or the City Council--are represented by a small number of individuals. A couple of the regulars have longstanding connections with the City of Berkeley’s planning department. 

The best contender for the title of Berkeley’s Walter Wong is Mark Rhoades, now an independent “consultant” but once upon a time a City of Berkeley planning manager. Exiting through the revolving door, he’s represented quite a few successful projects plus a few that flopped. 

Let’s connect a few dots. In the recent city election, progressivish incumbents Mayor Jesse Arreguin and Councilmember Ben Bartlett were easily re-elected. But incumbent Councilmember Cheryl Davila, described on 48hills.org as a “progressive firebrand”, lost to Terry Taplin, a previously unknown candidate, who enjoyed generous contributions from a nested cluster of three organizations which advocate on one side of the most hotly contested issue in California’s single-party dominated government: Trickle-Down Housing In Your Back Yard. 

Their spiritual home is called YIMBYism—and its adherents are sometimes called Wienies, hommage to San Francisco-based State Senator Scott Wiener who’s backed innumerable bills aimed at wresting control of land use decisions from local governments. Berkeley’s State Senator Nancy Skinner has co-sponsored many a Wienie bill, most of which have been defeated as yet, and our very own Buffy Wicks carries Wiener’s water in the state legislature. 

The YIMBY/Wiener types believe that if you build a whole bunch of luxury housing priced for California’s inflated market, some of it will magically become available for the unhoused and ultra-low-income tenants. There are now a good number of academic studies disputing this theory.  

The way to get housing that low and very low income people can afford is to build it in the first place. Trickle-down just doesn’t. But that’s a complicated discussion for another time. 

Most Democratic voters don’t realize that they’re supporting this point of view when they vote in general elections. The secret is that in the general election in districts like ours, everyone needs to call themselves Democrats. In fact many are genuine Democrats, sincere adherents to much of what my mother, an early member of a California Democratic Club, used to call the Standard Liberal Position. They’re not bad on some other hot button topics. Nancy Skinner, for example, has in fact done some excellent work on police issues, which makes her collaboration with Wiener on pro-developer legislation especially regrettable. 

And here’s where we get into the weeds. In the November Berkeley Council District 2 elections both Taplin and another candidate, Alex Sharenko, received generous funding from a YIMBY-dominated San Francisco organization. 

Here’s how it appears on the Berkeley City website: BERKELEY NEIGHBORS FOR AFFORDABILITY, MAJOR FUNDING PROVIDED BY BAY AREA HOUSING ADVOCACY COALITION, SUPPORTING ALEX SHARENKO AND TERRY TAPLIN FOR DISTRICT 2 CITY COUNCIL 2020. 

An internet search on Bay Area Housing Advocacy Coalition produces this disclosure from the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition (SFHAC) website: 

“In 1999, we began calling for an end to our affordability crisis through creation of well-designed, well-located housing, at all levels of affordability as the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition (SFHAC). In the past year, we have taken our mission Bay Area-wide with a 501(c)4 advocacy arm, the Bay Area Housing Advocacy Coalition (BayHAC).” 

A 501(c)4 organization is what's often called “dark money’—making campaign contributions without donor attribution a lot easier. The money is put into an Independent Expenditure commitee--no strings attached. 

And what is SFHAC? 

Well, for brevity’s sake, let’s just quote from its website the bio of its executive director: 

” Prior to joining SFHAC, Todd [David] was the Political Director for Scott Wiener’s successful State Senate campaign.” 

Then, there’s this on their site: 

“ 'SFHAC has been an essential and effective partner in helping to further our pro-housing legislation in the Legislature,” stated Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco).' ” 

Taking advantage of Berkeley’s ranked choice voting system by funding two candidates, SFHAC was pretty sure to be able to knock off Cheryl with one of them. 

In my investigative reporting youth I would have supported the conclusions here with a lot of numbers, but in my lazy old age I have to be satisfied with guessing what’s going on from small clues. 

In this locked-down world, with no reporters at my disposal, all I can do to keep the public informed is to pass along crumbs of gossipy information and allow readers to form their own conclusions. 

It seems apparent that San Francisco’s developer shills have their sights set on Berkeley now. Two alluring plums are the BART parking lots and the historically Black-owned single family lots in South and West Berkeley, which could be zoned for techy 10-plexes if the Wienies have their way this session. 

Two more crumbs : 

1) it’s rumored that Jesse Arreguin is planning to run for Nancy Skinner’s seat when she’s termed out. This might explain some of his recent endorsements, including his recent enthusiasm for the BAHAC candidates, since the organization has flexed its funding muscle around here. 

2) Each of the newly elected Berkeley councilmembers (Mayor Arreguin, Sophie Hahn, Ben Bartlett, Susan Wengraf, Terry Taplin) was allowed to invite a very small number of in-person spectators to the Zoomed swearing-in. Credible observers report that Mark Rhoades seemed to be there as Terry Taplin’s guest. Are they right? You figure it out. It's a small town. 

After all,they're all Democrats anyhow, aren't they? So why does it matter? 

And right on cue, just as I was asking that question, I got this email from a local reader who needs to remain anonymous: 

Not sure if you endured last night's Council meeting? They voted (effectively) 6-3 to overturn 6 years of work on the silly "Adeline Corridor Specific Plan," by glomming an extra story onto "Tiers 2–4" of the zoning.  

YIMBYs mobilized their members around a coordinated message. Clearly, at least 4 pro-growthers on the Council organized this astroturf turnout. Jesse very much in the lead. 

Harrison, Hahn, and Bartlett are the only remaining councilmembers with any integrity. All 3 spoke passionately against breaking trust with an already-suspicious South Berkeley community. 

Bartlett ultimately voted for Jesse’s bad plus-one-story measure, after his own substitute motion failed, with most pro-growthers "abstaining" because they lacked the courage to vote no on what they were killing. 

During this interregnum period, we can hope for a more positive and progressive political future. Summing up the massive ethical lapses of the past federal administration is critical to never forgetting how our democracy was nearly shredded.

If Trumpism proves anything, it shows what happens when you take the individualism and greed inherent in neoliberal public policy to its logical and inevitable conclusion. Yes, Trump has been an aberration, but at the same time you can follow a thread back to the Powell Memo to see Trump represents, in brutally cartoonish form, the enforced austerity of predatory corporate ideology that has guided Republican and Democratic administrations since the entrance of Ronald Reagan into the political arena.

How does this affect the City of Berkeley and its major public institution, the University of California? The impact of austerity and now the COVID cuts have reduced the state’s contribution to UC’s budget, which has in turn led to increased student fees and tuition and to a groveling for cash from individuals and the private sector. While UC actively pursues public-private partnerships and the monetization of public resources, it remains a public institution in name but is increasingly becoming a private institution in behavior.

What's needed is a significant state tax on large corporations and wealthy individuals, the proceeds of which would specifically go to support the university. This way UC would get the money it needs from the rich without having to sell its soul. If the university was being funded primarily by public money, it might be a lot more influenced by public interest and a lot more dedicated to the public good. 

UC would do itself and Californians a great service by promoting basic education throughout the state on the difference between regressive and progressive taxation. This could then begin to empower voters to redress the issue of UC now getting only 13% of its funding from the state, rather than the 50% it used to receive. 

Meanwhile, the Black Lives Matter movement has finally ratcheted up the public conversation on race to a point where we may finally dig deeply in exploring both the roots of racism and actual policies that deal with institutional and structural barriers to social equity. 

