Posted on

Press Release: Wicks legislation may kill Berkeley low income housing project

Press Release: Wicks legislation may kill Berkeley low income housing project
Date: August 23, 2023

For Immediate Release

Contact: Harvey Smith, People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group, 510-684-0414, peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com

State Assembly Member Buffy Wicks (D, East Bay), a vocal backer of housing for the poor and unhoused, has introduced a bill that may likely kill a supportive housing project for the homeless proposed by UC Berkeley on People’s Park, a federally recognized historic site listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Federal law generally bans the use of Federal funds on housing projects proposed on National Historic sites unless the developer submits to an extensive Federal review, including consideration of alternative sites. UC Berkeley has declined to participate in this process, so HUD has determined at this time that federal funds would not be available for the project

Harvey Smith, president of the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group, said
“We have urged UC to use an alternative site, just one block away, that would accommodate both the student housing and the supportive housing, and which would be eligible for Federal funding with no need for a Federal review. This would be a win-win solution for the university and the community.”

The university’s Project #2 plans to construct about 1000 units of student housing and more than 100 units of supportive housing for low income people in Berkeley’s People’s Park, site of one of the major social, political, and cultural conflicts of the 1960s. The park, owned by the university, has remained public open space since 1972.

Construction is currently blocked by a California State Appeals Court decision in a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs who favor building the project on a more appropriate university owned site. The court required the university to seriously consider more than a dozen alternative properties, and the university has appealed the decision to the State Supreme Court. The non-profit chosen by the university to build the supportive housing has dropped out of the project and no replacement developer has been named. Generally, long term supportive housing projects require a significant level of Federal funding

Wicks’ bill, AB1307, attempts to allow the university to build the project in People’s Park without considering alternatives. The park is an official historical landmark, recognized by both the Berkeley City and California State governments. It is also on the National Register of Historic Places, a list established by federal law to designate sites of such national historical importance that they deserve preservation.

Supporters of Peoples Park have urged UC to move the project to the decrepit Channing parking structure, a 1.7 acre university property located just one block west of the park. It’s now occupied by a sixty-year-old parking structure that must be taken down for seismic reasons. The university has designated the site for eventual student housing but has no specific project or designated funding for that purpose.

Harvey Smith said, “We urge Wicks to drop her amendment and urge the university to build the project in an appropriate alternative location. This would assure the construction of both much-needed student and supportive housing. And it would preserve an invaluable historic resource, consistent with federal preservation policy. Finally it would also preserve the only public open space in Berkeley’s most densely populated neighborhood.”

Posted on

Revitalizing our People’s Park in Berkeley

A misguided disaster struck People’s Park and many trees dear to us were chopped down, killed. We will continue to revitalize the park with resources anyone can contribute.

The dryness in summer is hurting trees, bushes, community gardens with flowers, herbs and vegetables, and happens when UC keeps the water turned off. Park gardeners do what they can in transporting water bucket by bucket. Please contact us if you are able to help out. Every bucket makes a difference, and it can be a great group activity if you get your friends together to do a bucket brigade. Send us photos to post when you do this!

photos from August 4, 2022

Posted on

People’s Park 54th Anniversary, music, speakers, green space gathering, Sunday, April 23, 2023, 11 AM to 7 PM

People's Park 54th Anniversary poster illustration of people gathering to celebrate the park

People’s Park 54th Anniversary
(in memory of Michael Delacour)
Sunday, April 23, 2023, 11 AM to 7 PM

Climate Event, Yukon Hannibal and Drummers, Welcome by Eddie and talk about Michael, Jordan Huez, Speakers, Hali Hammer and Randy Berge, Max Ventura, dress, and George Franklin, Marika Sage, Speakers, Moth Morgue, Speakers – Aidan Hill, Cheryl Davila, others, Driftwood Dave duo, Speakers – Alan Haber, Odile Hugonot, others, Evelie Delfino Såles Posch, Carol Denney, Speakers, Afterthought, Andrea Mallis, astrologer, FiLTHMiLK, Speakers – Russell Bates and others, Andrea Prichett group, Speakers, Jazmin, Speakers, Gurschach, Closing

11:00-12:00: Climate Event
12:00-12:30: Yukon Hannibal and Drummers
12:30-12:40: Welcome by Eddie and talk about Michael
12:40-12:55: Jordan Huez
12:55-1:10: Speakers
1:10-1:25: Evelie Delfino Såles Posch
1:25-1:35: Max Ventura, dress, and George Franklin
1:35-1:50: Marika Sage
1:50-2:05: Speakers
2:05-2:20: Moth Morgue
2:20-2:35: Speakers – Aidan Hill, Cheryl Davila, others
2:35-2:50: Driftwood Dave duo
2:50-3:05: Speakers – Alan Haber, Odile Hugonot, others
3:05-3:20: Hali Hammer and Randy Berge
3:20-3:35: Carol Denney
3:35-3:50: Speakers
3:50-4:05: Afterthought
4:05-4:15: Andrea Mallis, astrologer
4:15-4:45: FiLTHMiLK
4:45-5:00: Speakers – Russ and others
5:00-5:15: Andrea Prichett group
5:15-5:30: Speakers
5:30-6:00: Jazmin
6:00-6:15: Speakers
6:15-6:45: Gurschach
6:45-7:00: Closing

