• “Affordable Housing” is a convenient marketing term developed by the Reagan and Bush Administrations since the early 1980s as a vehicle to “de-ghetto” urban cities.
• The “non-profit” component is a small, temporary intermediary and used as a shield which for-profit developers, banks, large contractors, lawyers, syndicates, consultants, and management hide behind. 81% of affordable housing is eventually owned by for profit companies.
• “For-profit” investor take can range from 4 to 6%. The average yield was 4.75% in 2019 and 2022 interest rates are considerably higher.
• “Affordable Housing” is not affordable to build. Too many middlemen taking a cut with costs hitting almost a million per 2 bedroom unit in Los Angeles.
 
• “Low Income” is defined by Federal Housing Authority (H.U.D.) and its corporate alliances. Low income to them is not what you think of as low income. It’s really “middle income.” Alameda County’s average median income is close to 130,000 dollars and HUD bases income on AMI.
• Covenants(agreements between the building owners, managers and local authorities to maintain the tax-break status of the project)will eventually expire allowing units to suddenly ramp up to prevailing market-rate rents.
• An applicant typically needs to have strong credit, clean records, proper immigration status, and have 50–80% of the average mean income of Alameda County. That’s $52,000 to $83,000. Homeless individuals and independent students easily fall out of these income brackets and rarely qualify.
• Corporate developers(frequently out of state)and building owners make money from massive tax breaks, overcharges and excessive management fees. They can also mismanage finances and force the LLC into insolvency, which can accelerate the transfer to market rate. This is called “planned foreclosure.”
• Corporate developers, thanks to HUD and IRS rules, are able to skirt union labor laws, only have to pay minimum wage, many times don’t pay healthcare and are allowed to avoid local zoning and permit laws.
• Investors are typically for-profit banks looking to get 10 years of tax breaks on their federal taxes.
• “Affordable Housing” and “Opportunity Zones” are corporate marketing corporate constructs that allow investors to drive up square-footage values of distressed areas and make a killing in tax breaks and capital gains when they sell.
• “Affordable Housing” creates more “un-affordability” due to higher rents and creates MORE homelessness. Developers often target minority neighborhoods with suppressed real estate values- sometimes already devastated by 1960’s urban renewal and “go for the kill shot.”
• “Affordable Housing” projects eventually turn to market-rate-sometimes as quickly as 15 years. Los Angeles is having a massive rollover to “for-profit” as the covenants expire.
• Owners(typically a limited liability LLC) of an LIHTC project do NOT have to abide by rent control laws and in 2022 alone can raise rents 3 times the allowed rent-control increase limit of Berkeley. They are allowed to chase increases in median income(raised thanks to Piedmont, Pleasanton and North Berkeley Hills incomes) and raise rents 8–10%!
• High-cost developments using portions of the City’s general obligation bonds (Measure L’s astounding $650 million dollars) will not just cost $200 million-it will be close to double that amount. Making bond underwriters, banks and hedge funds wealthy with interest payments that may DOUBLE the cost. You can review the costs of any borrowed money here.
• The city taxpayer will pay standard amortized interest payments on a schedule. The loans the city provides “affordable housing” corporate developers are “simple interest” and are NOT amortized nor do they have a payment plan. The LLC is expected to pay the loan back at their discretion. That means taxpayers are losing money on the loan instantly.
• City services endure increased usage and load on services and public assets but these LLC developments get massive breaks and are little value add to tax revenue-just like UC Berkeley.
• Berkeley already shakes down developers of housing for millions a year with a $46,000 per unit “mitigation” fee(1986 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance ) OR allows developers to sneak in a few “below market rate” units to avoid the fee. The Inclusionary Ordinance has already proven to be more efficient at building units faster and cheaper than LIHTC.

“Affordable Housing” is and always has been a cynical play on words to provide safe marketing for an array of investors, politicians, “non-profit” shell corporations, LLC landlords, and private beneficiaries to transfer public money and property outside the control of the taxpayer. The system is legally and financially byzantine and complicated-rife with blind spots to take advantage of poor IRS, local and state oversight. As typical of privatization efforts, the tax-paying voter and city solvency is most at risk and the problem it purports to solve progressively gets worse as interest payments overwhelm revenue. 

 

OUR MANDATE, YOUR HEADACHE 

Mayor Arreguin argues that building this extraordinary number of units has been mandated by state law but as the president of ABAG(Association of Bay Area Governments) and the head of the ABAG executive board, the Mayor accepted the Bay Area’s RHNA target of 441,176 new housing units and deliberately increased Berkeley’s share of the load on our behalf. RHNA targets, as mandated by state, are near impossible targets written and designed by state legislators who are in the tank for corporate developers and the construction lobby. Most notoriously, Scott Wiener of San Francisco, helped to pass legislation penalizing cities which do not build fast enough with workarounds that allow the State of California to run blocking tackle for developers on local zoning laws. 

On closer review the RHNA allocation percentages benefits “low-income” to “above-moderate” household incomes, with the caveat that “low-income” already is HUD’s vocabulary for middle income as per county’s adjusted AMI. There is no mention of the most-in-need resident or homeless. The RHNA mandates are high density, zoning-rule busting, oversight-ducking projects designed to maximize profits for corporate investors and developers. 

THE REVENGE OF THE ARISTOCRACY 

At best, Progressive advocates do not understand the historical background of the LIHTC Housing Credit System and have found themselves hitching their caboose to a supply-side, Reagan-era solution which has allowed for the government to unload its public assets and responsibilities into private hands. Sadly, HUD Director Jack Kemp’s solution of transferring ownership of public housing and control was meant specifically for the residents not for corporate buyers. Today, almost all LIHTC projects have no purchase or lease-to-own options with renters being at the mercy of the new “rentier class.” 

---

Editor's note: For a longer version of this analysis see this on Medium. 

When I heard that the City was going to propose a bond measure and a low-income housing measure, I decided to look beyond the advertising of Measures L and N and dig a little deeper into the facts and figures. What I found was discouraging and I think that if history is any guide and these measures pass, they are bound to disappoint us.  

Berkeley’s $650 Million Bond Measure L purports to fund a variety of vague aspirations like infrastructure and housing, but I could find no specific project list. I was shocked by a mysterious caveat, it offers “no commitment on how the funds will be spent”. 

Measure N, would allow the City to build 3000 segregated low-income units, without offering a price tag for us to examine. Maybe the cost to build a subsidized apartment in Berkeley is now so astronomical, that we would balk, if we saw the total cost of the measure?  

This isn’t the first time the City of Berkeley has put a measure on the ballot with vague wording, even though specifics and impartiality are necessary for astute voters. Maybe vague ballot wording is a way for city staff to spend tax revenue, without being beholden to pesky oversight committees. 

Notoriously, Berkeley oversight committees have been stymied in their efforts to demand accountability. For example, 

• The Measure P Committee protested diversion of $2.7 M for City budget-balancing, instead of homeless shelters.
• The Measure FF Oversight Committee is waiting 2 years to get the requested expense accounting.
• The Measure M Oversight Committee couldn’t justify the absence of city street-paving in 2018, despite the presence of dedicated funds.
• Measure T1 diverted funds from the community-led process to the City Manager’s and Council’s pet projects.

In addition to accountability issues, Measure L will saddle current and future households with 48 years of debt totaling over $1 billion dollars when all is said and done. Berkeley property taxes are already higher than other cities because of the punishing parcel taxes, which go up 7% this year, much more than the 2% ad valorem increase. There is no available exemption for homeowners to avoid the burden of Measure L or the burden of Measure O which we may start paying when we open our tax bills this week. 

Many folks also see an ideological problem with the City of Berkeley prioritizing rental-only housing, which puts wealth in the hands of corporations, not families.  

Berkeley already builds more affordable units than other Cities, through its 1986 Inclusionary ordinance, where 20% of the units in any Development are designated affordable. This is Vienna-style integrated subsidized housing and Berkeley has built 400 of these units at no cost to taxpayers in the last 5 years. This is fiscally prudent housing and overall better for the community. But, that isn’t what Measure N is! Measure N wants you to subsidize more economically segregated low-income rental housing. 

Now, how about streets?! Berkeley’s street paving needs are on our minds daily whether we walk, bike or drive. But, who wants a 48 year loan for a street that lasts only 15 years. That’s why well-run cities use a sales tax increase to pave streets. Sales taxes target all who use the streets, students, renters, workers, business patrons not just homeowners and landlords. Groceries, medicines and other essentials are exempt from a sales tax, so those who spend little on non-essentials can avoid the tax. Berkeley already receives thousands in gas tax funds each year from the state that they divert to pet projects. Then they ask residents to tax themselves again and again to pave the streets. 

Even if you and I can afford the extra $1000 or more a year on our tax bill for Measure L on top of Measure O’s assessments, the City’s 4000 low-income homeowners, especially seniors, will suffer from the unavoidable expense. Measure L will force low-income seniors to subsidize housing for those who earn more than they themselves do! It is foreseeable that these measures will further gentrify Berkeley. Please try to talk to a low-income senior about Measures L and N before November 8. 