Rhetoric from UC Berkeley sounds like it has taken this seriously. In December 2019, Chancellor Christ stated, “Berkeley must do all it can to assure that it reflects a diverse population. But demographic change is not enough, Christ said, and she called on the campus community to do more to make its entire culture welcoming and supportive of all people. (Edward Lempinen, Berkeley News, 12/19/20, online). 

Earlier Christ had said, “[T]he campus will continue to support a wide range of existing initiatives that advance diversity and inclusion for our graduate students… We are committed to keeping the campus informed and engaged as this essential work unfolds. I am both confident and optimistic that we are well positioned to build a campus community that truly reflects the diversity — and the very highest ideals — of the public we serve” (Public Affairs, UCB, 9/27/19, online). 

However she also recognized “that some members of our community feel we talk a good game about improving diversity, but haven’t backed up our words with appropriate actions” (Nanette Asimov, San Francisco Chronicle, 9/2/19). 

Yes, Chancellor Christ, we do. Witness the recent announcement of the proposed closure of the Institute for the Study of Societal Issues (ISSI) by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year - the only institute on campus currently scheduled for closing. The research institute, which was founded decades ago, was the first in the UC system devoted to the study of race, stratification and social change. ISSI also provides office space to graduate students in the landmarked Anna Head Building (across the street from People’s Park) for their work, meetings and interdisciplinary dialogue with other students of color. 

Dr. Lawrence Rosenthal, chair of the Center for Right-Wing Studies, was quoted in a Bay Cities News Foundation article that ISSI closing is “indicative of a larger pattern of universities on one hand rushing to form committees and issue statements in support of Black Lives Matter, while in this case, on the other hand, actually taking action that diminishes campus resources dedicated to racial justice.” A Daily Cal article reported that allegedly the “campus administration did not adequately communicate with ISSI or attempt a ‘collaborative approach’ before announcing the closure.” 

The historic Anna Head Building is also threatened with destruction because of the cost of repairs. This absence of care is similar to the UCB’s lack of concern for the cultural and historic legacy of People’s Park and the other historic and landmarked architecture that surrounds it. 

January 20, 2021 will mark the end of a political nightmare and hopefully the beginning of a reckoning that starts to deal with the structural deficits that led to the creation of our current chaos. UC Berkeley needs to take this to heart. 

Let’s demand that UC Berkeley seek a new vision more in line with its motto “Fiat Lux” – Let There Be Light. Let there be the light of truth, transparency, and ethics. Let that light guide the way to principled behavior and the respect for diversity, culture and history. Let that light banish the increasingly corporate behavior exhibited by the university. 

Harvey Smith is a board member of People's Park Historic District Advocacy Group. Go to peoplesparkhxdist.org to see an alternative that would bring the city, the university, and the South Campus community together to preserve and improve the park as both an important historical site and an important neighborhood open space.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) , which is the official source of data on employment, the economy is improving. According to the BLS the number of unemployed continues to fall. In fact, according to the agency it was the 6th consecutive month of improvement. The official unemployment rate last month fell from 7.9 percent to 6.9 percent. A drop in the rate by a full one percent is considerable.  

Unfortunately, however, that good news reminds us of President Herbert Hoover, who prior to the great 1930s depression, boasted that “prosperity is just around the corner”,  

But jobs were not around the corner then and jobs are not around the corner now. Aside from the bogus way that BLS counts employment ------ discouraged workers who have given up the futile search for jobs are not counted as unemployed -- there has been a tremendous increase in long term unemployment. In fact, a growing number of workers are out of work for at least six months. These jobless workers make up one third of the unemployed. Moreover, the BLS does not count seven million workers as unemployed even though they report that they want a job. 

Yet incredibly, President Trump, boasting of his accomplishments, claimed at an international forum (The World Economic Forum) that the United States was “in the midst of an economic boom the likes of which the world has never seen before”. 

But here is the reality. Although it was boasted that that many new jobs have become available, the number of unemployed workers exceeds job openings by a 2-to 1 margin. Actually, job growth has slowed considerably since seven months ago. But long term unemployment is growing rapidly. The number of long term unemployed has just jumped in just one month from 1.2 million to 3.6 million, which is three times as many. 

The consequences are extremely serious. These workers have exhausted their 26 week maximum. And most have very little if any savings. In fact, almost 70 percent of American families have less than $1,000 stashed away, and 45 Percent have nothing saved. 

Currently there is a national ban on evictions. However, the ban ends on December 31. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, as many as 19 million people are at risk of being evicted. 

It is imperative that the current anti-eviction law be renewed and that some of the loopholes, which judges have used on behalf of landlords, be eliminated. And legally as well as morally speaking enough healthy food for all members of the family must be available.  

It is a Monday in late November, 2020, and I catch Amy Goodman (“Democracy Now”) looking back on the weekend. A couple of months have passed since the massive demonstrations against police brutality, people shaking governments by the collar demanding that the pointless wanton arbitrary killing of black people stop. Organizations had formed and the movement had grown, hoping for a voice loud enough to be taken seriously. There is no democracy or justice when there are voices calling for justice that are not heard. 

Yet here it is, the end of November, and the police killing is still going on. On November 13, two black teenagers are killed by cops in Florida. On November 19, a black man sitting in the back seat of a car, a mere passenger, is hauled out of the car and shot four times by cops. On November 23, a leader of the protests against the police murder of Breonna Taylor is targeted in the middle of the night and shot dead. In the same town, on the same night, a motorist is killed by cops during a traffic stop. He was white. His name was Brian Thurman. Like a black person, he had no one to protect him. And then, as if to reenact these tragedies as farce, a totally crazed man, a person of color, goes running around on Market St. in San Francisco wielding a frying pan and a kitchen knife, escaping a fire in his apartment of uncertain origin, moaning and screaming in inchoate pain, while fighting with a ghost. Maybe, in his duress, he had become a Roman gladiator whose frying pan was a shield and whose kitchen knife was a sword. Those with the ability to feel his distress might interpret him as personifying the total inability to make sense of this world. So he jousts with the psychotic spirit of senselessness. The cops who come to the scene, however, could think of nothing other than using him for target practice -- beanbag rounds, rubber bullets, stun guns, and finally live ammunition. Somehow he survived. They let him live, which means he will be thrown in prison for his impersonation of official insanity. For the cops, his emotional distress was not a cause for empathy. Instead, it rendered him an enemy to be dealt with militarily. 

All this in one “Democracy Now” broadcast, in late November, 2020, four hundred and forty years after the first Slave Codes in Virginia (1682) had established that a black person disobeying a white person could be killed outright. Under those codes, a black woman could not be raped because she did not have the right to say no. A black man could not be murdered because he would have to be granted his humanity first in order for his murder to even be considered "manslaughter." Who was Messerle killing when he shot Oscar Grant in the back? What were the Berkeley cops sitting on when they sat on Kayla Moore and crushed her ability to breath? 

As a final coda to these incidents on Amy’s broadcast, she talks about Chesa Boudin’s decision to open a case against a cop who killed a black man named Keita O’Neil, in 2017. On that day, a white van had been carjacked in one part of town by a black man. Some time later, another white van is seen on the expressway in another part of town. Two cops in a cruiser "decide" it is the stolen van and follow it. The van parks in front of a house, and the driver, who is black, walks calmly toward the cops in their car to find out why they had been following him. No gun in his hand, no scowl in his face, no hurry in his step, he walks over. The cop in the passenger seat of the cruiser shoots him as he approaches. He was in such a hurry to kill this man that he shot through the window of the car door. Obsession. What were the cops who sat on Kayla Moore obsessed with? Handcuffing her in her own home? 

