Posted on

We Will Write the History of People’s Park, Not UC!

The outrageous paramilitary occupation and destruction of People’s Park proceeds each day behind a fortress of barbed wire, 24/7 security guards and a giant Trump-style border wall. With little regard for the displaced community, the history that is being erased or the gentrification that is being furthered, the University and its functionaries make no apologies. In a tiny gesture of recognition, the University has hired Walter Hood, a UCB professor and renowned Black artist to create a “commemorative monument” to serve as a reminder of the space that was retained by the people for almost 55 years. Turns out, nobody who actually used, cared for and supported People’s Park wants anything to do with this whitewashing of history.

Yes, the Walter Hood Design Studio reached out to the People’s Park Council and others for input on how to create a history of the Park. Why can’t we all just sit together in a focus group and work together to tell the story of People’s Park? We could give them all of our choicest anecdotes and timelines. They can then pick through what we give them, choose what they want, present it however they will and claim that we collaborated with them in the telling. We say, “NEVER!”

Is UC really ready to tell the history of how in 1967, it illegally used eminent domain to steal the land and tear down the radical cooperative houses that once stood on what became People’s Park? Is UC ready to explain how many times it has used violence and even lethal violence over the past 55 years to prevent the people from claiming this land for use by the community? Is UC ready to talk about the ways that it claimed ownership and yet neglected to maintain the property and prevented others from caring for the land and the community with SLAPP suits and threats of arrest? Is UC ready to tell the history of how an educational institution that was chartered to provide free and public education to every Californian became a “research university” that has been privatized by corporations and war profiteers? Shall we tell the history of how UC has continued to increase the number of students and manipulated the housing market to ensure that the cost of housing yields huge profits for developers and landlords and forces marginalized and poor people out of Berkeley?

Imagine someone destroying your home, your community, or your sacred space and then asking for your “input” on how they tell the story of your destruction? Would you help your destroyer write your epitaph? We refuse. We who love the park and have served our community for years declare definitively that we will NOT help you whitewash history and THE STRUGGLE CONTINUES!

People’s Park Council, August 17, 2024

Posted on

PRESS RELEASE: Farewell, Carol Christ

For Immediate Release
July 23, 2024

Contact: Harvey Smith, peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com, 510-684-0414

Many fluff pieces have been celebrating the tenure of Carol Christ as chancellor of UC Berkeley, particularly extolling her fundraising prowess. However, there is a dark side to her seven years at the helm, chief among them her obsession with People’s Park, which according to a former Berkeley mayor began decades ago.

Obviously the relationship between UC and People’s Park over its long history has not been an easy one; it has veered from uneasy accommodation to outright antagonism. However, there were times when a positive future for the park could have been assured as an internationally-recognized asset to Berkeley and the university.

According to former UCB Vice Chancellor for Real Estate, Bob Lalanne, who left his position in 2016, building on People’s Park was off the table, and in fact there were proposals considered to improve it and make it more inviting for the entire community. This was reversed when Carol Christ took the helm in 2017, and as statements indicate it became her vanity project. A recent L.A. Times article stated she “is proud of her relentless efforts to build housing at Berkeley’s iconic People’s Park.” She also repeated in the article some of the misinformation that she and her PR flak Dan Mogulof have been spewing about the park. Early this year she also told the Times that the park’s “redevelopment” will go down as “one of the most important things I’ve done.”

Besides the misinformation, Christ and Mogulof have committed major acts of omission, never mentioning the park’s listing on the National Register of Historic Places and its recognition by the country’s leading preservation organization, the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Likewise the anti-environmental act of destroying a park with its many redwoods, oaks and other trees brings to mind the attitude of Ronald Reagan who stated, “If you’ve seen one redwood tree, you’ve seen them all.”

Carol Christ will go down in the annals of history arm-in-arm with Ronald Reagan, who formulated the original attack on the park, the invasion of Berkeley by the National Guard, and the killing and maiming perpetrated by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office.

People’s Park was created after the Civil Rights and Free Speech Movements in the midst of the Vietnam Anti-War movement and preceded the first Earth Day. It is tied to and symbolizes all these movements. We can only wonder what possessed Chancellor Christ to recently speak in conversation about Free Speech with Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush’s Secretary of State, champion of the Iraq War and accused war criminal. Was this another snub to the history of the park?

Park supporters have outlived the tenure of Christ as chancellor, but the UC machine will keep moving to acquire more property in Berkeley with disregard for our city’s historic properties and the housing displacement caused by its increasing enrollment.