Download posters:

Poster (color) 54th Anniversary People’s Park, 2023, version 2
https://www.peoplespark.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/poster-54th-Anniversary-PeoplesPark-colorV2.jpg

Poster (black & white) 54th Anniversary People’s Park, 2023, version 2
https://www.peoplespark.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/poster-54th-Anniversary-PeoplesPark-bwV2.jpg

Please also come this related event:

Broad Community Meeting to Save the Park

We hope to see people from many organizations as we work toward long term stewardship and maintenance of the park in perpetuity. This is to build an inclusive community wide planning and working group to revitalize our park and to create a commons for all.

SATURDAY, APRIL 29, 1–4 PM
Community Meeting Room in Berkeley Central Library
2090 Kittredge Street, Berkeley, CA 94704

54th Anniversary Celebration: We are Peoples Park! Berkeley, CA

Posted by People's Park Community on Sunday, April 23, 2023
Posted on

Legal Update on People’s Park – January 12, 2023

On January 12, 2023 the Court of Appeal heard Oral Arguments on the CEQA case of Make UC a Good Neighbor and People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group VS the Regents of the University of California. There were not any points in the arguments of either side that were different than the briefs and supporting letters that had previously been submitted by the parties. The attorney/justices interaction was very interesting. The entire 82 minute hearing is at:

https://jcc.granicus.com/player/clip/3368?view_id=41&redirect=true&h=e8920a278fccbe9f40ea13a15f093f12

For us interested in preserving People’s Park as an open space in perpetuity the hearing is very reassuring. The UC lawyer tried to gain traction for their contention that the “revitalization” (read destruction) of the park was always the core goal of Housing Project #2 and therefore the Environmental Impact Report had no obligation to analyze other alternate sites for that housing because only by building on People’s Park could the project revitalize the park. Justice Burns was especially unaccepting of this claim and interrupted and contradicted their lawyer continuously. In short, it would be very surprising if we don’t win on the alternative site issue, which would mean the EIR has to be redone.

The other meaningful exchange was about the issue of noise. Our contention that Housing Project #2 would have a significant negative impact on noise levels in the neighborhood because of the common occurrence of student parties is being critiqued as a “social” impact as opposed to an environmental impact. UC claims that the burden of predicting, analyzing and mitigating for these kinds of social noise is discriminatory and that it will delay or stop new building projects. Even the Chief Justice Terri Jackson asked about the possibility of a new building for a church being made to analyze the effect of tambourine shaking.

Our lawyer made the point that noise is noise. He also made the point that the fair argument standard should be applied. Finally he noted that anti-discrimination law is an established means by which any environmental impact can be evaluated.

This question of whether social impacts should be included in CEQA suits is complex and can be looked at from many angles. It seem to be the way developers and their political allies are going to attempt to weaken or throw out CEQA.

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/

Posted on

Nationally significant People’s Park was officially listed on the National Register of Historic Places on May 24, 2022

To all our People’s Park Supporters:
We are very happy to report that after over two years of work we were able to send out this press release today. — Harvey Smith

For Immediate Release

For additional information:
Harvey Smith peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com
510-684-0414

(May 27, 2022) – Nationally significant People’s Park was officially listed on the National Register of Historic Places on May 24, 2022.

This designation underscores the historical, cultural, architectural and environmental assets of this irreplaceable open space. The park has an over half-century legacy of political and cultural events, a bio system of flora and fauna, and a surround of highly significant architecture.

This recognition follows being nominated unanimously by the California State Historical Resources Commission. People’s Park has played a key role as a gathering place for free speech during the decades of anti-war and civil rights struggles.

Former Berkeley Mayor Gus Newport commented that, “The stability of cities and towns is formed from the history of planning and participation of citizens. People’s Park very much reflects and proves this. People’s Park is very deserving of being on the National Register of Historic Places.”

However, the University of California plans to destroy the park despite its national significance. Harvey Smith, president of the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group, commented that, “Its planned destruction is unconscionable. The park’s importance is beyond a squabble in Berkeley or within California. It is a nationally recognized historic site.”

Smith suggests the park should be preserved so that its appearance and infrastructure are no different than any other park within the City of Berkeley or any green space within the UC Berkeley campus. This is entirely possible once the present homeless population of the park is relocated to housing as planned by the City of Berkeley and the University.

The ill-considered plan of UC Berkeley to build on the park should be scuttled because the university has many alternative sites for student housing. Chief among them is the Ellsworth Parking Structure, which is one block away from People’s Park. Keeping a parking lot and destroying a park is a totally irresponsible action in the age of extreme climate change. UC Berkeley’s plan to demolish Evans Hall to create open space on the campus should be matched by maintaining the open space of People’s Park in the community.

