Category: Letters

For reasons I can’t fathom, the Daily Cal deleted my comment on that op-ed.
– Thomas Lord, February 13, 2019

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: response Feb 12 op-ed (re People’s Park)
Date: 2019-02-13 15:48
From: Thomas Lord lord@basiscraft.com
To: editor@dailycal.org

I wrote this in response to the February 12 op-ed “UC Berkeley must prioritize community voices in People’s Park housing plans”. It got positive responses from Park supporters including members of the People’s Park Committee. I’ve appended it below.

I am writing to ask that you please explain to me why you deleted my comment from the op-ed. To me it seems response, informative, and civil – especially in contrast to many comments on the Daily Cal that you don’t censor.

Thanks,
Thomas Lord (Berkeley, CA)

My comment:

There is no just way to raze the Park. The Park can not be reduced to just the most controversial users (i.e. poor people). The community can not be reduced to a set of “services” to be replaced.

Nor is there any practical reason to raze the Park. For that matter, there is no practical reason to build on the research field on Oxford. When the Chancellor’s office embarked on this farce they turned a blind eye to alternative sites such as the SW and NW parking lots on Clark Kerr. They ignored the part of the Oxford parcels with the older (run down) buildings. Those are just two examples – there are more. And to add insult to injury, they are proposing to build privately profitable housing that will gouge students and taxpayers. It’s an enormous wealth transfer from public education to already rich people. These facts alone should make students skeptical that UC is speaking with them in good faith. You’re being ripped off. Again. In yet another way. When do you stop trusting this institution?

The history of the Park matters. It was, once upon a time, housing. The housing was largely occupied by counter-culture households, many not-affiliated with the University but influential on student life. This context is vital to understand the past 50 years of struggle:

The University had taken some bruises, from their perspective, in that very conservative time. They had taken bruises from student involvement in the Civil Rights movement, from the Free Speech movement, from the anti-war movement, and from the growth of revolutionary politics and radical environmentalism. Students today can check out some deep (and academically very serious) history in Seth Rosenfeld’s “Subversives: The FBI’s War on Student Radicals, and Reagan’s Rise to Power”. Students today can find source materials about Park history in the on-line archives of the Berkeley Barb (content warning: no shortage of sexist and race-insensitive content in those old issues – but you’ll also find plenty of evidence of the positive good that was going on, really, at that time).

Where the Park stands today there was housing. The housing was largely occupied by unaffiliated counter-cultural types the University saw as a political threat.

Back then, the University found a flimsy excuse (a false promise to build student housing, ironically) to take that housing by eminent domain, evict the counter cultural residents, raze the buildings, and salt the earth by leaving behind a huge dirt patch. Meanwhile, the University continued its oppression of students who questioned and challenged the society around them, and the institution that processed them like commodities.

The Park grew out of student and community frustration and anger, and the something-in-the-air of the times that sought out solidarity, positive creation, much needed earth-loving, and the spontaneous discovery of the power of positive direct action. Watch some of the videos of the Park being built — and of the military counter-attack – to get some sense of the times.

Incidentally, the much beloved Ohlone Park in North Berkeley grew out the very same process of direct action. It was initiated in a moment of response to the murder of James Rector and the maiming and injury of others by the literal occupying army sent to suppress the People’s Park movement. The Park is sacred for many reasons.

For 50 years, the University has done everything it can to interfere with the Park’s positive development. You write of “services” the Park provides? You have no idea how much more extensive the mutual support was in the Park before the University cracked down on it. If it looks shabby and beat down today — keep in mind that the sticks used to beat it down were wielded by the very powers you think you are now negotiating with.

My metaphor for what even the well meaning author’s of this piece propose is an ugly one: It reminds me of those horrific photos of trophy hunters gloating over dead elephants, rhinos, and big cats — the kind you see flying around social media. You may mean well but if you think “just development” means anything more than giving some very mean folks a trophy photo, please reconsider.

The People’s Park civic landmark status with the city ends April, 2019. The People’s Park Committee is applying for civic landmark status, state and national, I am to believe. The regents were aware of this, I am to believe. The regents should have known that the millennials were coming, and likely have had at least 50 years to plan for their arrival. I am to believe. The regents should know the importance of green urban space and how it revitalizes the community. I have an MA in urban studies, not from UCB or any UC, and I am very aware of the importance of green urban space and how it revitalizes our community; it seems that you are not aware of this.