######## 

Let us revisit the details of the incidents reported by Goodman. They belong to the world we live in and pretend to accept. 

A couple of black teenagers in Florida borrow a girlfriend’s car, and start to drive somewhere. Angelo Crooms was driving. He is 16 years old. He had just turned the corner from the street on which the girlfriend lives (this is in a video), and two cop cars driving down the same street see the car and follow it (the rest is on dashcam). The cops see black people in the car and "decide" the car was stolen (the same way the cops in 2017 "decided" the white van they saw was the one carjacked), and follow it. It pulls into a driveway. The cops get out with guns drawn. Their target car backs out of the driveway, and goes around them, trying to get away from them. There is this 16 year old black kid finding himself confronted by men with guns drawn. Does anyone ever think about the terror that a person must go through, facing the threat of getting shot to death by a cop? The driver is killed. A bullet enters the side of car from a right angle, signifying that the shooter was off to the side of the car and not threatened by it (as he later claimed­). In other words, he was not shooting to defend himself. The bullet that made that hole, however, is the one that killed the other young man, Sincere Pierce, who was sitting in the back seat. 

There was no traffic stop, no report of a stolen car, nobody doing anything dangerous; the cops didn’t even check the license plate number. They just had a desire to follow this car, and get out with their guns drawn. Same obsession, a desire to terrorize. It is reminiscent of the killing of Alan Blueford in East Oakland. He was standing around with some friends on a street corner, and two cops approached with guns drawn. He ran, and died. 

You walk toward, you run away, you sit in a car, none of it makes any difference. There are no cops who will protect you from getting killed when you need it. 

Is it important that the cop who did the shooting had problems with excessive force in the past? He had shot other people. Does that explain anything? Yes. What is important is that he was kept on the force. He was apparently the kind of cop the police force liked. He remained uncharged by the department or the DA for any malfeasance. 

Kenneth Jones was sitting in the back seat of a car that was parked by the side of the road, with its hazard lights flashing. There were four black people in it. It is November 19, 2020, in Omaha. A cop sees the car, and he and his partner approach with guns drawn. He is yelling, “show me your hands.” There is no crime being committed, and there was no perceived threat. Nothing is happening that would require police actions. Yet the police are acting as if there were. The presence of a black person becomes a hallucinated crime scene for them. Back in 1682, blackness meant enslavement. In 2020, blackness still means a violation of some kind of unwritten law which men with guns hallucinate. 

Three of the people in the car raise their hands. Jones, in the back seat, does not. Perhaps he has decided that he is not a slave, and he is not a criminal. So no white man has the right to arbitrarily order him to do anything. Especially something that would suggest he wasn’t a self-respecting human being. So he simply sits in the car, parked by the side of the road. 

The cop, on the other hand, has been yelling, “show me your hands.” It is not a request, nor an order (as in the military). It is a transformation of these people’s status in the world. It doesn’t occur to him that he is terrorizing people. Or maybe it does, and that is the purpose. There is a logic to this. When you terrorize people, you often make them do things that will allow you to make your acts of terrorism look like defense against aggression. 

The cop keeps yelling about Jones’s hands. He takes his flashlight and smashes the window of the back door, opens the door, and drags Jones out. If this was a traffic stop, why is he concerned with a back seat passenger? Or rather, what’s his concern with a backseat passenger in the first place? Jones has refused to obey him. The cop is back in 1682, when disobedience could be the cause of being killed. The cop keeps yelling about seeing Jones’s hands. He must have his command obeyed. The next thing that happens is Jones is shot, and falls to the ground. And the cop doesn’t stop. He is still yelling, “show me your hands” while Jones is lying there dying.  

Like a crazed man, he doesn’t know how to stop yelling his order. He has become a command-yelling machine. 

A similar thing happened in West Oakland two years ago. A fight broke out between two men in a strip mall parking lot across the street from the 7th St. BART station. A BART cop goes running over there with his gun drawn, repeatedly yelling “show me your hands.” The two men in the fight, who have been wrestling on the ground, stop fighting, and the one with his back to the cop straightens and raises his hands. The cop who is running over to him shoots him three times in the back, killing him. Against a command-yelling machine, one has no recourse. 

Let us return to our gladiator, Antonio Estrada, wielding his frying pan on Market St. Whoever he thought he was fighting in his extreme distress, he couldn’t hear the cops yelling, “drop the knife, drop the knife.” People standing around on the sidelines were trying to talk to him, trying to get him to stop his performance because the cops were going to kill him. He hears nothing. He jousts at the air. They shoot bean bags at him. He gets up. They tase him, and he gets back up. They shoot him with rubber bullets again. He gets up again. The cops are simply waiting for him to make a single hostile move toward them (as if their assaults hadn’t made hostility an absolutely normal response) so they could kill him and claim that they did it in self-defense. They finally got their chance to shoot him. He doesn’t die. 

Any normal person would have been able to think, “gee, this guy needs some help.” Not these cops. They were in their own alternate world. They had seen a non-white man with a knife, and they had clicked into a different universe where all they could think about was shooting something at him, probably already dreaming of his final sinking to the ground and breathing his last. Which one is more emotionally disturbed, a man with a kitchen knife jousting with hallucinations, or a man yelling commands at someone he has just shot to death? Which hallucination is more deranging, the one warded off with a frying pan or the one inherent in racial bigotry. 

Does it ever occur to any of these cops that they are creating role models for the rest of society? When they face actual violent situations, do they imagine that it is their brutality that partially engenders it. Or conversely, do they hope that their own violence will spur other kinds in society at large, because that will then translate into overtime pay, or job security. Do they recognize an increase in gun violence as a possible opposition to the call to defund the police? 

When other police departments, such as that in Berkeley, remain silent about the murders committed by their confreres in other jurisdictions, do they become accomplices? Have they become infected by the same bug? When cops act out their machinic attitudes toward people, is it a social illness? Have they become agents of contagion, carriers of a malicious consciousness that they can then spread like a virus? Maybe that’s what happened to Travis Nagdy in Louisville. 

Nagdy was a nobody, a guy who didn’t know who he was. In and out of foster homes, juvies, constructing a record for himself out of small thefts. At one point, he found himself in a demonstration protesting the murder of Breonna Taylor, and it touched him. He heard the story, he listened to things he already knew about from his own experience with police impunity. He joined the drive to make the police accountable. He got a bull horn and found a voice for himself, singing and chanting and speaking – an organizer fearlessly insisting on justice for this woman he had never met. He builds an identity for himself, becoming a social person, someone who knows who he is, and can grasp the world with both hands. He becomes a man who doesn’t just speak truth to power, but goes beyond that to speak truth to the powerless. 

Nobody knows who did it, nor how it happened. But one night, a little after midnight, he is standing on the street on a Monday morning, November 23, and someone shoots him. The rumor claims there was a carjacking, and some shots were fired at random. But he is hit with several bullets, and falls to the ground, dying. In other words, he was targeted. Somebody didn’t want him to become another Fred Hampton, so they made him into another Fred Hampton. 

The cops say they don’t know who did it. They have no suspects. 

It’s a familiar kind of event. One of the men who played an important role in the massive demonstrations in 1999 against the NYC police after they shot Amadou Diallo (thousands demonstrating for days at NY city hall) was set up for assassination. His name was Patrick Dorismond. After the cops who had killed Diallo were acquitted, Dorismond was approached on the street by a man demanding that Dorismond provide him with some drugs. He said he didn’t have any. A fight started, and Dorismond was shot and killed. The man who had approached him turned out to be a narc. That same month, another man named Malcolm Ferguson, who was also an organizer of those demonstrations, was shot to death openly by the police on the street. 