If the City wants to bond its tax-weary property owners once again, it should explain: 

• why Measure O isn’t sufficient to build the current affordable housing Berkeley wants
• update us on the per unit cost to build housing using current borrowing rates.
• give us a specific cause to vote for in one measure, like 50% Owned/50% Rental Affordable Housing
• reappropriate diverted gas tax revenue to street paving, or put a Sales tax on the ballot.
• protect low-income households from having to move when taxes become unsustainable.

Without more foresight, specifics and accountability, Measures L and N are a Trojan Horse, hiding the City’s plan for you to subsidize housing without financial oversight and without a care for the generous voters who just want to understand what they will be paying for. 

 

I am writing in response to the recent op-ed piece by Zipporah Collins. I share the concern for adequate funding for infrastructure, if not for the position of support for the current proposal, Measure L. Three years ago, as a member of the Public Works Commission, I met with my appointing council member, my district representative, and another council member about the condition of the streets and the need for action. I penned an op-ed piece in Berkeleyside that put those recommendations on the record: https://www.berkeleyside.org/2019/05/21/opinion-our-streets-are-failing-berkeley-should-increase-its-spending-by-at-least-13m. 

We do need more funding for infrastructure. But we also need processes that carefully plan what that funding should be used for, and to educate Berkeleyans about how we are doing that. Measure L lacks these processes. For infrastructure, there is a better way. The city currently gets nearly $7 million a year from state and county gas taxes—which pays for visitors using our streets. A modest parcel tax of $0.15 per square foot would raise about $14 million a year. If the city maintains its new commitment to fund $8 million a year from the budget’s general fund, that would exceed $28 million a year, more than sufficient to start on a multi-year program to responsibly fix our streets.  

There are other advantages to parcel taxes—they cannot be used for other purposes and they can be designed to exempt seniors and low-income homeowners. Measure L doesn’t guarantee the money will be spent on what supporters say it will be spent on and it doesn’t protect our vulnerable homeowners. These aren’t idle concerns. We have seen that money promised for certain things has been used for other purposes. Measure P, for example, promised to expand homeless services but those funds were diverted. 

Beyond the issue of cheaper and focused alternatives to fix roads is the issue of trust and accountability. Measure L was put together in a week, after the council rejected the idea of two measures and combined them into one, funded by bonds that would take 48 years to pay off. As written, the city could sell bonds with an interest rate as high as 12% and use the money for road repairs that would last 5 to 7 years—or for new city council chambers. This doesn’t make any sense. 

But, of course, the city doesn’t actually have to use Measure L money for road repairs at all. You don’t need to take my word for this. It’s actually written into Section 4 of Measure L which says, “These dollar amounts are estimates and are not a commitment or guarantee that any specific amounts will be spent on particular projects or categories of projects.”  

The same is true of affordable housing. Measure L doesn’t guarantee that any money raised will be used for affordable housing. Luckily, there is still $55 million in unspent money from past affordable housing bonds that we can use to keep building while we properly plan the next phase and identify specific projects to construct. 

Poorly drafted and planned measures have allowed the city to avoid citizen oversight in the past and Measure L is no different. Now the city is asking us to approve a series of bonds for ill-defined purposes, the last of which won’t even be issued until 2040! There is no reason to make this huge commitment now. 

Please join me in voting No on L and then we can come back together to plan a more responsible measure for street repair that would require the city to keep citizens informed and would expire unless extended. We could also identify specific affordable housing projects to fund and get climate resilience right.  

 

For more information, go to https://berkeleyansforbetterplanning.org/ 

A project to make urgent partial repairs to a beleaguered West Berkeley landmark structure—Finnish Hall—begins Friday, spearheaded by a group of neighbors and community members. The effort is not to raise the leaky roof, but repair it, before winter rains begin.

Funded with in-kind donations and a GoFundMe page, the project is still short some thousands of dollars but the organizers have decided to begin repair work this week so repairs can be done while the weather remains dry.

Bryce Nesbitt, the lead project organizer, says that although the fundraising money is not yet fully subscribed and more money beyond the initial goal may be needed, “we’re starting Friday. While we don't have enough funds to finish, we'll get as far as we can. Every $63 donated gets another 4 foot by 8 foot section of roof done.” 

The building in need of repair is Finnish Hall, Toveri Tuppa (“Comrade’s Hall”) at 1819 Tenth Street. The three story wooden structure, incorporating vernacular Finnish design and painted a cheery white and blue (the same colors as the flag of Finland) stands just a block off San Pablo Avenue on a residential street. 

The GoFundMe fundraising pitch is straightforward and urgently worded. “Old Finnish Hall has fallen on hard times. (It) sports a giant hole in the roof, and on a stiff wind day, shingles literally fly into neighbor’s yards and onto the street. This once vibrant…space can’t come back to life if it rots. This winter’s rains will destroy this building unless we act fast. A local roofer will donate labor if we, the community, raise funds for the materials.” 

Last week, supporters of the repair project came to the Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission to ask for support and encouragement for their grassroots campaign. That’s where I first learned about the roof repair plan (disclosure: I sit on the LPC).

The repair project organizers—a mix of neighbors, other community members, and Berkeley arts advocates including Carol Denney, Jerome Solberg and Lisa Bullwinkel—also started their GoFundMe last week. 

To date (Tuesday night, October 11) it has raised $12,747 out of the initial $14,970 goal. 63 people or organizations have donated, including two members of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, local architects, Ashby Lumber, and Civic Arts Commission member Lisa Bullwinkel, who is also one of the GoFundMe organizers.  

The money is intended to go towards buying some of the materials, renting cranes to reach the roof, and other aspects of the repair work. 

You can read the fundraising appeal (and donate if you wish) here: https://www.gofundme.com/f/new-roof-for-toverii-tuppa-finnish-hall-arts?qid=32808cea9a6904fe03535d8a20872031 

(If the link doesn’t work, go to gofundme.com and search for “Finnish Hall” and “Berkeley.” It should be one of the first hits.) 

Finnish Hall was built in 1908-09 with the volunteer labor of Berkeley’s then-large Finnish community. Many immigrant Scandinavians in early 20th century Berkeley worked in the construction trades, especially as carpenters. The spirit of the creation of the building with volunteer labor seems akin to the spirit of the present-day community fundraising effort to save the building. 

The Hall was constructed as a social and event center for local Finns, whose modest homes were concentrated in the surrounding West Berkeley neighborhoods. The building originally included an auditorium, kitchen, dining hall, library, and sewing room.  

As a center of immigrant life, it figured prominently in the 1934 General Strike in San Francisco. Labor organizers of the strike used Finnish Hall as one of their support centers for the waterfront longshoremen who were striking. Right-wing Berkeley-based vigilantes raided the Hall, and other sites in Berkeley, breaking in and vandalizing the interior.  

Designated a City of Berkeley Landmark, the building was eventually sold, as younger generations of Finns dispersed to other communities. It came into the ownership of a non-profit, and has been an event space for everything from martial arts classes to opera performances in recent decades. 

I looked online for users of the Hall when writing this article and found an eclectic mix, representing both the changing character of the East Bay and increasing multiculturalism. Users in recent years include Brazilian Capoeira classes, Abrazo Queer Tango, Chinese martial arts classes, the Berkeley Chamber Opera and the Actors Ensemble of Berkeley. 

The building faces multiple other challenges in coming years, beyond and below the roof. The state of the ownership sounds uncertain and a court hearing for unpaid back taxes is currently scheduled for 2023.  

But getting a sound roof on before this winter should allow its advocates to focus on other issues in coming months and try to fully revitalize the building and its organizational structure.

Berkeleyans for Better Planning, Vote No on Measure L, today demanded that the $15,000 donation from 2274 Shattuck QOZB LLC accepted by the Committee for an Affordable and Resilient Berkeley-Yes on Measure L be returned and that the Yes on L campaign stop soliciting money from companies with business pending before the City Council. 

Jim McGrath, former Berkeley Parks and Waterfront Commissioner and member of the Berkeleyans for Better Planning Steering Committee, made the call for the contribution to be returned. McGrath stated: 

“I didn't just vote for past funding measures, I ran campaigns that increased city funding for parks and infrastructure by nearly $200 million. This bond is just too big and too poorly written. It doesn't have the transparency and oversight language that I would need to see to support it. More than 130 small donors agree with me and have contributed to our campaign. I'm astonished that the yes on Measure L campaign and some of their donors are so afraid of oversight that they would accept donations from people with business pending with the city. While that may not be illegal, it certainly isn't the kind of Berkeley that I want to see.” 

2274 Shattuck QOZB LLC is registered by a private developer seeking approval of a multi-story 239-unit tower at 2274 Shattuck Avenue in downtown Berkeley. This same developer has several other projects in its "pipeline," according to The Real Deal. The questionable donation is 60 times larger than would be allowed if it were given to a candidate-controlled committee and buys an untold amount of influence over a City Council that still needs to grant necessary approvals for this developer’s projects. 