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 both the city and university, and among the reasons visitors from all parts of the globe are drawn to Berkeley. Recognizing People’s Park for the asset that it is and then preserving and enhancing it can only add to its value as a treasured Berkeley attraction.

The National Register of Historic Places is the official list of the Nation’s historic places worthy of preservation. Authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Park Service’s National Register of Historic Places is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect America’s historic and archeological resources.

More information on the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group can be found at peoplesparkhxdist.org.

Posted on

PRESS RELEASE – Community groups continue fight against secret, illegal agreement between the City of Berkeley and UC Berkeley

For Immediate Release

For Additional Information:
Harvey Smith, peoplesparkhxdist@gmail.com, 510.684.0414

(January 31, 2022) – A coalition of community groups filed a lawsuit to fight the secret, illegal agreement that the City of Berkeley signed with UC Berkeley — giving UC Berkeley a blank check for unfettered growth. The agreement, signed in July 2021, prevents the City of Berkeley from filing any further legal action against UC Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) and withdrew the city’s objection to the destruction of several historic buildings and to the eviction of tenants from their rent controlled homes.

Three community organizations — Make UC a Good Neighbor, People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group (PPHDAG) and People’s Park Council (PPC) — amended their Petition on January 20, 2022 that challenges the City of Berkeley’s agreement with UC Berkeley regarding their LRDP. The Petition alleges the vote on the agreement violates the requirements of the Brown Act, which mandates local government to conduct business at open and public meetings.

“The residents of Berkeley will be saddled with this onerous agreement long after the Mayor, Chancellor, City Council members and Regents are gone from their positions. The basic principles of open government have been shamelessly tossed aside for purposes of political expediency,” according to Harvey Smith, member of the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group.

The agreement prevents the city from taking legal action against the LRDP for the next 16 years. Although the city’s own analysis estimated UC Berkeley costs the city $21 million per year, the agreement will pay the city only $4.1 million per year, 20 cents on the dollar. Therefore, over the 16 years Berkeley taxpayers will be responsible for covering a deficit of over $250 million. Three other cities hosting UC campuses have negotiated much more favorable agreements, including the mandatory production of student housing.

The lawsuit cites the action of the Berkeley City Council to conclude “a secret agreement in closed session, never acknowledged, approved or disclosed in public session.” The Petition to the court also cites Measure L, an ordinance passed by Berkeley voters in 1986, which mandates “That wherever public parks and open space currently exist in Berkeley, such use shall continue and be funded at least to allow the maintenance of the present condition and services.” The agreement violates voter-approved Measure L by collaborating in the destruction of People’s Park, a user-developed and community-controlled open space in the South Campus area of Berkeley.

Additionally cited is Measure N, approved by voters in 1988; the secret agreement is described as running “afoul of the intent and aspirational policies set forth in Berkeley Measure N,” which requires the city to “use all available lawful means to ensure that public agencies abide by the rules and laws of the city and that these agencies pay taxes and fees, comparable to those paid by private citizens and business to support their fair share of city services.”

Although the Berkeley City Council had also resolved on multiple occasions to support tenant rights, and specifically the interests of tenants evicted from 1921 Walnut Street, Berkeley, the agreement bound the City “to not challenge the upcoming 2021 LRDP and UC’s Anchor House [1921 Walnut Street] and People’s Park housing projects.”

The lawsuit further stipulates that the City through its agreement with UC will “induce, aid and assist” in destruction of People’s Park as a student and community park and open space and has collaborated in breach of contract by UC Berkeley. “UC has breached its mutual commitments, promises, and written contracts with responsible People’s Park organizations,” which are included in Exhibits A through L of the Petition.

###

Posted on

People’s Park Nomination for National Historic Landmark, CSHRC, October 29, 2021

Video of the People’s Park Nomination for National Historic Landmark, CSHRC, October 29, 2021

Hearing of the People’s Park nomination for the National Register of Historic Places, by the California State Historical Resources Commission, October 29, 2021

Excerpted from video of full commission meeting, available here:
https://cal-span.org/unipage/index.php?site=cal-span&owner=CSHRC&date=2021-10-29

Short introductions of Commissioners:
Lee Adams III, Chair (Public Member)
Adam Sriro, Vice Chair (Historical Archeology)
Bryan K. Brandes (Public Member)
Alan Hess (Architecture)
Luis Hoyos (Architectural History)
René Vellanoweth (Prehistoric Archeology)
and State Historic Preservation Officer:
Julianne Polanco

Followed by public comment, discussion and unanimous affirmative vote.

The Keeper of the Register is expected to issue final approval of the nomination within 45 days.

The original request for the nomination, with extensive historical context, was submitted to the commission by the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group, and can be read here:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1067/files/CA_Alameda_Peoples%20Park_DRAFT.pdf

For more information about People’s Park, its history and current events, please visit:
https://www.peoplespark.org/wp/
https://defendthepark.org/