For each story here and now, there is always an earlier version that elucidates it. 

But killing Diallo also epitomizes the obsession being examined here. He was shot 19 times by the cops. What is significant is that the last two bullets to enter his body went through the bottoms of his feet. It wasn’t that they didn’t know how to stop. They wanted to do more than just kill him. 

It is said that there are police officers who “are not like that.” Why don’t they stop the killing? Why don’t they organize against those who give the police a “bad name” (terrorist)? But even the government is like that. Trump and Barr want to put 5 of the people on federal death row to death in the remaining few weeks of Trump’s administration. Trump wants to go out a killer. The cops are small potatoes. 

This is the end of 2020, and the killing just keeps going on.

Following his monumental failure to protect the American people from the deadly Coronavirus, DJT has turned his attention to America’s most vulnerable population, people on death row who now face a firing squad, poison gas, or the electric chair to end their lives. It is baffling why a firing squad is needed is still needed to kill a single person. 

Under a new rule filed by Attorney General Darth Vader, William Barr now offers a tantalizing choice of methods can to carry out executions for federal death sentences in addition to lethal injection. DJT’s lust for killing during the lame duck period is unprecedented. 

This comes as the Trump administration has already executed eight people in the past five months. Well done sir, ievangelicals, and Jesus must be so happy. 

The Death Penalty Information Center reports it’s been more than a century since a federal execution was conducted during a lame-duck presidency, in 1889, during the outgoing administration of Grover Cleveland. 

Sister Helen described the planned executions as the most grotesque federal sponsored murders in US history. 

President-elect Joe Biden said during the election campaign he now supports eliminating the federal death penalty which is a welcome change from1990 Biden who authored legislation that expanded the federal death penalty. Let’s offer him a very short honeymoon before we demand he live up to his more enlightened pledge. 

For more go to, http://callforsocialjustice.blogspot.com/

Editor's Note: The latest issue of the Pepper Spray Times is now available.

You can view it absolutely free of charge by clicking here . You can print it out to give to your friends.

Grace Underpressure has been producing it for many years now, even before the Berkeley Daily Planet started distributing it, most of the time without being paid, and now we'd like you to show your appreciation by using the button below to send her money.

This is a Very Good Deal. Go for it! 

Although I take large dosages of antipsychotics and have done this since the mid nineteen eighties, I continue to have some level of "breakthrough symptoms." Despite treatment I can get delusional thoughts, and it is not safe to assume that medication will solve this. I cannot raise dosages of meds every time I get symptoms, because I am already on exceedingly high amounts, and raising the dosages could make things worse, not better. 

This is established in psychiatry: when dosages of antipsychotics and many other medications are too high, or "above therapeutic level" it can worsen symptoms rather than solving them. Additionally, many meds become toxic if raised too high, or could cause other types of damage. 

(In the past twenty years, psychiatrists have raised my dosages at my own request--it was not their idea. Psychiatrists have acknowledged that I have considerable experience managing my condition.) 

I have gone off medications against medical advice about three times, with bad results. I am also older, having so far made it to an age many schizophrenic men don't reach. Due to aging and having stopped medication in my past, the effectiveness of medication could be less. 

You might ask, if the dosages are at their maximum and I still have symptoms, where does that leave me? It means I must seek other methods of getting my thinking and perceptions in order. Being medicated gets me in the ballpark of normal, but it does not do enough by itself. There are options. 

"Reality-checking" is one option. It is imperfect because it requires that either you believe what someone tells you, and/or you believe what your senses are telling you. If excessively paranoid, it is hard to take people at their word. Yet, reality checking should be part of the picture. You can't ask someone whom you do not know whether a thought is real or a delusion, because they will not understand. When asking someone whether a thought seems accurate or delusional, you must tap someone whom you know very well, or whom you know to be a clinical mental health professional. 

Another approach to delusions is to discuss a questionable thought at length with a therapist. You can discuss how you feel about the thoughts--whether they cause you a feeling of importance, a feeling of fear, pleasure, or pain. You can discuss the possible emotional "payoffs" of the delusion. Or the delusion could be painful and could be plaguing you. Usually, a delusion will gain its power over you through generating strong emotions. 

Another exercise is to reinforce the memory of how delusions have occurred in your past, and of how you later discovered that your brain had been generating a falsehood. 

Depression and anxiety, also, can be partly addressed with cognitive techniques. Generally, depression and anxiety are hinged upon a false image in the mind. Your mind is falsely telling you that things are bad. Working to combat this perception helps alleviate these symptoms, albeit partway. 

Sometimes depression is due to circumstances. If you are incarcerated, you're going to be depressed. If you go through a divorce or a death of a close relative, depression is normal. Depression due to living under difficult conditions, such as if you live in a noisy or dangerous neighborhood, is normal. Depression due to a downturn in your stock market portfolio is more subjective and has more to do with expectations--but this is also normal. 

Depression can lend itself to cognitive exercises, but sometimes we may need an antidepressant, if it gets too bad. Anxiety, also, may respond best to some meds. However, benzodiazepines are not advisable to take long-term. They are habit forming, they periodically require upping the dosages, and, if you get in a car accident, having them in your system can entail consequences. There are antidepressants that are not considered "controlled substances" that can address both depression and anxiety. 

You should never drive a car on a new medication until you know how it affects you. 

I suggest that if you have symptoms left over that medication hasn't fully solved, you could investigate cognitive exercises, many of which are taught in the mental health treatment system in California. A popular system taught to smart mental health consumers is called Cognitive Behavior Therapy, CBT. It is taught at a variety of places, or you can study it on your own. 

How to Handle a Deranged Tenant

It's not an uncommon event: a tenant, facing eviction, refuses to vacate the premises and, in a parting gesture of defiance, trashes the property, leaving the landlord to deal with the wreckage.

You guessed it: I'm thinking about Donald Trump.

TV host Jimmy Kimmel recently coined a term for Trump's refusal to accept the fact that his first term in office has been electorally terminated. Kimmel's word for Trump's Oval Office recalcitrance: "Squattergate."

Faced with the spectacle of Trump doing everything he can to make the new tenant's arrival difficult, unpleasant, and challenging, Kimmel wondered aloud why we provide loosing leaders in contentious elections the ripe opportunity to hang around for two months, mucking up the governing process until Inauguration Day rolls around.

In response, Kimmel has proposed a Constitutional solution. He called it the Airbnb Rule: "Lose an election and the next day you're out at 11 AM."

Trumplandia: Martial Law and Public Executions?

In Tenant Trump's case, he's not just writing dirty words on the White House walls, he's threatening to burn down the whole neighborhood—from sea to shining sea.

While Trump may have lost the unquestioned fealty of his Chief Toady—the frog-like Attorney General William Barr, who recently proclaimed the 2020 election legit—Trump can still count on a mob of lesser firebrands who have been turning up the heat with a chorus of horrific harangues. 

Trump's former National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Mike Flynn is promoting a petition calling on Trump to declare "martial law" and order a new election supervised by the Pentagon and local police. 

The petition implausibly calls for defending democracy from "the international and domestic socialist/communist left" by "temporarily suspend[ing] the Constitution." The petition warns that, without armed troops standing guard to oversee new elections, "the threat of a shooting Civil War is imminent." 