People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group, the People’s Park Committee, and many others have pointed out why the People’s Park construction project is an avoidable bad idea. Those many reasons will not be repeated here, but it is clear that the project was never about housing but about destroying the park and its historic legacy. If constructed on an alternative site, it would be nearly completed by now.

The inappropriate location of the project and the resultant delays have wasted millions of dollars of public funds due to increasing construction costs, legal and police costs, and the shipping container wall with razor wire. This money could have been better spent in so many ways, chief among them increasing the budget for returning the Native American remains and artifacts hoarded by Cal and legally mandated by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act passed by Congress over thirty years ago.

We are not alone in our criticism of UC corporate-like expansion and its façade of social concern. Book length critiques can be found in Tony Platt’s The Scandal of Cal and Christopher Newfield’s The Great Mistake. Likewise Davarian Baldwin’s book In the Shadow of the Ivory Tower analyzes universities’ growth, resulting gentrification, policing, and monetization schemes.

We honor fact-based research and support social justice. We think of these as values that should be associated with UC Berkeley. Therefore, it is disappointing in the extreme when UC Berkeley behaves like a greedy and abusive corporation without a conscience, but with a big budget for public relations and legal representation.

Long Live People’s Park!

Posted on

Response to Chancellor Lyons from People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group

July 9, 2024

Dear Chancellor Lyons:

We are disappointed that you will not meet with us. Your predecessor also never deemed it necessary to meet with those who support the preservation of People’s Park. Because she was not able to achieve total destruction of the park before she left her position, you will inherit that distinction. We do not know how aware you are of the background that led us to this point, but we’d like to explain that like the Free Speech Movement and other controversial issues at Cal, the battle for People’s Park will not disappear once the heavy equipment rolls onto the site.

Despite the misstatements by Dan Mogulof regarding the “strong support” manufactured for the project, our Open Letter, which the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group began circulating in 2021, stands in stark contrast. Many have signed on since, and many other supporters have joined in the effort to protect People’s Park. The nearly 150 signatures on the Open Letter include Berkeley residents, UCB professors, three former Berkeley mayors, three former Berkeley city councilmembers, many former Berkeley commissioners, Cal alumni and students, attorneys, architects, historians and many others who are concerned about the threatened destruction of People’s Park.

Additionally, several student groups support preservation of People’s Park – Pay Your Workers Campaign, Historic Preservation Club, Cal ACLU, and Suitcase Clinic. Add to that, two resolutions from the ASUC opposing destruction of the park, the Berkeley Faculty Association’s questioning of the project, and the many editorials in support of the park in the Daily Cal. Support has also come from the country’s leading preservation organization – The National Trust for Historic Preservation.

These park advocates are clearly not the profile of “privileged NIMBY neighbors” claimed by the UC administration. They have all recognized a particularly bad plan when so many viable alternative sites for student housing are available. UC has given the community the false choice of having either a park or a dorm when we can have both.

Respecting the State Supreme Court decision is difficult if one understands that AB 1307 undercut park proponents’ win in the State Court of Appeal. AB 1307 was nothing more than a sweetheart, backroom deal concocted by Assemblyperson Buffy Wicks. She had absolutely no contact with the plaintiffs in the court case or with any park proponents in the district she purportedly represents. There were no legislative committee hearings that aired arguments on the bill, pro and con. The bill can only be described as a piece of special interest legislation with the special interest being none other than UC.

This outcome is disappointing because the nonprofit, community-based organizations were only asking for a public process under the California Environmental Quality Act. The Court of Appeal clearly saw that UC pursued a private process in determining it had no alternative other than to build on People’s Park. Our groups hired legal representation at great expense to advocate for transparency from UC. We played by the rules, and when UC did not like the outcome, it got the rules changed.

This begs the question – Is the project about student housing or about destroying the park? This is particularly evident when the millions of wasted dollars of public funds are considered due to delays, legal and police costs, and the shipping container wall with razor wire.

In order to meet its housing goal, UCB has claimed that it wants to build as much student housing as soon as possible. However, as an indication of its outrageously poor planning to reach the goal, UCB chose People’s Park as Housing Project #2 and then admitted early on that it would certainly experience delays due to the controversial nature of the project. Anchor House, Housing Project # 1, is nearly completed. If any of the many alternative sites had been chosen for Housing Project #2, it would likewise be nearly complete.