About Measure L

Measure L is a poorly drafted $650 million bond measure that was placed on the November ballot by a unanimous City Council without adequate public vetting. The measure does not guarantee that any affordable housing will be built and provides no protection for low-income residents or seniors. Under Measure L, the city is asking for the largest investment in Berkeley’s history with no detailed plan and no explanation for why it isn’t using the remaining $55 million in affordable housing funds voters approved in 2018 to build housing for the unhoused. 

About Berkeleyans for Better Planning

Berkeleyans for Better Planning (berkleyansforbetterplanning.org) is a grassroots coalition formed to oppose Measure L and then work toward solutions to our very real problems. The No on Measure L coalition is made up of a broad base of community members that includes former members of the Berkeley City Council and city commissioners as well as the Alameda County Green Party and Berkeley Neighborhoods Council. 

Paid for and distributed by Berkeleyans for Better Planning, No on L, FPPC # 145452

You’re already being bombarded with phone calls, mailers, and (soon) machine-funded slate cards trying to tell you exactly how to vote by Nov. 8. I’ve attended too many candidate forums, as an individual voter, so you don’t have to. I now offer you these a-la-carte suggestions. 

Please mix and match, do your own research, and decide for yourself. Also, anywhere I say “we,” I mean “I” or the consensus of the Cinque family, not any publication hosting this. I address mostly races that are realistically contested and/or controversial in our precincts. 

Statewide Propositions 

Prop. 1, Reproductive health-care access: You bet. 

Props. 26 and 27, Gambling: NO to both. The constant TV/cable ads assaulting us since before the June primary show a spending level unprecedented even for California’s bloated, corrupted initiative system. Which, in turn, shows the obscene amounts of money that existing casinos are already extracting from gullible people. You can wager that I’m no Puritan, but the victims include people with serious gambling addictions, whose lives get shattered by debt. No expanded gambling, period. 

Prop. 28, Art and music in schools: Yes. In their recent rush to turn every kid into a future software professional – let them eat “STEM” – schools need to stop neglecting the creative and collaboration skills that nurture truly successful software pros. (Or, really, success in any future profession.) 

Prop. 29, Dialysis clinics: No. Round 3 of the SEIU’s attempt to influence two big dialysis chains' staffing, at the ballot box. We’re tired of this. We respect the SEIU’s organizing skills, and we don’t like the duopoly – but corporate-style abuse of the initiative process doesn’t look any prettier when the special-interest funder is a union. We’re voting with the medical professional associations warning (yet again) about clinic closures, higher costs, and physician shortages. 

Prop. 30, ZEVs and firefighting: No, similarly based on special-interest taint. We love the idea of accelerating electric- and hydrogen-vehicle conversion for individuals who need subsidies. But here, the millionaires who run Lyft are targeting other millionaires to fund the fleet investments that Lyft (and Uber) are already required to make, by state law. That’s what investors are for – and this is corporate welfare, which also potentially shortchanges schools. 

Prop. 31, Flavored tobacco “products”: Potheads, vote your conscience. This would be a no-brainer Yes, if it hadn’t included vague language that could outlaw your favorite flavored rolling papers. 

Alameda County Measure 

Measure D, Agricultural land: Yes (Qualified ). This makes highly technical amendments to the original Measure D, which was written to keep East County land in farming, and has helped curtail urban sprawl. The “new” D authorizes more and larger building on ag land, and would substantially help at least one Livermore winery. But we’d rather see vineyards there than more subdivisions. 

Berkeley Measures 

Measure L, Loose, larded infrastructure bond: NO. Teach the City Council not to abuse Berkeley residents' support for affordable housing. When staff polled the public earlier this year, housing was the only issue that approached (yet still didn’t reach) the threshold for approving a bond. But instead of offering voters a separate vote on a housing bond, Mayor Arreguin led the Council in cynically larding up a single mega-bond with ill-defined infrastructure and “traffic-safety” spending. 

The City has already wasted far too much money on too many expensive, destructive prestige projects. This mega-bond simply gives this (and future) Councils a $650 million slush fund to endow whatever whims they might want to spend our money on, with no real constraints or oversight. The only Measure L language you really need to read is this: 

“These dollar amounts are estimates and are not a commitment or guarantee that any specific amounts will be spent on particular projects or categories of projects.” 

Amid record inflation and soaring interest rates, this is the worst possible time to borrow or spend freely. Tell the Council to come back in two years with separate, cleanly written bonds, each addressing well-defined purposes. 

Measure M, Vacancy tax: Yes. Vacancy taxes elsewhere have been effective incentives in getting idled housing back onto the market. M includes reasonable exemptions for principal residences, and for properties being repaired or renovated. We wish this measure more narrowly targeted multi-unit speculators. We wish it also applied to storefronts that commercial landlords keep shuttered, to demand unreasonable rents. But we’ll take it. 

Alameda County District Attorney 

There are very good reasons why Terry Wiley, current Chief Assistant DA and Equity Division Director, has been endorsed by the mayors of 11 out of 14 Alameda County cities, prominent civil rights attorneys John Burris and Benjamin Crump, and Oakland NAACP President George Holland. Wiley, who prosecuted the Oakland PD’s abusive Riders, is also the first prosecutor ever honored with a Civil Rights award from the National Bar Association. He’s measurably improved equity in the DA’s Office’s operations, and he now offers a focused plan to reduce regional crime by targeting known high offenders. 

And Wiley is the only qualified candidate for this office. 

In Oakland, two people are being murdered on an average day. And that lethal violence has spilled into schools, and into Berkeley. Other crimes have spiked across the county. 

This is no time to flirt with limousine liberals' darling, Pamela Price. She’s a private attorney who’s never prosecuted a crime. She’s never run an office of more than four people. (The DA’s Office employs hundreds of people, and prosecutors there unionized specifically because of Price’s previous run.) Price has been accused of serious misconduct by a past client. And she offers no plan to reduce unacceptable crime levels – mostly just a constant smirk. 

You don’t need to buy into the excesses of “broken-“windows theory to acknowledge that getting lower-level crooks off the street can tamp down both the match and the fuse that spark lethal violence. Prosecuting crimes is right there at the core of the DA’s job description, but Price – like flamed-out San Francisco anti-prosecutor Chesa Boudin, and Murder City Philadelphia’s failing Larry Krasner – basically doesn’t want to do it. Vote for Wiley. 

AC Transit Director, At-Large 

Incumbent Joel Young can claim support from the bus drivers' and mechanics' union, as well as successes in funding clean hydrogen fuel-cell buses and sustaining service levels and affordability in difficult times. 

Another reason to re-elect Young is his opponent, Alfred Twu. Twu is an extreme pro-development advocate, with a day job as an architect (yes, that spells conflict of interest), and no transportation expertise. He’s made bizarre proposals like deforesting part of Tilden Park to build subdivisions – Twu apparently didn’t get that Joni Mitchell was being critical when she sang "took all the trees, put 'em in a tree museum." 

After two ill-considered appointments to Berkeley commissions, Twu is seeking a toehold in elective office here. There’s no better time to tell him to go back to the drawing board – literally – at his day job in the private sector. 

Berkeley City Council 

District 1: Rank Elisa Mikiten, then Tamar Michal Freeman. District 1 deserves a doer and a listener, and Mikiten is both. Where others talk, she’s actually gotten affordable housing built. She’s distinguished herself as Planning Commission Chair, and through a long career as an architect, planner, and disabled-access advocate/consultant. 

Incumbent Rashi Kesarwani doesn’t deserve re-election or even ranking. She’s been combative, ideologically extreme, contemptuous of constituents, ineffective, and dishonest about her role in sabotaging Planning Commission consensus around BART housing plans. She’s also dodged at least one recent forum. If you can’t tell the truth, you can’t face your constituents, and you avowedly care less about them than about developers and theoretical people who might want to live in Berkeley – you don’t deserve a second term. 

District 8: Rank Mari Mendonca, Jay Wu, and (if you like) Peter Bruce DuMont. Mendonca offers District 8 new progressive representation, and a refreshing multiracial perspective. She’s advocated effectively for renters on the City’s Housing Commission and Rent Board, and is passionate about preventing displacement. 

The one candidate who doesn’t deserve ranking is the one boasting endorsements from much of the current groupthink Council, Mark Humbert. His implicit case for election is that a white male San Francisco lawyer would add valuable perspective to the Council. 

His explicit case is even worse, conveying that he’d extend the aloof, elitist conduct of retiring incumbent Lori Droste. Humbert touts his eight years on the Transportation Commission, and his role in developing the 2017 Bicycle Plan. Anyone who’s observed that commission (now abolished) knows that it was a dysfunctional, undemocratic mess. That bike plan was nutty – it encouraged the mangling of the Hopkins/The Alameda intersection, and of Milvia Ave. downtown, both of which have since been targeted for rollbacks at yet further expense. In forums, Humbert seems obsessed with “traffic safety” – meaning, he’d encourage more of these novel hazards. We feel safer with Mendonca. 

District 7: Aidan Hill. He’s running the kind of optimistic, grassroots, people-first progressive campaign that we once saw – and will never see again – from now-entrenched Mayor Arreguin. This student-rich district could use representation from someone who visibly cares more about tenants than about developers. 