It furthermore seems disingenuous and scandalously unfair to destroy our vital urban ecosystem in this time of poverty, pollution, and political strife. One should think that any kind of destruction to People’s Park would not take place until after April of 2019 as per any recurrent civic landmark status. 2018 in many ways marked the first time in history that people began to take for granted an urban forest in eastern People’s Park, instead 2018 will be marked by how the UC regents choose to once again put gentrification [which is a form of genocide,] before community.

The Sacred Berkeley Oak Grove and it’s systemic treesit should have taught the regents that policing is as expensive as replanting trees, and by replanting I am to mean that one would use engineering to remove and replant them elsewhere. Our point then was replace fossil fuels and our point is not much different today. We also wish to preserve nature, but you don’t seem to understand this, I am to believe.

With some sort of focus on education, in today’s terrible world of industrial haste, one might believe that the UC regents might wish that urban gardeners, at the Walnut Street student farmer and volunteer co-op garden, at Occupy The Farm in Albany [The Gil Tract Farm,] and People’s Park should be a pinnacle for social outreach, ecological / agricultural education, Native American folklore education, social justice education, and so on. But what we find from many but not all students, and people in general is that the misinformation from their ‘mainstream,’ cultural conditioning does little to help define sub-cultural phenomenology beyond the market value of a tie died t-shirt. The importance of how micro or sub cultural sociology helps to create facets and trends in the macro sociological matrix is lost on people in general and people take sub cultural values from the past for granted, yet at the same time fascism currently looms around the transnational matrix.

If you are unaware of how invaluable sub-cultural sociology is for human awareness locally, and in general, I would recommend any book, passage or article by Rebecca Solnit on the subject.

The United States is not a Democracy it is an oligarchy where capitalism is king. In a socialist country at least people don’t seem to die on the streets as much. The blight in People’s Park is systemic to a dysfunctional governance. Stop nullifying us. We had a forest. All of us. I am to believe that the regents do not value nature.

If you are unaware of how invaluable nature is to cities read any book or passage by Jane Jacobs on the subject.

The wildlife in our community hates you, and we howl in the wind.

In my opinion that makes no difference to the regents because they cannot hear anything other than themselves and capitalism while the Earth dies screaming.

— Darin Allen Bauer, artist / photographer / laborer / writer

 

Make the Park Better

by Sennet Williams, November 2018

Here is the campaign I would suggest:

Make alliances with student groups concerned about the housing shortage like CalPIRG and others for this solution.

1: change the language MAKE THE PARK BETTER, rather than “save the park,” because a lot of people are unhappy with the way the park is now.

2: change the name to “Tree-people’s park”.

2a: The park can be a showcase for FIGHTING GLOBAL WARMING by GROWING MORE TREES.

2b: It should NOT be part of campus. Make it state property for a tree park or city property.

3: point that it would be silly for student housing because the students do not want to surrounded by people spanging all the time, which would be the case under the proposed “plan.”

4: The proposed “plan” would make traffic/parking a lot worse on southside because students have friends and they drive her to pickup, drop off or visit.

5: The city has already asked U.C. to stop expanding in Berkeley.

6: All Cal’s new construction should be at Cal’s Richmond “field station” that has plenty of land and vacant buildings. Most of the suggested new housing will already be at Richmond.

7: For students to live in Richmond there will be a new rail transit system which is ALREADY PLANNED to be built, but it is still being kept secret from the media for legal reasons. But the plan is to start building it from Richmond to Cal. ASAP.

8: The most likely rail system, with offices at Cal’s RIchmond property is called CYBERTRAN.com, and it will solve the parking shortage because it is so much better than driving, Berkeley AND U.C will stop wasting huge fortunes building parking garages, and students will not need autos to get to class.

More immediately AC Transit is the problem for changing bus routes and not having enough buses, and that is why most students do not like to ride the bus and want to live near campus.

* Line 51 should be restored to one route instead of being split in two. (the major route to dorms, needed to reduce traffic)

* Line 6 should have the same route to campus 24 hours instead of shutting down at midnight. I believe “line 41” was 24 hours.

With these changes, many thousands of students will be happier to rent rooms in other towns with lower rent.