Meanwhile, disgraced Trump attorney Sydney Powell is tweet-begging Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, declare the election void, and set up "military tribunals" to deal with anyone who dares say otherwise. Some StormTrumpers are even calling for "public executions" of their fellow Americans. 

Cheeky Freaky Holiday Ads 

Hard to image, since we've been living with Covid-19 since March, but now that it's the holiday season, the TV ads are looking strangely retro. 

More often than not, I'm seeing shopping ads that look like they were filmed in some distant, Pre-Pandemic universe. Living rooms and kitchens stuffed with generations of family members preparing to get stuff from under the holiday tree or get stuffed at the dining room table. And nobody's wearing a mask. Instead of social distancing, it's full-on hugs and cuddles. Every cheek and chin is visible: no longer a half-world of eyes, ears and brows. 

Was all the ad money spent on filming these ads prior to the arrival of the coronavirus? Or are advertisers intentionally promoting the fable of a virus-free world because it is more conducive to promoting sales? 

According to RetailWire, an Ace Matrix study found that some products are just incompatible with face masks—specifically: ads for "cosmetics and toothpaste are hard to advertise with faces covered." An "overwhelming majority" of viewers surveyed by Ace Metrix did not object to ads featuring groups of unmasked revelers in holiday commercials. Less than 1% of viewers, found these ads upsetting. (This could be another reason infections continue to soar.) 

Other findings: 

• COVID-19 themes appeared in 32% of holiday ads, with many focusing on the "new normal" versus traditional seasonal concepts. 

• Under 10% of holiday ads feature masks this year, with the retail category most frequently emphasizing face coverings, particularly around scenes of in-store shopping. 

• The exclusion of masks in ads did not evoke feelings strong enough for most viewers to even comment on their absence. 

• Messaging that clearly made the case for masks were more popular than subtle ads that left viewers to draw their own conclusions. 

• Using masks to sell products can heighten perceptions that the brand is seeking to exploit a tragic event. 

• 76% of Republicans complained about masks appearing in ads; 88% of Democrats reacted positively to the promotion of masks. 

Draw Your Own Opinion 

The East Bay Express' Opinion column offers something completely different this week. Instead of a flurry of words, the space is filled with an intricately detailed 16-panel cartoon that retells the history of a rare and imperiled Telegraph Avenue business—The Hat Company. 

The cartoon was created by Waylon Bacon, a former Berkeley resident and former Hat Company employee who stayed in touch with the owners—Ed and Carol—over the years and has now come to their aid with a one-of-a-kind illustrated appeal. 

The panels cover most of the page and the 900 or so words crammed inside the cartoon panels cover a lot of ground and a good deal of local history. 

If you spot the EBX around town this week, pick up a copy and enjoy this rare and well-executed gift of friendship. (You can also view it online at this link: The Hat Company.) 

The Goldman Environmental Awards 

Each year, the Goldman Environmental Prize is honored to recognize six heroes of the environment. The event usually draws hundreds of Bay Area activists to San Francisco's War Memorial building. This year, the event reached even more viewers when it was broadcast live on Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Hosted by award-winning actress Sigourney Weaver, this virtual award ceremony featured Goldman stalwart Robert Redford, Danni Washington, and Lenny Kravitz, as well as musical performances from Jack Johnson and Michael Franti. 

The complete broadcast can be watched at the link following the list of this year's remarkable activists. 

Chibeze Ezekiel, Ghana 

As a direct result of Chibeze Ezekiel’s four-year grassroots campaign, the Ghanaian Minister of Environment canceled the construction of a 700-megawatt coal power plant and adjoining shipping port to import coal.
Kristal Ambrose, The Bahamas 

Drawing on the power of youth activism, Kristal Ambrose convinced the government of The Bahamas to ban single-use plastic bags, plastic cutlery, straws, and Styrofoam containers and cups.  

Leydy Pech, Mexico 

An indigenous Mayan beekeeper, Leydy Pech led a coalition that halted Monsanto’s planting of genetically modified soybeans in southern Mexico. The Mexican Supreme Court ruled that the government violated the Mayans’ constitutional rights and Mexico’s Food and Agricultural Service revoked Monsanto’s permit to grow genetically modified soybeans in seven states. 

Lucie Pinson, France 

In 2017, Lucie Pinson’s activism successfully pressured France’s three largest banks to eliminate financing for new coal projects and coal companies. She then compelled French insurance companies to follow suit and announce plans to end insurance coverage for all coal projects. 

Nemonte Nenquimo, Ecuador 

Nemonte Nenquimo led an indigenous campaign and legal action that resulted in a court ruling that has protected 500,000 acres of Amazonian rainforest and Waorani territory from oil extraction.  

Paul Sein Twa, Myanmar 

Seeking to preserve both the environment and Karen culture in Myanmar, Paul Sein Twa led his people in establishing a 1.35-million-acre peace park—a unique and collaborative community-based approach to conservation—in the Salween River basin.  

The 2020 Goldman Environmental Prize Ceremony 

Call Me Garth Vader 

I just went online to fill out the boxes for EZ Pay auto-payments on my SF Chronicle subscription. In the box asking for "name on credit card," I typed in Gar G Smith. At least I thought that was what I typed. 

When the confirmation response arrived, however, I found listed my name appeared as "Gar Sith." 

I'm hoping the Chron can correct that error. I don't want to be mistaken for a Star Wars villain. 

It's Time to Disable Our Disabling Vocabularies 

December 3 was International Day of Persons with Disabilities, a day intended to focus attention on "the one billion people who live with a disability." According to Humanity & Inclusion, "80% of people with disabilities live in developing countries." 

The Daily Kos marked the date by posting an article entitled "Saying Goodbye to Ableist Language." The article explained how "ableism occurs when people are discriminated against, or otherwise dehumanized, based on disability. This might include mental disability or physical disability." 

The problem became clear when the author asked how often we unthinkingly use these words or phrases: "crazy, lame, crippled, paralyzed, schizophrenic, bipolar, OCD, obsessive-compulsive, dumb, stupid, blind spot, blind reading, falling on deaf ears, moronic, insane, or psycho." 

Having been sensitized to the issue of disabling lingo, I re-read the opening sentence in the Kos piece and wondered if it was also an example of an unconscious abelist slant. It read: 

"As 2020 creeps to a close, many of us feel like we’ve been at a loss for words over and over." 

Fashion Plates 

Smithereens recently noted a local car with a personalized license plate that read: "POOP." 

I'm also fond of a Mini Cooper parked on Henry Street whose plate reads: ELGONIF. 

Anyone else have any fave plates to report? If so, we might be reviving one of SF Chronicle columnist Herb Caen's favorite space-fillers. 

Here's an initial, unsolicited submission from phil allen: 

"I've noted custom plates ever since an Afro-driven lime-green Cad convertible zoomed by me on the way to Vegas, in '73. To date, its plate is my favorite: KMMFA. 

Here are some others: AIYAAH .. SS888SS (among those designed to confuse the law-abiding).. SLEEEEP, REALAXX, SINFINI, and the most startling: OK2HATE." 

I asked phil what message KMMFA might have been sending. His XRATED guess was: Kiss My M— F— A—." 

Too Tough to Care 

In a recent email, Jeff Blankfort (an Internet-ordained "legendary photojournalist") ruminated about the anti-polio vaccinations of 1963 (available to one and all "for only a quarter donation if they so chose") and went on to recall his work with the Marin Medical Society. Blankfort remembered ho—with the coins they took in from vaccination donations—"we decided to make a satire on tobacco advertising." 