Berkeley School Board (3 At-Large) 

We’re supporting Reichi Lee, Jennifer Shanoski, and Tatiana Guerreiro Ramos. BUSD students, parents, and teachers deserve energetic School Board members who are directly engaged in improving our schools. In this race, there’s lots of talk about closing the achievement gap, and weird endorsements from officeholders – all of which have flowed too easily. These three candidates are passionate, and they distinguish themselves from the rest of the field by talking not just about equity, but about encouraging all students to strive for excellence. 

Lee and Shanoski both have multiple endorsements. Ramos runs a tutoring business, and has been a steady advocate for her three ADHD kids in Berkeley schools. She’s now running an outsider campaign on behalf of kids who (like lots of us, once upon a time) don’t fit into standard peg holes. If she’s too outside for you, incumbent Ka’Dijah Brown is a safe choice, although neither inspiring nor new blood. 

We’re baffled by the multiple endorsements for Mike Chang, who failed to win election in 2020, and seems no better qualified for this office now. He’s an enforcement attorney with a federal civil rights office, where I’m sure he does good work. But he shows no experience with the nuts and bolts of making schools or school boards work. He also manages to talk like both a lawyer and a bureaucrat, to the point where he actually seems bored with his own dry rhetoric. If you want School Board meetings to be snoozefests full of blather like “systems in place” and “in a timely manner,” he might help you get to sleep. 

Rent Stabilization Board (5 At-Large) 

Nageene Mosaed, Soli Alpert, Vanessa Marrero, Ida Martinac, and Nathan Mizell are the five candidates endorsed by Berkeley’s 2022 Tenant Convention, and we’re voting only for them. 

-#- 

I would like to briefly respond to Zipporah Collins’s inaccurate statements in her recent “Yes on L” piece for they strike me as ill informed, specifically regarding the Berkeley city budget.

The total budget for this fiscal year (2023) is over $754 million. Police expenditures account for $87 million and fire expenditures for $63 million.

Therefore, contrary to what Ms. Collins wrote, police and fire do not make up 50% of the city budget. Rather, they make up approximately 20%.

I would highly encourage Ms. Collins to review the budget and recognize that there is already ample opportunity for the city to spend more to maintain and improve roads and other infrastructure, and that is through the various bonds and special taxes imposed on homeowners and businesses for this very purpose. Reviewing one’s tax bill would help with such an exercise. 

The decision by the current and previous council not to invest in infrastructure is -- and always has been -- a choice. It has not been due to lack of money. Berkeley enjoys surpluses virtually every year and that is why it has a high bond rating.  

Moreover, it is important to point out that we already spend double that of neighboring cities. Please see WOMBerkeley.org for more information on this topic. 

I also hope that Ms. Collins and anyone else intending to vote “Yes” reconsider based on this fundamental misunderstanding of the budget. 

Following Kelly Hammargren’s and Berkeleyans for Better Planning’s lead, I will be voting “No on L” primarily because of the language in the bond measure that has been pointed to: 

"These dollar amounts are estimates and are not a commitment or guarantee that any specific amounts will be spent on particular projects or categories of projects.”  

As Kelly noted in the Daily Planet several weeks ago, “No amount of declarations or resolutions can hide that the Measure L General Obligation Bond has no priority of projects or even defined projects, so it is impossible to hold to account a measure that states it is not a guarantee of anything except, of course, debt for us to pay off.”  

 

The Hopkins corridor plan is back on the City Council 6 pm agenda under Action, for October 11 as item 23 “Reconsideration of Hopkins Corridor Plan in Light of newly Available Material Information.” Councilmember Hahn is the author and Councilmember Wengraf is the co-sponsor. It includes a request to add $400,000 for the fiscal year 2024 for a comprehensive independent study of Hopkins from McGee to Gilman (the blocks with the shops and Monterey Market). 

Wengraf had a long list of questions and suggestions at the May 10, 2022 City Council meeting on the Hopkins Corridor Project Conceptual Design and had the good sense to vote No on the final motion in a meeting that lasted until 12:18 am. There were 52 speakers, most of whom were in opposition, including strong reservations from businesses. 

Hahn voted with the majority, 8 to 1 in favor of this motion: 1) adopt Resolution No. 70,354– N.S. approving the conceptual design for the Hopkins Corridor Project on Hopkins Street between Sutter Street and Gilman Street, and directing the City Manager to proceed with the detailed engineering design of the project including the portion from Sacramento to Gilman; 2) adopt the supplemental item from Councilmember Hahn as written, with the inclusion of Councilmember Kesarwani’s supplemental as a referral to the City Manager; 3) request staff to return to Council at a date in October 2022 for final approval of the extension to San Pablo, with at least two community meetings conducted by the City; 4) evaluate the installation of a traffic signal at Hopkins and Monterey; 5) conduct more outreach to business owners with the Office of Economic Development, Transportation Division and the Landscape Architect. 

Kesarwani’s supplemental was to extend the bicycle and pedestrian improvements to San Pablo Avenue and to include two public meetings. Hahn and Arreguin’s supplemental contains lots of drawings which can be viewed here: https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-05-10%20Item%2033%20Supp%20Hahn.pdf 

As far as I can tell from my weekly search for city meetings, the public meetings in the May 10 motion never occurred. And, since the council was supposed to receive a report back in October, it looks like none of the rest of the motion occurred either, but we shall see Tuesday evening. 

A last comment on this entire fiasco: this all started after two fatalities in 2017, Joseph Hurlimann, a bicyclist riding on Sacramento between Ada and Hopkins, and Seon O’Neill, a pedestrian in the crosswalk at the intersection of Monterey and Hopkins who was hit by a driver who failed to stop. The entire original Hopkins Corridor Plan did nothing to address the death of the bicyclist Joseph Hurlimann. That section of Sacramento between Rose and Hopkins is now included in the reconsideration request for study. 

Councilmember Hahn puts the oversight/management of the “Reconsideration of the Hopkins Corridor” in the hands of the Departments of Transportation and the Office of Economic Development, the two departments in which I have the lowest confidence though others don’t rank much higher. 

Finally, don’t expect to find anything useful on the City’s Hopkins Corridor Traffic and Placemaking Study webpage. It is sorely out of date. https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/hopkins-corridor-traffic-and-placemaking-study 

 

Given what is happening with the Hopkins Street redesign, it would be best if we all study the Redesign Ashby BART Plaza plans carefully before they land in cement. It took a little searching to find the presentation from Redesign Ashby BART Plaza meeting on Monday, October 3. The presentation is not linked to the meeting webpage or to the Ashby and North Berkeley BART Planning. https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Redesign%20of%20Adeline%20Street%20at%20Ashby%20BART%20Community%20Meeting%20Presentation.pdf 

On a visit to the Ashby Flea Market on Sunday, October 9, I learned that vendors were not informed of the October 3 meeting, though the vendors I spoke with knew the flea market would be moved for the future BART development. Trinia, who is on the Board for the vendors, said there was a meeting at the Senior Center with a display of plans, but we were not able to confirm if the October 3 redesign plan was the same as what had been presented at the Senior Center for vendors. 

The October 3 redesign offered two options, with both suggesting that the Berkeley flea market would be on the plaza (appears like an extra wide sidewalk) along Adeline between Ashby and MLK on the west side across the street from the Ed Roberts Campus. Within those options three different plaza widths are proposed. 

It is hard to know what the City will decide, but with the lack of engagement with the community it is difficult to predict how the final outcome will affect the flea market. The number of vendors on Sunday is about half of what it used to be. 

South Berkeley once was a solid African American neighborhood with a robust business district. Gentrification has taken its toll. Over the last 50 years starting with the 1970 census the Black population in Berkeley has dropped from 23.5% to 8% in the 2020 census. 

As for the plaza, I’m not sure how well it will work. The vendors are most concerned about parking for their vehicles for loading, unloading and the changes they make in their displays throughout the day, not just at the beginning and the end, and parking for people coming to the flea market. 

Attendees at the Oct 3 zoom meeting wanted a comparison between the current space for vendors and what is proposed in the plans. They asked for more open space, a dog park, wider sidewalks, more street trees, and what happens to emergency vehicles and the guarantees to the flea market. 

My vote is for a wider plaza, designated weekend parking, more community meetings and a far more visible effort to engage with vendors and the community. 

The Santa Fe ROW (Right of Way) Park Community meeting had good attendance from the neighbors and the park plans from the Wednesday, October 5 meeting are posted on the webpage. https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/capital-projects/santa-fe-right-way-park The plans for the four parks between Blake and Ward are fairly well developed with a community garden park, dog park, kid’s play park and urban farm and education park. Native plants to 80%, lighting in the red-yellow spectrum and some dark time were suggested. 

Neighbors preferred the lower lighting rather than light posts that would shine into houses. The park grant includes clean-up of contaminants left from the railroad (arsenic). The community garden will be managed by the Ecology Center with sign-ups for spaces and controlled access. Most liked the idea of permeable paving and no one including the two city contacts for the project (echan@cityofberkeley.info and srutherford@cityofberkeley.info) except this writer was familiar with the permeable paving sidewalk at 3120 Eton. 