Cal touts that 1.7 acres of the park would remain open space after development. However, the increasingly densely populated Southside needs probably at least three times the acreage of People’s Park to meet urban green space standards at the international, national, state or city level. Stripping much-needed open space from students and the community is particularly perverse because it is unnecessary. We also know that beyond the ever-growing borders of the Cal campus there is still a “Berkeley community.”

Cal states it has “secured housing vouchers from the City of Berkeley for this project” neglecting to explain that housing vouchers come from the federal Housing and Urban Development voucher program. Vouchers would only be available if UC completed an environmental impact report in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, a requirement UC refused for its original supportive housing project. Since UC has destroyed a site on the National Register of Historic Places, this will likely be a major deterrent for any potential nonprofit housing developer.

Not only are the proposed buildings out-of-keeping with the area, they overshadow a National Landmark (Bernard Maybeck’s First Church), a building by famed architect Julia Morgan, the Anna Head complex by the founding member of Berkeley’s Ratcliff architectural dynasty, and many other historic structures that surround People’s Park.

The university claims to honor the historic importance of the park but does so by destroying a place that is an official city landmark, recognized by the State Historic Resources Commission. And People’s Park is also listed on the federal government’s National Register of Historic Places as a site of such national importance that it’s worthy of preservation. So UC’s idea of honoring this historic place is to destroy it.

Chancellor Lyon, inviting us to give “input and ideas regarding planning” for commemoration of the park would make us complicit in UC’s perpetration of the death and wounding of park protectors, the tremendous waste of millions of dollars in delays due to inappropriate siting of the project, and the delay of the construction of much needed student and supportive housing .

Many who consider themselves part of the Cal family honor fact-based research and support social justice. We think of these values as having been strengthened by experiences at Berkeley. Therefore, it pains most Cal-affiliated people when UC Berkeley behaves like a greedy and abusive corporation without a conscience, but with a big budget for public relations and legal representation.

Obviously corporations can make expensive miscalculations, e.g., Ford’s Edsel. UC campuses likewise have made costly planning errors, e.g., UCSB’s “Dormzilla.” However, both of these mistakes were recognized and the projects were terminated. Harm only comes when a bad decision is stubbornly sustained at the cost of institutional integrity.

Yes, this project has been well underway due to Carol Christ’s efforts, but you will inherit the mantle of the person who implemented it. If any of these details are unclear or need further elaboration, we would be happy to explain. We understand you delegating to Dan Mogulof a reply to our request for a meeting. However, we would deeply appreciate a personal reply to the critical issues raised in this letter.

Sincerely,

Harvey Smith, BA ’67, MPH, ’84, UC Berkeley
President, People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group
peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com, 510-684-0414

Posted on

The False Narrative of People’s Park

by the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group

An analysis of the nonfactual presentation in UC Berkeley’s flyer “A Renewed People’s Park for All” reveals the irrationality of the People’s Park project and the venality of UCB administration in pursuing it. This is amplified by the undercutting of park proponents’ win in the State Court of Appeal by AB 1307 and its subsequent impact on the recent State Supreme Court decision reversing that win.

Moreover, an immediate concern is whether UC has done an adequate archeological investigation of the park. Given a recent official filing with the Northwest Information Center of the State Office of Historic Preservation showing evidence of Native American artifacts in or near the park, UC should present information to the public describing what steps it has taken to ascertain it will not continue its long history of destruction of historic Native sites, graves and objects.

AB 1307 was nothing more than a sweetheart, backroom deal concocted by Assemblyperson Buffy Wicks. She had absolutely no contact with the plaintiffs in the court case or with any park proponents in the district she purportedly represents. There were no legislative committee hearings to air arguments on the bill, either pro or con. The bill can only be described as a piece of special interest legislation with the special interest being none other than UC.

This outcome is disappointing because the nonprofit, community-based organizations were only asking for a public process under the California Environmental Quality Act. The Court of Appeal clearly saw that UC pursued a private process in determining it had no alternative other than to build on People’s Park. Our groups hired legal representation at great expense to advocate for transparency from UC. They played by the rules, and when UC did not like the outcome, it got the rules changed.

This begs the question – Is the project about student housing or about destroying the park? This is particularly evident when the millions of wasted dollars of public funds are considered due to delays, legal and police costs, and the shipping container wall with razor wire.

In order to meet its housing goal, UCB has claimed that it wants to build as much student housing as soon as possible. However, as an indication of its outrageously poor planning to reach the goal, UCB chose People’s Park as Housing Project #2 and then admitted early on that it would certainly experience delays due to the controversial nature of the project. Anchor House, Housing Project # 1, is nearly completed. If any of the many alternative sites had been chosen for Housing Project #2, it would likewise be nearly complete.