The result was a 19-minute parody called "Too Tough Care" starring members of SF's famed comedy club, The Committee. "Scott Beach, Larry Hankin, Hamilton Camp, Richard Stahl, and Gary Goodrow, volunteered their acting skills with my secretary and some other friends taking the other roles." 

The resulting sketch was crowd-pleaser but, as Blankfort recalls: "The local chapter of the American Cancer Society wanted nothing to do with it. When I was asked to show it at the office of McCann Erickson Advertising—which had prided itself on refusing to take on any more tobacco clients—the office staff had laughed loudly in the darkened office as the film rolled by. When the lights went back on, it was clear that the office manager was not pleased. 'That film is not just against tobacco advertising,' he blurted, 'it's against all advertising!' 'Well, if the shoe fits...,' I replied and packed up and left." 

Last week, to Blankfort's surprise, he discovered that a version of "Too Tough to Care" had somehow been posted on YouTube, "the original color having become sepia and the production credited to someone named Sid Davis who had nothing to do with the making of the film, of which I thought I had the only existing color print." And so, as Blankfort writes, "Enjoy!" 

Here is the link: 

$1,000 a Week for Life! 

This year, on a lark, I decided to play along with the Publishers Clearing House and put in my bid for a nongovernmental Stimulus Package. Every week or so, PCH sends an update my way, promising that "we are ready to deliver the money—every day for life." 

Of course, I realized the odds of winning are pretty steep—one chance in 3.84 billion. Since there a 7.7 billion people on Earth, you can't get your hopes up too high. (Assuming that everyone on the planet participated, this would mean two lucky winners, tops.) 

But the PCH envelopes keep coming—each one different and each filled with sticky labels to peel off and properly place on participant cards to be mailed back promptly. 

One envelope arrived in mid-November bearing the proclamations "Only & Final Advance Notice" and "Executive Mandate" and confirming that my 12-digit Prize Number "has a real possibility of winning our upgraded $1,000 A Week For Life prize." 

The big Final Envelope arrived last week, stuffed with coupons of things I could order, even though PCH clearly states that failure to sign up to buy their magazines and household goods will have no impact on one's chances of scoring a front-porch visit from the PCH Prize Patrol. 

Some of the goodies include publications like Men's Health, Reader's Digest, Southern Living, and Wood magazine. Some of the products include: a 13-inch hammered steel pan, a 90-inch-long Silent Night Mantel Scarf, a Women's Flannel Nightgown, a 36-Piece Colored Pencil Set, a Mini Tape Gun, a "God Bless the USA" Wall Cross, a set of 19 nail files, and a Flexi Head Telescopic Squeegee that extends to more than 39 inches! 

But the latest and last oversized envelope contained a distressing new wrinkle, direct from PCH Executive Vice President Deborah Holland: "It may surprise you to learn that someone from your area is hoping you won't respond to this" because "every number from this notice was paired with two recipients to help prevent their forfeiture—and you are a Primary Owner." The good news is that, although my potentially winning ticket has been assigned to two other contenders, the rights to the ticket "are yours for the taking!" 

PCH's pitch takes an odd turn at this point with this observation: "Can you imagine losing a win for life prize to one of your neighbors: someone you may actually know! It could be devastating!" 

Apparently Neighbor Envy is a potent tool to drive participants to fill out their PCH forms with all the transferable sticky labels moved to the right spots on the return card which, as PCH puts it, must be "timely returned." 

Holland's letter raises an obvious question: "Do you know WHY we give away all the FREE MONEY? The answer may surprise you… (see other side)."
A quick flip of the letter provides the answer: "There's nothing we enjoy more than making folks like you Sweepstakes Winners, Gar!" 

Well, maybe there is something else. There's a somewhat scolding note at the bottom of the page that reads: "Our records show the last time we sent you a mailing,, you did NOT place an order…." (PCH thoughtfully included two detachable stamps containing pre-selected items to order—a Nutri Chopper Kitchen Slicer and a Bell & Howell Tac Pen.) 

I guess I'll see how forgiving PCH is come December 18 when the prize payout is announced. 

And if I win? Don't worry, neighbors. I won't forget you. 

Rudi Works Up a Sweat 

By The Founders Sing 

So much seems to change in a week when it comes to the pandemic, and yet it is just what we’ve been told for months. Michael Osterholm, epidemiologist from the University of Minnesota( https://www.cidrap.umn.edu) said in his podcast last August, about public health measures to slow the pandemic, “we can pay now or we can pay later.”

So here we are in the “pay later” after weeks of lulling ourselves into thinking we could manage with halfway measures, “bubbles” and taking off facial coverings in restaurants and other gatherings as if eating in groups didn’t count. Though this has already been months, and despite vaccines on the horizon, we need to prepare ourselves for a longer haul before it’s over. There is still a lot to be learned, including how long the first vaccine shots last before another one is needed.

As for the week we just finished, it is hard to believe that the last day of November was Monday. The Monday afternoon Council Agenda and Rules Committee turned out to be more interesting than expected. The Use of Force Policy is back on the proposed December 15 Council agenda. As I have said previously, the Police Review Commission (PRC) is very deliberative in their actions and policy review. Through their process they determined to remove the words “strive to” from the Use of Force Policy #300. The PRC voted with near unanimity (one abstained) that the inclusion of “strive to” would make use of force accountability impossible.  

Reading the submission by Police Chief Greenwood and from the City Manager justifying reinserting “strive to” into the Use of Force Policy 300 (now item 45 in the December 15 Council agenda) reminded me of Bill Barr’s preview of the Mueller Report (I did listen to the reading of the entire Mueller report while swimming). It muddies everything. How Council votes on the end run from the Police Chief around the PRC will indicate where we really are in the “reimaging of public safety [policing].” 

There were other items that I expected the Agenda Committee to remove or push off to some commission or council committee, but they stayed on in the consent calendar, and I am afraid that mentioning them here might be their demise. There were several callers asking for the Police Chief No Confidence Vote to be scheduled, and others calling in supporting the implementation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act, passed by the voters in 2018, to be implemented ASAP instead of at the end of 2021 as required by the vote. The reorganizing of commissions discussion was put off until January. 

Cheryl Davila’s last Council meeting was Tuesday evening December 1, with Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson as one of the early callers recognizing Cheryl for her work and speaking about their many conversations. You can watch it all on the 6 pm meeting video, starting at 40 minutes into the meeting and continuing for nearly 1 ½ hours. 

Cheryl gave her response at two hours and 14 minutes into the meeting, and it was wrenching. It was not the ordinary goodbye: Brush the four years under the rug and say thank you and everything was wonderful. Follow the link to the December 1, 6 pm meeting. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/City_Council__Agenda_Index.aspx 

It was around 10:40 pm Tuesday when the Mayor closed down the Council meeting, saying there was not enough time to take up Zoning Ordinance amendments to reform off-street residential parking requirements. The amendments reduce and eliminate off-street parking minimums for new buildings and instead establish parking maximums. You can use the same link given above to see the proposed ordinance, item 40 in the December 15 agenda. And you can also read the budget update item 42, annual appropriations item 43, and Use of Force item 45. I am grateful for meetings ending before 11 pm and hope that this becomes the regular practice. 

On Wednesday, I opted for the Disaster and Fire Safety Commission so I could learn more about the City’s Wildfire Evacuation Plan. The discussion was limited to a presentation on red flag alert communications and recommendations for pre-emptive evacuation, none of which were helpful in reviewing how hill residents will evacuate in a real wildfire, or the rest of us for that matter, if a fire is spreading in our densely populated city of over 100,000 in a future with fewer cars. 