One last example of City “mis-designs” can be found along the sidewalk on the east side of San Pablo Avenue. Why there is a curb running down the center of the sidewalk with the side next to the buildings elevated is a mystery to the barbers at Men’s Grooming at 2211 San Pablo. It seems through conversations with the barbers on Friday morning waiting for their first customers of the day to arrive that two people have been injured tripping over the unusual curb in the middle of the sidewalk (see picture). 

Maybe Councilmember Taplin has the answer for why this was created in the first place and if it will be fixed as promised. 

I had a long chat with Mark Solofa owner of Men’s Grooming. He loves the neighborhood, the trees, the character of the buildings. I was sorry to tell him, the neighborhood is changing and he should keep watch for the yellow signs that indicate the buildings he loves are soon to be demolished and replaced. 

The days when cities managed their own parking meters are long gone, with privatization skimming off profits before turning over any leftovers to cities. That is, of course, as long as the expected parking income continues and there is money after profits left to turnover. Some cities are learning that those long-term parking contracts, privatization of public right-of way, turn into big bills when parking income drops or cities want to turn parking spaces into parklets for restaurants or protected bike lanes or more lanes for traffic. 

ParkMobile is coming to Berkeley’s program to charge fees in residential (Elmwood) and UCB campus neighborhoods. It is all part of goBerkeley smartspace, a partially funded pilot with a $940,000 grant from MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission). https://smartspace.goberkeley.info/ 

The pilot is “studying ways to provide more visitor travel options and reduce frequent vehicle re-parking (shuffling) in the Southside and Elmwood neighborhoods.” The pilot for Area 1, the 2700 blocks of Durant, Channing, Haste and the 2300 and 2400 blocks of Piedmont, starts Monday, October 17. UCB football game day restrictions still apply. 

The goBerkeley smartspace pilot met a firm wall of resistance in the Elmwood neighborhood, though without the support of a councilmember to take the side of the residents this pilot project is fully expected to forge ahead. If the smooth-talking anointed District 8 replacement gets the expected nod from this neighborhood in this neighborhood, no one should expect the future councilmember to do any better for the residents than the current one. I saw a lot of his signs in the neighborhood today. 

I hope the ParkMobile ap works better in Berkeley than my recent experience at the Cantor Art Center, but of more concern is that this pilot looks like the path to penalizing car ownership and vehicle use while monetizing residential visitor parking and parking for mixed-use building occupants who are prohibited from obtaining RPPs (residential parking permits). 

The Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment and Sustainability Commission meeting lasted less than 35 minutes. Councilmembers Harrison and Taplin were present and passed the revised ordinance to regulate plastic bags. 

I did attend the Housing Advisory Commission on Thursday. There is little to report. They did pass the amendments to the housing code and will add a cover letter in attempt to line up their submission with the submission from the 4 x 4 committee (4 council members and 4 rent stabilization board members) on housing and habitability. Given how the council agendas are drafted, this may or may not work. The City Manager has the option to delay submissions from commissions by 90 days to submit a companion report (normally an objection). 

The San Francisco library came through again with the just published Servants of the Damned: Giant Law Firms, Donald Trump, and the Corruption of Justice. I confess, I, of course, knew who Don McGahn was and how he directed the selection of conservative judges (over 100) for lifetime appointments to Federal Courts across the country under Trump and Mitch McConnell, but I had never heard of the law firm Jones Day. 

Jones Day, the bastion of conservatism with a revolving door in and out of the Trump administration, including the Department of Justice, is a white shoe law firm that started in Cleveland in the 1890s and now stretches around the globe with a powerhouse sitting in Washington DC. Under the hard-right iron fist (the reviews call it guidance) of Steve Brogan, Jones Day searched out lawsuits to undo Obama Care (remember nuns and birth control) and other lawsuits to bend the interpretation of the constitution and law into their conservative flavor. while at the same time wearing down any opposition with the force of their deep resources, challenges and threats of countersuits. 

There is a long list of unsavory clients and tactics before and after Jones Day took up representing Trump and stepping into the 2020 election in Pennsylvania to block mail-in ballots. 

If you pick up the book, which I recommend, you will read about lawsuits in recent memory and Jones Day’s hand in as the title states, corrupting justice. You’ll also read about the Texas two-step to split a large corporation being sued in two, keeping the profits in one arm and pushing the liabilities into the other and adding a bankruptcy filing to limit payouts in those losing lawsuits. 

Jones Day is not defending the NRA, but the move to Texas and possible Texas two-step is described here: https://www.globaltort.com/post/nra-s-chapter-11-possible-implications-for-mass-torts-public-policy-and-chapter-11 

There seems to be no limit to greed and the lust for power. Add how easily people are swayed by political ads sponsored by piles of PAC (political action committee) aka dark money and conspiracies moving through social media, I am deeply worried about the outcome of the November election 

The Rich Get Richer

On October 9, 2022, the Economic Policy Institute reported that "CEO Pay Has Skyrocketed 1,460% Since 1978." Furthermore, the EPI reports, in 2021, America's CEOs were paid "399 times as much as a typical worker."

Here are a few lines from the EPI report:
"Exorbitant CEO pay is a contributor to rising inequality that we could restrain without doing any damage to the wider economy. CEOs are getting ever-higher pay over time because of their power to set pay and because so much of their pay (more than 80%) is stock-related. They are not getting higher pay because they are becoming more productive or more skilled than other workers, or because of a shortage of excellent CEO candidates."

In 2020, TIME magazine drove home the same point with the headline: "The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the US Less Secure."

Ban the Poor? Ban the Rich! 

When we think about the Poor we frequently harbor mostly negative associations about this marginalized demographic (crime, poor education, unskilled, powerless) but when we think of the Rich—an even more marginalized portion of society—the associations tend to be positive (wealthy, polished, industrious, powerful). This simplification overlooks a long roster of character traits that distinguish many of the corporate rich—self-indulgence, egotism, deceit. 

Could it be that both extremes—the Very Poor and the Very Rich—deserve equal attention? There is a consensus that we must "eliminate poverty" and reduce the number of people suffering from hunger and homelessness. So shouldn't there be an equal concern about eliminating the number of absurdly powerful people who are experiencing "extreme wealth"? 

Surely, society would benefit by having fewer poor people. Society might benefit even more by having fewer rich people. Instead of simply focusing on the lower rungs of social inequality, how about going full circle and addressing the top rungs of the economic ladder. It's not enough to "banish poverty." Perhaps we should respond in kind with a call to "banish billionaires." 

Three Tricks that Are Used to Perpetuate the Rich/Poor Divide  

• The Lottery Plot and the Casino Conspiracy. Offer people the possibility of sudden, vast, unearned wealth for a piddling amount of wagered cash. "You, too, could be a winner!" 

• The Windfalls of Competative Sports. Major league sports franchises routinely offer contracts that turn young athletes into millionaires overnight, normalizing the idea that anyone with Major League prowess can become rich beyond belief. And reinforcing the idea that extreme wealth, while a novelty, is not a sin. 

• Finally: Television Game Shows. 

Breaking Teeth for 145 Years 

A bag of high-calorie popcorn recently fell into my lap. (Side note: What a mess.) The bag came from First Street, an LA company that boasted "For over 145 years we have been committed to offering high quality products … 100% Guaranteed or your money back." 

In smaller type at the back and bottom of the package there was a caveat that I'd never encountered before (but will be watching for now!). It read: "Caution: This product may contain unpopped corn kernels. Not responsible for tooth damage." 

Sierra Club versus Big Oil 

John Muir and David Brower would be proud to hear that the Sierra Club is doing battle with Chevron, Exxon, BP, and Texaco. "Fossil fuel companies should no longer have free rein to lease on our public lands," the Club argues. "It is clear that oil and gas leasing contributes to increased carbon emissions and pollution. Continued leasing on our public lands goes against President Biden's ambitious climate goals." 

So the Oakland-based Sierra Club is backing Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva's (D-AZ) recent bill—The Public Lands and Waters Climate Leadership Act—to prevent issuing any new leases and permits for fossil fuel projects. Gtijalva's bill would also require the Department of Interior and US Forest Service to develop an "emissions reduction strategy." 

Attention Corporate Lawyers 

It's time for a criminal come-uppance in a court of law.
Exxon and other oil companies knew that carbon-heavy pollution would disrupt the climate back in the 1970s—and they did nothing with this knowledge—expect to lie and cover it up. Today, thanks to the Big Carbon overlords, we have reaped the whirlwind. Literally: in the form of massive hurricanes. 

Southern states repeatedly hammered by deadly heat-feed storms should sue the oil giants for damages—and demand economic settlements sufficient to cover the costs of rebuilding lost neighborhoods and damaged municipal infrastructure as well as funds to rebuild coastal cities to survive the decades of storms and sea-level rise still to come. 