Cal claims extensive public engagement and input on the project. However, it was only earlier this year that teach-ins were held on campus that included student groups, faculty and community groups that provided an open and balanced analysis of what it would mean to destroy People’s Park. In 2021, People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group circulated an Open Letter with nearly 150 signatures that includes Berkeley residents, UCB professors, three former Berkeley mayors, three former Berkeley city councilmembers, many former Berkeley commissioners, Cal alumni and students, attorneys, architects, historians and many others who are concerned about the threatened destruction of People’s Park. Their representative views were never considered by campus administration.

Additionally, several student groups support preservation of People’s Park – Pay Your Workers Campaign, Historic Preservation Club, Cal ACLU, and Suitcase Clinic. Add to that, two resolutions from the ASUC opposing destruction of the park, the Berkeley Faculty Association’s questioning of the project, and the many editorials in support of the park in the Daily Cal. Support has also come from the country’s leading preservation organization – The National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Cal touts that 1.7 acres of the park would remain open space after development. However, the increasingly densely populated Southside needs probably at least three times the acreage of People’s Park to meet urban green space standards at the international, national, state or city level. Stripping much-needed open space from students and the community is particularly perverse because it is unnecessary.

Cal states it has “secured housing vouchers from the City of Berkeley for this project” neglecting to explain that housing vouchers come from the federal Housing and Urban Development voucher program. Vouchers would only be available if UC completed an environmental impact report in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, a requirement UC refused for its original supportive housing project. Since UC has destroyed a site on the National Register of Historic Places, this will likely be a major deterrent for any potential nonprofit housing developer.

Not only are the proposed buildings out-of-keeping with the area, they overshadow a National Landmark (Bernard Maybeck’s First Church), a building by famed architect Julia Morgan, the Anna Head complex by the founding member of Berkeley’s Ratcliff architectural dynasty, and many other historic structures that surround People’s Park.

The university claims to honor the historic importance of the park but does so by destroying a place that is an official city landmark, recognized by the State Historic Resources Commission. And People’s Park is also listed on the federal government’s National Register of Historic Places as a site of such national importance that it’s worthy of preservation. So UC’s idea of honoring this historic place is to destroy it.

Many who consider themselves part of the Cal family honor fact-based research and support social justice. We think of these values as having been strengthened by experiences at Berkeley. Therefore, it pains most Cal-affiliated people when UC Berkeley behaves like a greedy and abusive corporation without a conscience.

Corporations can make expensive miscalculations, e.g., Ford’s Edsel. UC campuses likewise have made costly planning errors, e.g., UCSB’s “Dormzilla.” However, both of these mistakes were recognized and the projects were terminated. Harm only comes when a bad decision is stubbornly sustained at the cost of institutional integrity.

Learn about The People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group and make a donation here.
https://www.peoplesparkhxdist.org/donate-now/

Posted on

People’s Park Last Stand? The Struggle Continues! Save the Heart and Soul of Berkeley – Panel Discussion, June 19, 2024

The Struggle Continues! Save The Park!
PANEL DISCUSSION
June 19, 2024, 7pm
1939 Addison Street, Berkeley

Featured Speakers Include:
Jovanka Beckles – State Senate Candidate
Joe Liesner – People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group
Margot Smith – State Assembly Candidate
Moni Law – Affordable Housing and Police Accountability Activist
Jonah Gottlieb – office of District 7 Councilmember Lunaparra
Aidan Hill – Longtime People’s Park Gardener

Video of the Panel Discussion
https://fb.watch/sQvoIa2bEY/?mibextid=cr9u03

This event is available in person and via Zoom link
Join Zoom Meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81963341496
Meeting ID: 819 6334 1496

Join us for a panel discussion and community meeting to confront the impending UC destruction of Berkeley’s most iconic landmark. Speakers will expose state manipulation of the housing market, suppression of information about the archeological significance of People’s Park, collusion of elected leaders in the theft of the land and discuss the legally required and urgent need for open space in the Southside area.

People’s Park supporters cry “Foul!” in response to the California State Supreme Court’s recent ruling to allow the University of California (UC) to destroy the park. We pledge to continue the fight to save it.