Btw, I have been a professional developer and I have a LONG history with Cal, but I am probably leaving the state for months very soon, possibly for years so that is why am sharing this info now.

Anyway, anyone can contact me: sennetwilliams@yahoo.com

To Chancellor Christ
by Joseph Liesner
August 2018

As the 50th anniversary of the first creation of People’s Park approaches it seems you have chosen to mark that anniversary by rolling out the same deception that Chancellor Heyns used in 1969. Let me be clear: Roger Heyns did not take the 30 to 35 homes that stood on lot 1875-2, now People’s Park, by eminent domain for the purpose of building student housing, or soccer fields, and neither is the need for student housing the reason you have declared your intention to build on that lot before any of the other pieces of land upon which the University could build.

The evidence that Roger Heyns had other reasons for taking the homes of some 40 people with alarming haste and callousness is evident in the statements of faculty members, members of the Board of Regents, and the long time residents of those old homes. Professor Sim Vander Ryn, Chairman of the Chancellor’s Advisory Committee on Housing and Environment, stated “I have it on pretty good authority that this was the pitch . . . (Vice Chancellor)Cheit’s position before the Regent’s was: ‘Let’s clean up the park and get rid of the people living there who are a threat to the stability of the University’.” Regent Fred Dutton said that Heyns and Cheit had based their case for acquiring the South Campus property on the grounds that it was “. . . an act against the hippie culture.” That “hippie culture” was mentioned to many of the homeowners on lot 1875-2 by the real estate agents who were tasked with taking their homes.

In your “Summer Letter” (“California”, Summer 2018) you also propose that building on People’s Park will include housing and services for the homeless of Berkeley. Well this is quite a change for the University. I have been a volunteer with East Bay Food Not Bombs for eighteen years and know that our daily meals for the hungry, which we serve in People’s Park have faced near constant opposition by the University. We couldn’t even get the University’s permission to allow Waste Management to come into the park to pick up our compost. Other homeless advocates have tried to distribute free clothing to those in need and time after time UCB police have destroyed those free clothing sites.

So what might be the actual reasons that your mighty institution is so determined to destroy People’s Park? In 1969 South Campus was the home of the counter culture and its radical sociopolitical consciousness. For the preceeding decade the University had been locked in confrontation after confrontation with studdent groups that wanted the right to organize on campus (The Free Speech Movement), with students of color who wanted a Third World Studies College, and with students and faculty who opposed the war against Vietnam (The Vietnam Day Committee).

UCB restricted and punished students for political organizing on campus; UCB poiice beat and jailed students on strike for the creation of a Third World Studies College; and UCB, while working to crush the anti-war movement on campus supported U.S. militarism in Vietnam and used its academic cover to further Department of Defense research.

Perhaps it is time to recognize that the University of California at Berkeley was, historically, on the wrong side in each of these, above, issues and that is why the counter-culture was such a thorn in its side. Then, that very group challenged the University’s misuse of its power by appropriating the very land which the university had turned into a muddy parking lot by taking and demolishing people’s homes. The act of students, neighbors and faculty creating a beautiful park on that lot and insisting that they, the users of the land, exercise control over it began the movement for community control. Userdevelopment is the most fundamental legacy of People’s Park, and it continues to this day. People’s Park is a unique and beautiful refuge for many, especially those most abused and marginalized by our system.

As Robert Scheer summarized the situation in Ramparts (August ’69) “The Berkeley crisis was never over whether the University would be able to stop one ‘People’s Park’ but rather over whether it would succeed in what had been a long-term strategy of eliminating the culture of protest by denying it its turf”.

So, in this time where the right of dissent is threatened world wide, and the 50th anniversary of People’s Park approaches, we must remember that what Mr. Scheer refers to as the “Berkeley crisis” was marked by death and maiming, the arial tear gassing of the campus and swarths of the city, and the occupation of the City of Berkeley by the National Gurad for several weeks. Was that military attack launched on Berkeley to stop a park? Of course not, it was launched by the University of California and the State of California as a unified attempt to crush the independent, progressive political and social expression of students and citizens. Now, seeing the “Berkeley crisis” for what it was, progressive thinkers must insist on the intact preservation of People’s Park and the values for which it stands.