Chevron Ad Spills the Ugly Truth 

 

Thanks to Hyperobject Industries, producer Staci Roberts-Steele and filmmaker Adam "Don't Look Up!" McKay. 

Ike's Classic Quote 

Before quitting the Oval Office, President (and former General) Dwight Eisenhower issued a famous warning about the rising threat of a Military-Industrial Complex. As "Ike" memorably declared: "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." 

The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) recently sent out a mailing that contained several hefty bookmarks that displayed Ike's prescient warning of the rise of the MIC. 

But there was one minor slip-up: Where Eisenhower referred to "in the final sense," the FCNL's version read "the vital sense." 

It coulda been worse: The malaprop could have read "in the vinyl sense.") Here's a video of Eisenhower's presidential warning: 

 

Saucy Aussies Dem a Major Weapons Expo 

Activists in Australia have just released a terrific video of a massive protest against an "Arms Expo" hosted by global weapons makers in Brisbane, Australia from October 1-7. 

The protestors' Festival of Resistance involved a week of art, action and activism by "your favorite pro-planet anti-militarist crew." The anti-war "Disrupt Land Forces" protest featured "a diverse and delightful offering of disruptive tactics aimed at the biggest weapons fair in the southern hemisphere." Here's a taste: 

 

Why Is Biden Risking Nuclear Annihilation Instead of Negotiation? 

Gerry Condon, of Veterans for Peace, recently hopped aboard the Golden Rule peace boat for a trip down the Mississippi River. Before climbing aboard, he sent out this Letter to the Editor. 

Eight months into the ever-escalating war in Ukraine, we must ask a few important questions: 

Why have President Biden and the Congress opened up the spigot for an endless flow of tens of billions of precious taxpayer dollars to keep this war going? 

Why are President Biden and the Pentagon engaging in a game of nuclear chicken with Russia, risking the destruction of all life on Earth? 

Why are there no adults in the room, pursuing negotiations to end this very dangerous war before it is too late? 

And why is the Media not asking these questions of our political leaders?  

I guess it is up to the rest of us to call for a ceasefire and negotiations. We better hurry up! 

The Nord Stream Sabotage: A James Bond Pipedream? 

These two links from my website, Environmentalists Against War, address some of the emerging revelations that suggest a US role in the sabotage of Russia's two undersea Nord Stream gas pipelines. 

The second video—about how the CIA tricked Russia into blowing up its own pipeline in SIberia—reveals a little-known spy-stunt that would have left James Bond shaking his head in disbelief! 

• Nord Stream Bombings Recall CIA’s 1982 Siberian Pipeline Attack 

• CIA Plot Led to Huge Blast in Siberian Gas Pipeline 

 

Berkeley Honors the Ohlone People on Whose Lands We Dwell 

The September issue of Sacred Land Film Project News notes that "Berkeley was the first city in the Bay Area to recognize that its citizens live on Ohlone land." To honor this fact, the city revised its street signs to read 'Welcome to Berkeley, Ohlone Territory'—an action spearheaded by City Councilmembers Cheryl Davila and Sophie Hahn." 

After the 2020 murder of George Floyd, the Berkeley City Council passed a resolution to paint two downtown streets with "Black Lives Matter" and "Ohlone Territory." On May 22, 2022, activists touched up the Black Lives Matter mural and added a colorful "OHLONE TERRITORY" mural (designed by local artist David Solnit) on the other side of City Hall. 

Here is a video of highlights from that beautiful spring day in Ohlone territory, courtesy of the Sacred Land Film Project, a project of Earth Island Institute. 

 

Worth a Listen 

David Hartsough is a lifelong Bay Area peace activist and author of the memoir Waging Peace: Global Adventures of a Lifelong Activist. In addition to serving as the executive director of SF-based Peaceworkers, Hartsough is also co-founder of the Nonviolent Peaceforce and World Beyond War. Hartsough writes that Waging Peace is now available for free as an audiobook on the Internet where it will continue to be an inspiration to the global peace and justice movement. The paperback version is available from PM Press. Here is a link to the first of 15 online chapters: 

 

Also Worth a Look and a Listen: The Amazing Life of Josephine Baker 

 

 

I send these out every election as a guide, hope it is helpful. 

They are listed in the order they appear on the ballot. 

Endorsers are also listed. 

 

WDRC=Wellstone; BTU=Berkeley Tenants Union; 

BCA=Berkeley Citizens Action; BNC=Berkeley Neighborhood Council; 

CalDem=California Democratic Party 

 

STATE OFFICES--CalDem Candidates
Governor: Gavin Newsom
Lieutenant Governor: Eleni Kounalakis
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber
Controller: Malia Cohen
Treasurer: Fiona Ma
Attorney General: Rob Bonta
Insurance Commissioner: Ricardo Lara
State Board of Equalization: Sally Lieber
U.S. Senator: Alex Padilla
U.S. Senator (Partial Term) Alex Padilla
12th Congressional District: Barbara Lee
14th State Assembly: No Vote. (Buffy Wicks has no opponent.) 

13 Judicial Candidates are unopposed, so Vote Yes on all. 

 

Superintendent of Public Instruction: Tony Thurmond 

 

ALAMEDA COUNTY 

District Attorney: Pamela Price--WDRC, BCA, BTU, BNC, 

 

BERKELEY
Rent Stabilization Board:--WDRC, BTU, 

Soli Alpert
Nathal Mizell
Vanessa Danielle Marrero
Ida Martinac
Nageene Mosaed. 

 

School Directors: WDRC, BCA
Ka'Dijah Brown
Mike Chang
Jennifer Shanoski,  

 

AC Transit District: Alfred Twu--WDRC, CalDem, 

 

STATE PROPOSITIONS: 

YES-Proposition 1 WDRC, BCA  

Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.
NO-Proposition 26-- Margot Sez No. I don't like gambling. All that money for ads; who profits?
Allows In-Person Roulette, Dice Games, Sports Wagering on Tribal Lands.
NO-Proposition 27--BCA Everyone can gamble anywhere. Who profits? Casinos.
Allows Online and Mobile Sports Wagering Outside Tribal Lands.
YES-Proposition 28--BCA Our kids need art and music.
Provides Additional Funding for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools.
YES-Proposition 29 WDRC, BCA, Badly needed for good health care there. 

Requires On-Site Licensed Medical Professional at Kidney Dialysis Clinics.
NO-Proposition 30--Gavin Newsom says NO, questionable funding.
Provides Funding to Reduce Air Pollution & Prevent Wildfires with Tax on Personal Income Over $2M
YES-Proposition 31 WDRC, BCA 

Prohibits the Retail Sale of Certain Flavored Tobacco Products.

ALAMEDA COUNTY
YES-Measure D: Save Agriculture and Open Space Lands

BERKELEY
NO--Measure L: Bond to repair streets, rebuild city hall. Pay this bond for 48 years + interest. 

NO--BCA, BNC, CENA, Berkeleyans For Better Planning, Kelly Hammargren, Margot Smith 

Money goes into General Fund to spend any old way. Poor city management both now and later.
YES-Measure M: Vacancy tax. BCA, BTU, Kate Harrison 

YES-Measure N: Needed to obtain federal funding for low income housing. Needed.

City Auditor: Jenny Wong 

District 1: Elisa Mikiten Berkeley Democratic Caucus, Our Revolution East Bay 

District 4: Kate Harrison BCA, No Opponent. She is terrific. 

District 7: Aiden Hill Green Party, Peace and Freedom 

District 8: Mari Mendonca BCA, Gus Newport, Moni Law, Richie Smith 

 

Vote, vote, vote! 

I am glad that President Biden is ''reconsidering'' his relationship with the Saudi Arabian dictatorship. The family that rules this regime doesn't believe in freedom of speech, press, or religion. They don't believe in equal rights for women. You have probably heard about what some women are doing in Iran. Women in Iran actually have more freedom than women in Saudi Arabia. There are Iranian Christians and Jews. There are no Saudi Arabian Christians or Jews. The punishment for a Saudi Arabian subject who converts is death. The President and Congress should cut all ties with Saudi Arabia as long as it is a dictatorship that doesn't support democracy, equality, and human rights.

I find that even though I'm not a young person, I haven't so far learned how to have flawless actions and speech. I make mistakes. I say things I shouldn't have said. And often, I suffer consequences. Yet, these days I'm more careful, and I have a pretty good idea of a few things not to do. 

I'm not an altar boy. In my past I've done and said some things you're not supposed to. Yet I've done very well at staying out of trouble for a very long time. This disease, schizophrenia, brings life circumstances that are far from easy, and the disease can directly cause errors in judgment, in turn causing poor choices of actions. Some adverse circumstances arise from the label, "mentally ill," and some arise from the disease itself: The disease can interfere with decision-making, and this brings less than optimal outcomes. And let's not forget, the medications that treat mental illnesses often restrict some forms of brainpower, making everything harder to do--and in some cases that means it is harder to think. 

But over time, we (mentally ill) will often learn to compensate for a lot of this. For example, I preprogrammed myself to have mechanisms (let's call them "Failsafe Mechanisms") that prevent completely disastrous actions while severely ill. But these days that is hypothetical since I haven't needed hospitalization since 1996. (It causes many to doubt that I truly am mentally ill--but that's entirely another subject.) 