Native American site of significance: People’s Park sits in Huichin, the name given the land by indigenous inhabitants of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan (local Ohlone nation). Derby Creek, which ran through the Park site, was filled in and culverted about 1901. The creek’s location suggests that an indigenous village was located in this area, and that significantly more recent remains or artifacts could be found during excavation. This would be grounds for another California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) challenge to UC’s construction plan. Many have suggested UC cede the Park to the Sogorea Te Land Trust as part of rematriation of lands lost to settler colonialism. UC “owns” the most real estate in California, all stolen from indigenous peoples. Adding insult to injury, after decades of struggling to fulfill commitments to more easterly native peoples, the US government refused to recognize any tribes in California so it would not have to provide any previously promised benefits, minimal as they were.

Desperately needed open space: Although the park has served as a place of last resort for unhoused and poor people, what the community desperately needs is open park space. Reducing People’s Park violates Berkeley’s Measure L, passed in 1986, which requires preservation and maintenance of the public parks and open space which exist in Berkeley, and acquisition of more open space in neighborhoods having less than the minimum amount of open space relative to population. People’s Park is the only public green space in the densely populated Council District 7, often referred to as Southside. It has served as refuge for many immigrants, starting with African-Americans in the 60’s and 70’s.

Historical Legacy: People’s Park was officially listed on the National Register of Historic Places on May 24, 2022, recognized in the letter of designation “as nationally significant for its association with student protests and countercultural activities during the 1960s.” In addition to this over half-century legacy of political and cultural events, the historical, architectural and environmental assets of this irreplaceable open space include a bio system of flora and fauna and a surround of highly significant architecture. Despite this, the current University administration remains intent on destroying the Park as one more part of making Berkeley unlivable for most.

Corrupt decision: UC has tried to avoid or undermine the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process for its proposed People’s Park housing project. When noise impact was identified as a likely disqualifier, it sought and won a special exception via having the Legislature amend CEQA to allow UC to proceed. UC is making profit from student housing while there is NO actual low-income housing to help the displaced people. There are over 3,000 vacant units in Berkeley, many held off-market for speculation. And hundreds of dorm rooms are vacant due to the high price. UC plans to increase enrollment by 20,000 students over the next decade, with no agreement from the City or its residents, who will suffer most.

People’s Park Community
We Ain’t Going Anywhere!

Posted on

PRESS RELEASE: Delay in Revealing Potential Findings of Native American Significance in the Vicinity of People’s Park

For Immediate Release
May 12, 2024

Contact: Harvey Smith, peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com, 510-684-0414

People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group and Make UC A Good Neighbor submitted on April 29, 2024 a Public Records Act (PRA) request to UC Berkeley due to the recent registration of a Native American site adjacent to People’s Park (listed on the National Register of Historic Places). UCB hasn’t disclosed any of the information about this site. Results of any subsequent investigation, subsequent discussions, or writings about it within UCB have not been shared with the public. 

In response to the PRA request on May 7, 2024, UC Berkeley acknowledged it was holding responsive documents, but did not plan to produce this potentially highly significant information for 10 weeks. 

There is urgency in the request because UCB is awaiting a State Supreme Court decision that could come at any day allowing initiation of construction at People’s Park. Before any construction begins at the park, the nature of the Native American site must be determined by appropriate and thorough archeological investigative techniques and testing.

Within the immediate vicinity of People’s Park, the Native American site was recently registered at the California Historical Resources Information System’s Northwest Information Center (NWIC). The site location is said to be within about one block from People’s Park, deemed to be sizable and significant, containing important habitation and dating evidence not found in any other Berkeley site. 

There may be other Native American sites, including burials, close to People’s Park that have records submitted and are awaiting assignment numbers at the NWIC.  

The potential that the People’s Parks site holds cultural remains and information not found in any other Berkeley site is most credible. The open landscape of the park affords a unique opportunity to explore not only the potential for on-site and immediate resources, including burial sites, adjacent to a flowing creek (Derby Creek), but also an opportunity to incorporate, predict, and understand the wider area. The site could be vitally important to understanding the Ohlone history in Berkeley and the East Bay.  

Finding a native site near the park wouldn’t prevent the university’s needed housing project from being built, since there are several alternative university-owned sites, including one just a block and a half from the park, on which the project could be located.

– – –

Posted on

People’s Park National Trust Letter – December 22, 2023

National Trust for Historic Preservation®

December 22, 2023

Harvey Smith
People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group
P.O. Box 1234
Berkeley, CA 74701-1234

Re: People’s Park, Berkeley, CA, and Make UC a Good Neighbor v. Regents of the University of California, No. S279242

Dear Mr. Smith,

The National Trust for Historic Preservation (“National Trust”) wishes to express our support for the preservation of historic People’s Park in Berkeley, California. People’s Park is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as nationally significant for its association with student protests and countercultural activities during the 1960s. The National Register of Historic Places is fundamentally a land-use planning tool that is intended to help prevent the loss of and harm to historic resources, and People’s Park’s inclusion on it should encourage just such a positive outcome. The National Trust is committed to advocating for significant historic places like People’s Park, and we hope that our support helps emphasize the national significance of People’s Park and the importance of exploring all possible opportunities for its preservation.