The deadline for commenting on the EIR (Environmental Impact Report) for the mixed-use housing projects at the Ashby and North Berkeley BART stations is December 21, 2020 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_-_Land_Use_Division/Final%20NOP.pdf. Email your comments to ashen@cityofberkeley.info. If you check the City budget documents you will find a line item for $310,000 for the EIR. 

The Citizens for a Cultural Civic Center (CCCC) met Thursday at noon and renamed itself the Community for a Cultural Civic Center. It was obvious from listening that the group needs to review the proposal from Gehl in addition to the CCCC plan to research restorations of historical buildings that have successful reuse plans and those that fail. It is likely (there was some limited discussion) that soon CCCC will break into three subgroups, one with a focus on the Veterans Building, one on old city hall and one on the park. The most interesting information was after the meeting ended when Deb Durant described the Turtle Island project and answered my many questions. Turtle Island Fountain Monument has been approved for funding under the T1 bonds. https://turtleislandfountain.org The CCCC group is open and anyone can join; just email John Caner, the convener, at johncaner@gmail.com for meeting announcements. 

The last meeting of the week, the Mental Health Commission,i also brought disappointments. The expected report from the City Auditor was not provided. Dr. Warhuus did attend and spoke to membership of the Re-imagining Community Safety Project. She promised there would be monthly updates to the Mental Health Commission and updates would be posted for the public. However, how updates for the public will be posted is still in the planning phase, as is the entire project. 

Enough for one sitting. 

With being in another Shelter-in-Place, this one until January 4, it looks like there will be lots of time for reading. I sort of feel like audio books is cheating, but the Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco Libraries have great collections of current audiobooks and ebooks too. I like to have one of each going. Up this week (audiobook-Oakland) Stamped from the Beginning by Ibram X. Kendi and (ebook-Berkeley) It Was All a Lie by Stuart Stevens. Check out the libraries!

Worth Noting:

City Council Winter Recess is almost here beginning December 16, 2020 thru January 18, 2021.



What Did and Didn’t Happen

December 1 was Cheryl Davila’s last City Council meeting. Recognition of Cheryl’s work started 40 minutes into the 6 pm meeting and continued for nearly 1 ½ hours culminating with Cheryl’s comments starting at 2:14. https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/City_Council__Agenda_Index.aspx

The Council meeting ended before 11 pm with the item on Zoning Ordinance amendments to parking minimums and maximums postponed to December 15.



What’s Ahead

Tuesday - There are two special back to back City Council meetings. The 4 pm is on tenant protections during the COVID-19 Emergency and 6 pm is on the Adeline Corridor Plan.

Wednesday – The Fair and Impartial Policing Working Group meets at 4 pm. 600 Addison is on the Parks and Waterfront Commission agenda.

Thursday – The last Budget & Finance Policy Committee meeting before the Annual Appropriations vote on December 15. The Community for Cultural Civic Center meeting starts at noon.



The City Council Agenda for December 15 is available for comment and follows the calendar of meetings.



Sunday, December 6, 2020  

No City meetings or events found 

Monday, December 7, 2020 

City Council Public Safety Committee, 10:30 am, 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/Home/Policy_Committee__Public_Safety.aspx 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83621975390 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 836 2197 5390 

Agenda: 2. George Floyd Community Safety Act – develop progressive police academy and curriculum that teaches de-escalation, empathy, Critical Decision Making Model (CDM), 3. Ordinance BMC Regulating Police Acquisition and Use of Controlled Equipment, Unscheduled: 4. Ordinance permanently banning less lethal weaponry, chemical, 5. Providing unhoused with Fire Extinguishers, 

Tuesday, December 8, 2020 

Special City Council, 4 pm 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/City_Council__Agenda_Index.aspx 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82201220671 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 822 0122 0671 

Agenda: 1. Updates to the COVID-19 Emergency Response Ordinance to enhance emergency tenant protections, “opt-out” county ordinance to adopt stronger City ordinance 

Special City Council, 6 pm 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/City_Council__Agenda_Index.aspx 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82201220671 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 822 0122 0671 

Agenda: 1. Adoption of Adeline Corridor Specific Plan (ACSP), associated General Plan and Municipal (Zoning) Code Amendments, Certification of FEIR, https://www.cityofberkeley.info/adelinecorridor/ 

Wednesday, December 9, 2020 

Civic Arts Commission, 6 – 8 pm 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/CivicArtsCommissionHomepage/ 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88944284241 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 Meeting ID: 889 4428 4241 

Agenda: 6. Presentation Civic Center Vision Update by Eleanor Hollander, 7. Action Items: a. letter to Council regarding arts and cultural uses of Civic Center Buildings and Park, b. Public Arts Budget FY 2021 (July 1, 2020-June 30, 2021), c. Approval design for companion mosaic “Tails” at Live Oak Park, d. Proposal by Mildred Howard for triangular plot Ashby Bart, e. Purchase artwork from Civic Center Exhibition, f. Prequalified Public Art Consultants, g. Extension of Home sculpture display on Downtown Berkeley Bart Plaza, 8. Update Big People removal 

Fair and Impartial Policing, 4 pm – 6 pm 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87983585819?pwd=ZSt6OVhLNnJ0UElHTzdPdVI4cXpUQT09 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 879 8358 5819 Passcode: 980593 

Agenda: 2. Public Comment, 3. Review Table of Proposed Actions and Recommendations, 4. Review Revised Report, 5. Creating a finished report 

Parks and Waterfront Commission, 7 – 9 pm 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/Commissions/Commissions__Parks_and_Waterfront_Commission.aspx 

Videoconference: https://zoom.us/j/95983019193 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 959 8302 9193 

Agenda: 5. Public Comment, 8. Election, 10. Berkeley Commons (600 Addison) 

Police Review Commission (PRC), 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/Commissions/Commissions__Police_Review_Commission_Homepage.aspx 

The closed session at 6:15 pm and regular meeting at 7 pm use the same conference links. 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87070468124 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 870 7046 8124 

Special PRC Meeting Closed Session 6:15 pm 

Regular PRC Meeting 7 pm 

Agenda: 3. Public Comment, 5. Report Mayor’s Fair & Impartial Policing Working Group, 9. a. Revise number of votes needed to accept late-filed complaint, b. length of meetings, c. Transition to new Police Accountability Board and Office of Director of Police Accountability, 10. B. 2019 Crime Report, 5-yr Use of Force Report, Overtime Report, c. Referral BPD Policy 319 Hate Crimes, 

Thursday, December 10, 2020 

City Council Budget & Finance Committee, 10 am, https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/Home/Policy_Committee__Budget___Finance.aspx 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82481213542 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 824 8121 3542 

Agenda: (Dec 10 meeting documents not posted as of noon Dec 4) 2. FY 2020&2021 Budget Update a. FYFY2020 General Fund Year-end Excess Equity, b. FY2021 Amendment to Annual Appropriations Ordinance, c, FY General Fund Revenues Update, 3. General Fund Reserves Replenishment Discussion, 4. Assignment of Unassigned General Fund Balance to Reserves, 5. Juneteenth as a City Holiday, 6. Step Up Housing Measure P funds $900,000/year for 10 years plus $32,975 for 1367 University (group living/SRO transition housing -39 rooms operated by BOSS project approved not yet constructed) Unscheduled Items: four listed including 7. Restore Tax Equity – property owners with inequitable property assessments. 