Learning control of actions is vital--for anyone, mentally ill or not. I find it is easier to control actions than it is to control the words that issue from my mouth. I don't edit everything I say before I say it. I've met people who do, (think while speaking, that is) and they are tiresome to listen to. I'd rather hear how someone really feels than hear the prescreened version. In many professions, you can't get away with saying just anything. Doing that could end your career very quickly. Even in sports this seems to be so. I've heard professional athletes speak on television, and the words seem very thoughtful. But what they say in the locker room--we can only take a guess. 

Schizophrenia causes disorganized thinking and speech. It can cause impulsivity. Many mistakes can be made. This works against us. And how would you like it if you had an infestation that made you say and do the worst possible things--against your will, and at the same time made your thinking go haywire? Mental illnesses are not "infestations." Yet your brain is often doing things against your wishes. And you may even have the very insight blocked that you must have if you are to get well; the insight that you're ill. 

Anosognosia is a part of schizophrenia that blocks many people's insight that they're ill and need help. To me, anosognosia may very well involve a time factor. By this I mean we may be forced into treatment for a two-week period (In California this is known as a "5250") and taking medication may be required--a doctor can force that on you with a legal procedure. This can allow some reality to seep in. At the end of two weeks medicated, often we've reached the realization that our mind was taken over by delusions and that we need to be medicated to fix this. For some, it takes longer than two weeks. We might be calmer to the extent that legal grounds no longer exist to force medication, yet we have not realized that medication is needed. Some may require months of being medicated. It varies from one individual to the next. Anosognosia could be a situation of too much time required for the reality to get in, and consequently, being released too soon. This is known as "the revolving door" syndrome. If better medications could be invented, we might be able to do away with some of this. 

But even when we are in recovery, we may very likely need to unlearn or relearn some behaviors. 

And even while a behavior must change, it is not necessary or helpful to hate yourself over having one or more behavior issues. If your liking of yourself is uninterrupted, you'll stand a better chance of changing something that needs to change. Additionally, there are two sides to everything. And while no one truly makes you do anything, an opposing "side" to a conflict (where your behavior is pointed out as wrong) could bear some level of responsibility. They could be in some manner baiting you, either intentionally or unintentionally. Or it is possible that their behavior is not completely pristine. But even when the credit for your actions is a hundred percent yours, don't hate yourself over it. And at the same time, no one else makes you do anything. When you do something, that's you doing it. 

Changes in a behavior often don't come easily and you may need both internal and external reinforcement. This can take many forms. In my past, a social worker helped me resolve a behavior problem. In that situation, there was a conflict in my low-income apartment building, and I needed to stop a behavior, or else. The social worker helped in a huge way. She sympathized with my side of things. And she created a written contract for me to sign. While the contract may not have held up as a legal document, it made the difference in my ability to stop doing what I needed to stop. 

The forementioned took place nearly thirty years ago. And since that time, I've learned how to stop a problematic behavior long before it impacts my life. Asking for help from professionals can't hurt you. In that situation of thirty years ago, I said to the social worker that I needed help, and that brought about the contract. 

Internal reinforcement to me involves having a track record of being able to stop a behavior. Such a track record is powerful in that it builds self-confidence. 

I continue to make the occasional error in how I act or speak. Yet this week's essay could help give you some ideas. 

---

Jack Bragen is author of "Revising Behaviors that Don't Work," and lives in Martinez, California.

Worth Noting:

Monday is Indigenous People’s Day and Friday is a City reduced service day and the rest of the week is packed. Don’t forget to check for meetings posted on short notice https://berkeleyca.gov/

Sunday, Oct 9 closing of African Americans in Berkeley exhibit on zoom.

Tuesday City Council starts at 4 with special meeting on Measures L and O followed with regular meeting at 6 pm. On agenda Fair Work Week, Hopkins redesign, and Harriet Tubman Terrace safety violations.

Wednesday Council Committee on Health, Life, Enrichment, Equity and Community meets at 2 pm on Office of Racial Equity and guaranteed income. The Wildfire Evacuation Workshop is at 6:30 pm. The Parks Commission, Homeless Services Panel of Experts, Police Accountability Board and Hahn / Wengraf Town Hall on Measure L are all at 7 pm.

Thursday the final January 6th Hearing starts at 10 am the same time as the Budget and Finance Committee. Mayor Arreguin gives his State of the City address at 6 pm (registration closed for in-person) watch on YouTube Jessearreguin.com. The Zoning Adjustment Board meets at 7 pm.

Saturday is the Harvest Festival at 11 am – 4 pm. Pre-Register for the EV test drive.

Sunday October 16 is the Bird Festival with events from 8 am – 8 pm.

The Comment Period ends October 17, 2022 at 5 pm for the Housing Element Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The DEIR is a plan for adding 19,098 housing units not the RHNA 8,934. As stated at the Planning Commission in the presentation, the larger number is to push changing zoning in the City of Berkeley. The document including appendices is over 500 pages.

https://berkeleyca.gov/construction-development/land-use-development/general-plan-and-area-plans/housing-element-update

Last day to register to vote is October 24 for the November 28, 022 election. Ballots start arriving this week.

Sunday, October 9, 2022  

CLOSING PRESENTATION FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS IN BERKELEY at 12 pm 

Videoconference: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/closing-presentation-for-african-americans-in-berkeley-tickets-430015085697?mc_cid=94dbc79bf4&mc_eid=5054d9346e 

AGENDA: Co-Curators Dr. Stephanie Anne Johnson and Harvey Smith and the Advisory Committee Tina Jones Williams, David Knott, Byron Rumford III and Mary Jackson will look back on the 3-year project African Americans in Berkeley. 

HARBOR HOUSE QUILT PROJECT STUDENT QUILT SALE at 10 am – 2 pm 

2733 Prince St. 

Monday, October 10, 2022 – Indigenous People’s Day 

Tuesday, October 11, 2022 

CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting at 4 pm  

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88115464108 

Teleconference: 1-669-254-5252 or 1-833-568-8864 (toll free) Meeting ID: 881 1546 4108 

AGENDA Consent: 1. Appointment of Director of Police accountability, 2. Appointment of Director of Human Resources, 3. Purchase Order – Golden State Fire Apparatus, Inc, for Kenworth 3,000 Gallon Tender for Emergency Water Supply (vehicle) Action: 4. Guidelines for Public Process, Expenditure and Oversight of $650,000,000 Affordable Housing and Infrastructure Bond, 5. Measure O Bond Impacts on Affordable Housing Development in Berkeley (packet 58 pages) 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/city-council-agendas 

CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting at 6 pm 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88115464108 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 881 1546 4108 

AGENDA: full agenda list follows list of meetings by day of the week or use link. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/city-council-agendas 

CIVIC ARTS COMMISSION Grants Subcommittee at 12 pm 

Videoconference: https://cityofberkeley-info.zoomgov.com/j/1614254300 

Teleconference: 1-669-254-5252 Meeting ID: 161 425 4300 

AGENDA: 5. Presentations, discussion and action, FY24 guidelines eligibility, review criteria and other policy considerations for Arts Organizations, Festivals, Individual Artist Projects, Arts Programs grants. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/civic-arts-commission 

YOUTH COMMISSION at 6:30 pm 

(Videoconference showing as expired, check website for update) 

Videoconference: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83795428506?  

Teleconference: Meeting ID: 837 9542 8506 Passcode 655790 

AGENDA: 9. Discussion school safety, 10. BHS Tardy Policy 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/youth-commission 

Wednesday, October 12, 2022 

HEALTH, LIFE ENRICHMENT, EQUITY & COMMUNITY Special Meeting at 2 pm  

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83087770197 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 830 8777 0197 

AGENDA: 2. Taplin, co-sponsors Harrison, Robinson – Office of Racial Equity: Re-Entry Employment and Guaranteed Income Programs 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/council-committees/policy-committee-health-life-enrichment-equity-community 

HOMELESS SERVICES PANEL OF EXPERTS (HSPE) at 7 pm 

Videoconference: https://zoom.us/j/92491365323 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 924 9136 5323 

AGENDA: 6. April meeting, 7. Increased City monitoring and action at Harrison Street Encampment, 8. Shifting monies otherwise allocated to fund expanded mobile shower provided by Dignity on Wheels, 9. Establish plan for site visits, 10. Impact of HSPE on homeless services, 11. Update on number of subsidy allocations, 12. Site visit to STAIR/Pathways, 13. Family homelessness. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/homeless-services-panel-experts 

PARKS, RECREATION, AND WATERFRONT COMMISSION (PRW) at 7 pm 

Videoconference: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89264197181 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 892 6419 7181 

AGENDA: 8. Update on PRW Capital Projects, 9. Update Recreation Programs, 10. PRW Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Initiatives. 13. Communications Lights Out, America! Songbirds Are Counting On Us, NYT. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/parks-recreation-and-waterfront-commission 

POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD at 7 pm 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82237902987 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 822 3790 2987 