The National Trust was chartered by Congress in 1949 as a private charitable, educational, and nonprofit organization to “facilitate public participation” in historic preservation, and to further the purposes of federal historic preservation laws. See 54 U.S.C. § 312102(a). With over one million members and supporters, the National Trust works to protect significant historic places and to advocate for historic preservation as a fundamental value in programs and policies at all levels of government. In addition, the Chairman of the National Trust has been designated by Congress as a member of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (“ACHP”), which is responsible for overseeing federal agency compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, id. §§ 304101(8), 304108(a).

One of the National Trust’s core areas of advocacy is the defense of local, state, and federal historic preservation laws. We understand that the People’s Park Historic Advocacy Group is currently involved in a lawsuit challenging, among other things, the inadequate analysis of alternatives under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The National Trust wishes to express our support for the full exploration of all potential alternatives that result in the preservation of People’s Park. The exploration of alternatives is a core protection provided to historic places by CEQA. For projects that are not dependent on a single location, such as the proposed construction of student housing, a robust alternatives analysis can often identify superior win-win solutions that allow both preservation and new construction. We hope that just such a solution can be identified that enables both the construction of new student housing in Berkeley and the preservation of People’s Park.

The National Trust would be happy to work with the People’s Park Historic Advocacy Group to help envision historic preservation opportunities at People’s Park and to advocate for its preservation. People’s Park is a unique historic place that is integral to the story of both Berkeley and the nation, and the National Trust supports the work that the Advocacy Group is doing to prevent its destruction. Please feel free to share this expression of our support in any way that may be helpful, and we look forward to continuing to work with your organization.

Sincerely,

Rob Nieweg
Senior Vice-President
Preservation Services & Outreach

Elizabeth S. Merritt
Deputy General Counsel

Chris Cody
Associate General Counsel

600 14th Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005
E law@savingplaces.org P 202.588.6035 F 202.588.6038 SavingPlaces.org

View the PDF version of the letter

Posted on

Lawsuit Update, November 22, 2022

On PROGRESS (or lack thereof) in the Matter of MAKE UC A GOOD NEIGHBOR, PEOPLE’S PARK HISTORICAL DISTRICT ADVOCACY GROUP, and PEOPLE’S PARK COUNCIL vs. BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR JESSE ARREGUIN, CITY OF BERKELEY, and REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA d.b.a. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY, Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG21105966:

Our lawsuit on behalf of three (3) People’s Park groups commenced over a year ago, August 2, 2021, as a Petition for Writ of Mandate against the Berkeley City Council and Mayor for violation of the California open-meeting law (the Ralph M. Brown Act) and for violation of certain laws, including Berkeley Measure L and Measure N (true copies of which are attached to this email message).

Berkeley Measure L and Measure N (PDF)

The case, originally a Petition against the City Defendants, has now morphed essentially into a Complaint for Breach of Contract against the University of California (“UC”).

Under the purview of Hon. Frank Roesch, an Alameda Superior Court judge, People’s Park’s pleadings have now been amended four (4) times in response to demurrers and other motions designed to defeat the people’s efforts to challenge the Berkeley City Council and Mayor’s secret agreement with UC, a deal by which the City corruptly colluded with UC to sell out the public interest in controlling overcrowding, in receiving equitable compensation for City services, in maintaining low-income housing, and in preserving parks and open space within the City limits, most notably, People’s Park.

On behalf of People’s Park Council and the two other non-profit community groups, I filed the 4th Amended Petition and Complaint on November 17, 2022, and directed a copy to David M. Robinson, Chief Campus Counsel for UC Berkeley. I then appeared before Judge Frank Roesch the following morning in a Zoom hearing for Case Management and Compliance. The next Case Management Conference is set for February 3, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 17.

The current incarnation of this People’s Park lawsuit, namely the 4th Amended Petition and Complaint, largely consists of an action against the Regents of the University of California (UC) alleging breach of contact. Specifically, UC breached multiple agreements with People’s Park Council and with the founding Park gardening group, People’s Park Project/ Native Plant Forum, agreements that date back as far as 1978 and 1979.