Community for a Cultural Civic Center, 12 – 1 pm 

Email johncaner@gmail.com to be added to the email list for announcements and zoom login. This is an open group with invitation to the community of Berkeley 

Community Environmental Advisory Commission, 7 – 9 pm 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Community_Environmental_Advisory_Commission/ 

Videoconference: https://zoom.us/j/93180167647 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 Meeting ID: 931 8016 7647 

Agenda: items 5-7 reports, 8. Draft Workplan 

Zoning Adjustment Board, 7 pm 

http://www.cityofberkeley.info/zoningadjustmentsboard/ 

Videoconference: https://zoom.us/j/95337854863 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 953 3785 4863 

Agenda: 1500 Tyler – eliminate single family dwelling and establish Child Care Center – staff recommends approve 

Friday, December 11, 2020 

City Reduced Service Day 

Saturday, December 12, 2020 and Sunday, December 13, 2020 

No City meetings or events found 

_____________________ 

December 15, 2020 Regular City Council Meeting Available for comment 

Email: council@cityofberkeley.info 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81127849616 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 811 2784 9616 

Agenda 1. Swearing in newly elected officials, CONSENT: 1. 2^nd Reading BMC Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation, 2^nd Reading BMC BESO, 3. 2^nd Reading Lease Agreement 1947 Center 5^th Flr, 4. Ratify COVID-19 Local Emergency, 5. 1444 Fifth Street Settlement, 6. Minutes, 7. Contract $270,000 1/1/2021-6/30/2022 with National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform to Manage and Lead a Community Engagement Process to Develop New Paradigm of Public Safety in Berkeley, 8. Amend Contract add $120,000 total $370,000 and extend 1 yr with BOSS for Mental Health Clients living at 2111 McKinley, 9. Amend Contract total $1,272,580 and extend to 6/30/2025 with Worldwide Travel Staffing for Nurse Registry Services, 10. Revenue Accept COVID-19 HHS CARES Act funds, 11. Purchase Software $165,000 12/16/,2020 – 6/30/2021 with Kovarus, LLC, 12. Accept Donation $700,000 from Friends of Tuolumne Camp for construction, 13. Joint Use Agreement between COB and BUSD, 14. Recommendations for T1 Phase 2, 11. Amendments to Use of Force BPD Policy 300, 15. FEMA application for $1,875,000 for South Berkeley Senior Center, 16. Accept $100,914 from Bay Area Air Quality Management District to support electrification of City fleet vehicles, 17. Grant Application $52,000 to Alameda County Transportation Commission COVID-19 for Healthy Streets, 18. Extend Workforce Agreement with labor organization to 6/30/23 for City capital improvement projects value >$500,000, 19. Continue Sole Source Contract Negotiations with Community Conservation Center, Inc and Ecology Center, Inc., 20. Contract with AC Transit for EasyPass bus pass program for COB employees 1/1/2021-12/31/2025 not to exceed $774,453, 21. Change vendors 3rd Party Administrator for COB Employee Commute Benefit program new vendor BRI (Benefit Resource, Inc), 22. $962,000 to Purchase three Model 600x Regenerative Air Sweeper, 23. $4,5554,575 to purchase 11 Side Loader Collection Trucks with Arata Equipment Co, 24. $327,000 to purchase One Vactor Combination Sewer Cleaner Truck, 25. Prohibition of the Resale of Used Combustion Vehicles in 2040, 26. Allocation $3,000,000 over 2 yr, FY22&23 to Reduce Consumption and Health Impacts of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages, 27. Rocky Road: From Auditor Berkeley Streets (maintenance/repair) Significantly underfunded request report back from City Manager by June 15, 2021 and every six months thereafter regarding the status of audit recommendations until reported fully implemented by Public Works Dept., 28. Sponsor 10^th MLK Jr. Celebration, 29. Appoint Alexandria Thomas-Rodriguez to the Berkeley Housing Authority, , 30. Establishment of Reimaging Public Safety Task Force follow-up to July 14, 2020 Council action on policing. 31. Resolution requesting state legislation for greater flexibility in traffic enforcement, 32. Deferral of Remaining Permit Fees $720,000 for 2009 Addison (Berkeley Rep housing project) for a period of 10 years, 33. Plaque recognizing childhood home of Kamala Harris, 34. Support calling on food companies to implement the requirements of Proposition 12 (Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act passed in 2018 with 12/31/2021 compliance date) as soon as possible by selling only cage free eggs and meat, 35. Procedural Request to Council for FITES committee to continue working on Master Paving Plan, 36. Earmark $2.5 million in Housing Trust Fund for Small Sites program, 37. Support Berkeley Baby Book Project, 38. Support S. 4571-extending census deadline, 39. Refer to City Manager to develop Outdoor Dining Program, ACTION: 40. Zoning Ordinance Modify Minimum Residential off-street parking, impose maximums in transit rich areas, 41. Home Occupation Ordinance, 42. Budget Update, 43. FY 2021Annual Appropriations Ordinance, 44. Support loan forgiveness to Berkeley Youth Alternatives, 45. Amendments of BPD Use of Force Policy 300, 

Public Hearings Scheduled – Land Use Appeals 

0 (2435) San Pablo (group living) ZAB - 1/21/2021 

1915 Berryman (Payson House) LPC – 1/21/2021 

1850 Arch (add bedrooms) ZAB – 1/26/2021 

1862 Arch (add bedrooms) ZAB – 1/26/2021 

Notice of Decision (NOD) and Use Permits with End of Appeal Period 

2580 Bancroft 12/14/2020 

1530 Buena 12/15/2020 

2607 Ellsworth 12/8/2020 

170 Hillcrest 12/8/2020 

1437 Lincoln 12/15/2020 

460 Michigan 12/22/2020 

2500 Milvia 12/8/202 

1921 Oregon 12/22/2020 

1828 San Juan 1/4/2021 

1200-1214 San Pablo 12/8/2020 

99 The Plaza 1/4/2021 

1311 Ward 1/4/2021 

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Planning_and_Development/Land_Use_Division/Current_Zoning_Applications_in_Appeal_Period.aspx 

LINK to Current Zoning Applications https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Planning_and_Development/Land_Use_Division/Current_Zoning_Applications.aspx 

___________________ 

WORKSESSIONS 

Feb 16 - BMASP/Berkeley Pier-WETA Ferry, Systems Realignment 

March 16 – Capital Improvement Plan (Parks & Public Works), Digital Strategic Plan/FUND$ Replacement Website Update, 

May 18 – date open for scheduling 

Unscheduled Workshops/Presentations 

Cannabis Health Considerations 

Berkeley Police Department Hiring Practices (referred by Public Safety Committee) 

Update Zero Waste Priorities 

Ballot Measure Implementation Planning 

Pedestrian Master Plan 

Removed from Lists 

Update Berkeley’s 2020 Vision 

Undergrounding Task Force Update – Present as Information Item 

_____________________ 

This Summary of City of Berkeley meetings is the available published public meetings that could be found and they are important. This does not include the task forces established by the Mayor (those schedules are not available). If anyone would like to share meeting schedules including community meetings to be included in the weekly summary so we can be better-informed citizenry, please forward the notices to sustainableberkeleycoalition@gmail.com before Friday noon of the preceding week. 

If you see an error or omission that needs correction or wish to stop receiving the Weekly Summary of City Meetings please forward the weekly summary you received to kellyhammargren@gmail.com with your message. 

If you wish to stop receiving the Weekly Summary of City Meetings please forward the weekly summary you received to kellyhammargren@gmail.com,