AGENDA: 3. Public comment on agenda and non-agenda items, 5. ODPA staff report, 6. Board reports, 7. Chief report, 8. Subcommittee reports b. regulations, c. controlled equipment, d. Police chief process, 9. Finalize regulations for handling investigations, 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/police-accountability-board 

WILDFIRE EVACUATION WORKSHOP at 6:30 pm 

Videoconference: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/wildfire-evacuation-workshop-building-your-fire-weather-plan-registration-428859960687 

AGENDA: Focus is on household fire weather plan, prior to workshop watch videos and visit evacuation and planning links in webpage. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/community-recreation/events/wildfire-evacuation-workshop-building-your-fire-weather-plan-5 

COUNCILMEMBERS HAHN AND WENGRAF Town Hall on Measure L at 7 pm – 8:30 pm 

To receive zoom link register at https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/su/RsOr5Lc/Sept18?source_id=12b27c58-3aab-4f7b-8a3a-3b8ca715ffc5&source_type=em&c=98tGl_3qm-8x7dPs6CP8Ts8Wtw57udrnEUzJEwfC__7JPwoQxFYoBQ==  

 

Thursday, October 13, 2022 

Final JANUARY 6TH HEARING starts at 10 am PDT 

List of coverage of hearing by station https://deadline.com/2022/10/how-to-watch-january-6-hearings-online-tv-schedule-1235040755/ 

BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE at 10 am 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85481506493 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 854 8150 6493 

AGENDA: 2. Bartlett, co-sponsors Robinson, Harrison, Taplin – Budget referral and updted guidelines and procedures for City Council staff expenditures, 3. Bartlett, co-sponsors Wengraf, Kesarwani – Additional allocation of Measure P funding to Step Up Housing $114,660 per year for 10 years for 1367 University, 4. Bartlett – Outcomes Based Funding, Pay-For-Success and Social Impact Bonds refer to CM how City can implement an Outcomes Based Funding Initiative, 5. Investment Report Update – Investment Policies of Other Jurisdictions, 6. Presentation on Mental Health Transports and update on implementation of Specialized Care Unit and Community Crisis Responses Services, (packet 84 pages) 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/council-committees/policy-committee-budget-finance 

ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD at 7 pm 

Videoconference: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85055743942 

Teleconference: 1-669-444-9171 or 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 850 5574 3942 

AGENDA: 2. 3003 Dwight (top of Dwight opposite soccer field) – on consent – add a pool, pool house, greenhouse, retaining walls and fences on the undeveloped half of the site, 

3. 2435 Haste (between Dana and Telegraph) – on consent – demolish existing multi-family building (8 units) and construct an 8-story, residential building with 37 units (including affordable replacement units) and 935 sq ft of usable open space, 

4. 1262 Francisco (between Chestnut and West) – on action – staff recommend dismiss appeal of Zoning Officer decision to approve Administrative Use Permit – to add 40 sq ft on the 1st floor and a balcony on the 2nd floor of existing single-family dwelling. 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/boards-commissions/zoning-adjustments-board 

MAYOR ARREGUIN STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS at 6 pm 

Registration for in-person closed watch on YouTube https://www.jessearreguin.com/ 

Friday, October 14, 2022 – Reduced service Day 

Saturday, October 15, 2022 

HARVEST FESTIVAL at 11 am – 4 pm 

https://berkeleyca.gov/community-recreation/news/october-15-harvest-festival-celebrates-berkeleys-sustainable-food-culture 

Register early for the EV test drive on October 15 at 11 am – 3 pm at https://tinyurl.com/RideElectric2022 or 

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/5th-annual-ride-electric-at-the-harvest-festival-registration-406380624387 

Sunday, October 16, 2022  

BERKELEY BIRD FESTIVAL at 8 am – 8 pm 

Check website for events schedules https://berkeleybirdfestival.org/ 

Events include birding field trips, origami, drawing and painting, making a bird house, garden tours, slideshow, exhibits, focused events for kids/family 

++++++++++++++++++++ 

++++++++++++++++ 

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 11, 2022 at 6 pm 

Videoconference: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88115464108 

Teleconference: 1-669-900-9128 or 1-877-853-5257 (toll free) Meeting ID: 881 1546 4108 

https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/city-council/city-council-agendas 

AGENDA CONSENT: 

1. 2nd reading - 2023 Tax Rate: Transportation Network Company User prearranged trip originating in Berkeley single rider 53.775 cents, pooled 26.249 cents per user.
2. 2nd reading - Zoning Ordinance amendments technical edits,
3. Legislative bodies to meet via videoconference,
4. Amend Contract 117596-1 add $17,500 total $67,218 with Animal Fix Clinic for Spay and Neuter Services extend to 9/14/2023
5. Amend Contract 108-410-1 add $17,500 total $134,466 to Paw Fund to provide no-cost spay and neuter surgeries to eligible pet owners for FY 2023 extend to 9/14/2023
6. Formal Bid Solicitations $2,968,600
7. Amend Contract 3220192 add $100,000 with Alameda Co. Network of Mental Health Clients for one additional homeless outreach staff member and extend to 12/31/2023
8. Revenue Grant WIC projected $1,810,197 for Federal FY 2023 – 2025
9. Expand Program Manager Series by establishing Principal Program Manager Classification and Annual Salary Range $151,819 - $183,719
10. Establish Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Officer Classification and Annual Salary Range $137.966 - $181,293
11. Assistant to the City attorney Classification and Annual Salary$137.966 - $181,293
12. Revision of the Tool Lending Specialist Classification and increase salary by 4%
13. Contract $500,000 with Abbe & Assoc LLC for the development of the Integrated Zero Waste Management Strategic Plan
14. Kesarwani co-sponsor Taplin – Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program expansion for West Berkeley Neighborhoods within two blocks of commercial corridors
15. Taplin – Regulation of Autonomous Vehicles
16. Harrison co-sponsor-Hahn - Adopt an Ordinance adding Chapter 13.09 to BMC Prohibiting Discriminatory Reports to Law Enforcement
17. Harrison – Referral to November 2022 AAO #1 Budget Process for $50,000 in additional traffic calming at MLK and Addison
18. Harrison – Refer to the Transportation and Infrastructure Commission and City Manager to consider and make recommendations regarding policy of deploying rectangular rapid flashing beacons and other treatments at dangerous or high-collision pedestrian and bicycle intersections
19. Hahn co-sponsor Arreguin Land Acknowledgement Recognizing Berkeley as the Ancestral, Unceded Home of the Ohlone people

ACTION: 

20. CM – Amend Zoning to clarify and streamline the permit process for Amusement Devise Arcades
21. ZAB Appeal 2018 Blake Street #ZP2021-0095 six-story multi-family residential building with 12 units (including 2 low-income units),
22. a. Commission on Labor - Fair Work Week Ordinance adopt ordinance, b. City Manager refer Fair Work Week to Health, Life, Enrichment, Equity & Community (item has already been reviewed by Health Life Enrichment, Equity & Committee).
23. Hahn, co-sponsor Wengraf - Reconsideration of Hopkins Corridor Plan in Light of newly Available Material Information
24. Housing Advisory Commission - Harriet Tubman Terrace Tenant Support Recommend following action, Review Tenants video, Direct City Manager to investigate health and safety violations, provide dedicated tenant advocate to assist with relocation and other needs,

INFORMATION REPORTS: 

25. Commission on Disability FY 2022-2023 Work Plan.

+++++++++++++++++++ 

LAND USE CALENDAR: 

Public Hearing to be scheduled 

2018 Blake (construct multi-family residential building) 10/11/2022 

1643-47 California (new basement and 2nd story) 11/3/2022 

Remanded to ZAB or LPC 

1205 Peralta – Conversion of an existing garage 

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

Bad news on tracking approved projects in the appeal period. Samantha Updegrave, Zoning Officer, Principal Planner wrote the listing of projects in the appeal period can only be found by looking up each project individually through permits online by address or permit number https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/Online-Building-Permits-Guide.pdf 

The website with easy to find listing of projects in the appeal period was left on the “cutting room floor” another casualty of the conversion to the new City of Berkeley website.  

Here is the old website link, Please ask for it to be restored. 

WORKSESSIONS and SPECIAL MEETINGS: 

October 11 Measure O Report and Update at 4 pm 

October 11 Oversight responsibilities for General Obligation Bond Measure special meeting time 4 pm 

Unscheduled Presentations 

Civic Arts Grantmaking Process & Capital Grant Program 

Fire Facilities Study Report 

African American Holistic Resource Center (November 15) 

Kelly Hammargren’s on what happened the preceding week can be found in the Berkeley Daily Planet www.berkeleydailyplanet.com under Activist’s Diary. This meeting list is also posted at https://www.sustainableberkeleycoalition.com/whats-ahead.html on the Sustainable Berkeley Coalition website. 

If you would like to receive the Activist’s Calendar as soon as it is completed send an email to kellyhammargren@gmail.com. (Your email is not shared). If you wish to stop receiving the weekly summary of city meetings please forward the weekly summary you received and request to be removed.