At least two (2) of these agreements were written and signed by representatives for People’s Park and the UC Berkeley campus administration, the Letter of Agreement dated May 8, 1978, and the Letter of Understanding, dated January 5, 1979. Some of the other agreements, both written and verbal, expressed and implied, were described in an open letter dated August 31, 1979, from Associate Vice Chancellor T. E. “Ted” Chenoweth to his boss, Vice Chancellor R. F. “Bob” Kerley. True copies of all three (3) contractual “Letters” are attached to this email message.

3 Letters of Agreement – University of California, Berkeley Campus Chancellor’s Office and the People’s Park Project/Native Plant Forum (PDF)

UC had systematically breached its solemn agreements with People’s Park organizations for many years, even before the most recent wanton and tragic acts of destruction, especially those wrought last summer, 2022. We will pursue the ongoing action for breach of contract, as well as planning to claim property damages in a separate proceeding.

Breach of contract may not be a crime, it’s true, but destruction of property and vandalism ARE indeed crimes. UC has wantonly and brazenly acted to destroy People’s Park, harming and killing trees, shrubs, wildlife habitat, and many other landscape features, including damage to the ramp for the People’s Stage.

These living items belong to the people, by and through the People’s Park organizations and volunteers who created them, bought and paid for them, installed and planted them. These items were and are NOT the property of UC or the Campus Administration. The People’s Park agreements that UC has violated are proof of UC’s knowledge, intent, and malice that underlie their recent wave of senseless damage, destruction, and desecration.

UC has willfully stifled and vandalized the fruits of our creativity. UC has also heartlessly employed unfortunate social ills and challenges, such as homelessness and drug use, as a cynical weapon to discredit and defame People’s Park and the Park community, blaming the victim for the very problems of neglect that UC has fostered and focussed upon the sacred ground of People’s Park.

With unity, persistence and love, we can hold UC accountable for these wrongs, and commence the process of transforming the Berkeley campus administration from a purveyor of public corruption and higher ignorance, into an institution of higher learning and public cooperation.

Wishing good luck and a happy holiday to all,

David

DAVID L. AXELROD,
Attorney at Law

Documents:

Berkeley Measure L and Measure N (PDF)

3 Letters of Agreement – University of California, Berkeley Campus Chancellor’s Office and the People’s Park Project/Native Plant Forum (PDF)

Posted on

Opinion: Breaking the impasse on People’s Park

This statement is published at:
https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/01/10/opinion-peoples-park-student-housing-alternate-site

We suggest UC Berkeley commence construction of the student and supportive housing planned for the park on an alternate site as soon as possible.

By Shirley Dean and Gus Newport
Jan. 10, 2023, 8:01 a.m.

Although UC Berkeley has stated it wants to build 8,000 student housing beds as soon as possible, the university has picked a site, knowing it would be vigorously opposed, and now has caused months of delay. We suggest it commence construction of the student and supportive housing planned for People’s Park on an alternate site as soon as possible. Indeed, UCB has identified up to 15 alternative sites.

The National Register of Historic Places has recognized the value of People’s Park. The park has an over half-century legacy of cultural events; town, gown and political events; a biosystem of flora and fauna; a surround of highly significant architecture; and a role as an everyday community recreation site.

UC has been defeated in the courts in many of the California Environmental Quality Act challenges to its campus development plans. These court decisions have made it clear that UCB is not doing an adequate job of identifying and mitigating the impacts of its development in Berkeley.

Additionally, UC’s reckless demolition of most of the historic trees in People’s Park on Aug. 3 has threatened a key element of the HUD funding for the supportive housing portion of the project due to the lack of agreement to do the required federal environmental review, thus putting that project in jeopardy.

UCB’s almost 50% increase in enrollment (almost 15,000 students) means that the Southside of Berkeley desperately needs the open space of People’s Park. Based on the city’s recent population growth, concentrated in the areas nearest the campus, and the city’s standard of 2 acres of park and open space per 1,000 residents, the Southside neighborhoods need approximately 18 acres of new, accessible open space.

City planners agree increasingly dense urban areas need more parks, not fewer. Furthermore, the park is needed as a shelter during earthquakes, fires and pandemics – Berkeley will face them all again.

Now is the time to develop a feasible plan of action based on cooperation between the state, the University of California and Berkeley residents who host its flagship campus.

The park’s future should include proper maintenance, user development, and interpretation to provide Berkeley residents and visitors with information on all aspects of People’s Park — Berkeley’s incredible architectural legacy and the political and cultural history of activism on the Southside. Like other parks, it should become a welcoming recreation resource for anyone in the community – housed or unhoused city residents, students, and visitors of all backgrounds and income levels.

Both the city of Berkeley and UC Berkeley celebrate the Free Speech and Sixties history of the Telegraph Avenue corridor. It is an asset to the city and the university and draws visitors from around the globe to Berkeley. Preserving and enhancing the park can only add to its value as a treasured Berkeley attraction.

With the park’s permanence assured, its future could evolve in collaboration with the People’s Park Council, the long-standing consensus-based group of stewards and advocates for the park, with California Indian tribes, and with a land trust or conservancy. Financing for this vision could be through federal or state funds for parks.

Whatever future model is adopted for People’s Park, it is clear that the plan to destroy the park and the possibility of continuing conflict between park users and the university are neither desirable nor inevitable. Community members can develop a partnership with an enlightened public agency to preserve and enhance People’s Park in a way that honors its culture and heritage and provides valuable open space for the Southside neighborhood. With goodwill and hard work, this future is possible.

Shirley Dean and Gus Newport are former mayors of the city of Berkeley.

Posted on

Appeal Filed to Preserve People’s Park!

Make UC A Good Neighbor and the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group (PPHDAG) filed their joint opening brief to the appellate court this week against UC Berkeley under the California Environmental Quality Act challenging UC’s Long Range Development Plan and construction of housing on People’s Park.

We’ve said it before, but this excellent legal work needs to be supported. Please refer any and all to our DONATE NOW! page at http://www.peoplesparkhxdist.org/donate-now/

The appeal focuses on UC’s failure to analyze in its Environmental Impact Report (EIR) a lower-enrollment alternative or any alternative locations for the housing proposed at People’s Park. The lower-enrollment issue is similar to that at UC Santa Barbara, where the City of Goleta and Santa Barbara County have both sued the university for not complying with an agreement to build enough housing to keep up with its expanding student population. With the alternative location issue, UC is required to adequately assess alternative sites for student housing, which it has not done.

UC has twenty days to reply to our appeal brief. However, be assured UC Berkeley will continue its cynical and misleading public relations campaign on Housing Project #2 (People’s Park) belied by UC’s own planning documents. The goal is building 8,000 new student beds. However, UCB’s own Draft EIR includes a chart listing sixteen possible construction sites and proposed new beds provided by them. They total 13,566. The 1,100 hundred beds at the People’s Park site could easily be accommodated at these other sites.

The prime alternative site is just over a block away at the UC-owned Ellsworth Parking Structure, which UC says can provide up to 2,980 beds. Preserve a parking lot over a park’s much-needed urban recreational space? Why in the midst of extreme climate change must the trees and birds be part of a sacrifice zone? Urban planners agree that overcrowded urban areas like the Southside require more urban parks, not less, to promote human health and wellness and are needed in a time of drought, wildfires, pandemics and pending earthquakes.

Despite UCB’s claims of support, its student survey has been negatively critiqued in the Daily Cal, which has also written many well-researched articles and editorials denouncing the destruction of the park. Students were the primary participants in the recent effort to stop the fencing off the park. The Berkeley Faculty Association is also a critic of the plan to build on People’s Park.

UCB has described the housing crisis as “dire” and “acute.” We all realize that more affordable housing is needed, but most new housing is market rate and beyond the means of most students and the community. The crisis, however, can hardly be described as “acute” by UC Berkeley when it has known about its low ratio of housing per student for well over a half-century.

Campus messages portraying People’s Park as an area of frequent crime on the Southside is quickly countered by facts. A review of data from the Crimemapping website over a six-month period from January through June, 2022 for a 20-block area surrounding the park revealed that 94% of crime occurred outside of People’s Park. Crimes do occur there, but at a lower rate than the surrounding neighborhood. Keep in mind that the promoter of the image of the park as “crime-ridden” is the same institution that was fined $2.35 million in 2020 for underreporting campus crime.

The Chancellor’s message to the campus at the beginning of the semester was noteworthy in that it made absolutely no mention of People’s Park being added to the National Register of Historic Places. The value of the park as a cultural and historic site is beyond Berkeley, beyond California. It is nationally recognized and sought out by visitors from all over the world.

Now is the time for UC Berkeley to stop the delay in student housing construction by moving Project #2 to an appropriate location and to work with the community to make People’s Park a park that all can be proud of. The world is watching.

— Harvey Smith, People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group
http://www.peoplesparkhxdist.org/donate-now/