— Joseph Liesner

by Ed Monroe, August 2018

Chancellor Christ has determined that Berkeley needs to double its capacity in ten years adding 7,500 beds. She states, “Whatever anyone thinks of the ideals that motivated the creation of People’s Park, it is hard to see the park as embodying those ideals. It is equally hard to determine who the people are that benefit from the park in its current form.” She says, “I have decided that People’s Park will be the first University-owned parcel to be developed and re-vitalized as we embark on our new long term effort to double the number of beds provided by the University.”

It is understandable that the chancellor finds it hard to see the park as embodying those ideals. The chancellor hasn’t been seen in the park very often.

In June 1967, the University of California acquired the land through eminent domain. In February 1968, they demolished the residences but left debris and rubble for 14 months. On April 13, 1969, activists presented a plan to local merchants and residents for developing the land into a public park. They wanted a free speech area that wasn’t controlled. On April 18, more than 100 people began building People’s Park. On May 13, Chancellor Roger W. Heyns notified the press that the university would build a fence around the property and begin construction. On May 15, a riot erupted between 4000 people
and 791 police officers, sheriffs, and highway patrolmen. Officers used teargas and buckshot. 128 people were admitted into hospitals with injuries and shotgun wounds. Student James Rector was killed. For two weeks the streets of Berkeley were patrolled by national Guardsmen. On May 23, the Berkeley faculty senate endorsed a proposal by the College of Environmental Design for People’s Park to be an experiment in community-generated design. UC students voted 12,719 to 2,175 in favor of keeping the park.

In the past 50 years there have been subsequent battles. In 1979, the university paved over what had previously been a dirt parking lot, promising that the lot would be free to everyone. A few weeks later they changed their policy to state that the lot would be for students only who would be required to pay. Then they precipitated a riot which resulted in people taking picks and shovels to remove the asphalt and convert the west end into a garden.

In December 1984 the Berkeley Landmarks Commission declared People’s Park a landmark for its historic and cultural importance to the City of Berkeley.

In 1991, the university announced its intention to build the volleyball courts. After numerous meetings and public hearings where everyone spoke out against the volleyball courts, the university built them anyway. This resulted in five years of riots that only ended when the volleyball courts were removed.

The most important ideal in the creation of People’s Park is the practice of free speech and the exercise of our Constitutional Right of Assembly. Over the last 50 years people have used the People’s Park stage for a variety of free speech events. According to Don Mitchell in “The Right to the City; Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space”, “The stage was built explicitly as a space for free speech and political action, and it has remained a center for rallies and organizing efforts in the city. In this sense, People’s Park was constructed as a public space for politics, as a place where political involvement and debate are encouraged and in a way that stood at odds with (but not disconnected from) the more orderly politics of the traditional parties, elections, council meetings, and the like.” People gather there to celebrate, protest, and share. Memorials are held there. Congresswoman Barbara Lee spoke from the People’s Park stage. Wavy Gravy hosted shows where Country Joe McDonald performed.

The World Music Fest, the Berkeley Mardi Gras, and the Hare Krishna Concert have been held in the park. Anti-war rallies, Mayday festivals, and Hip Hop shows happen on weekends in the spring and summer. During the Residence Hall Assembly Bear Fest, the park was decorated with yellow and blue balloons while students competed in games of tug-of-war, three-legged races, and pie-eating contests.

On one of their recent parades through Berkeley, flag-waving supporters of President Trump marched to the People’s Park stage to brag about the national right-wing victory, and complain about how they suffered through eight years of Obama.

When the Chinese government cracked down on the protestors in Tiennamen Square, a small group of about 20 people gathered at the stage in People’s Park that evening. There was no network. No one had called anyone else. They just showed up. Someone brought candles. They were lit in honor of brave people on the other side of the world who had sacrificed on behalf of freedom.

The problems of homelessness are ones that exist in every park in practically every city in the country. The recent self-serving tax cuts benefiting the banks, the multi-national corporations, and the rich will cause homeless camps to increase and expand. With the level of corruption in the leadership of our nation today, now more than ever people have a need to speak out.

Along with Food Not Bombs, a number of churches and student groups distribute food and other materials necessary for homeless and poor people to survive.

A variety of unique and colorful gardens have flourished under the hands of many community volunteers. A Peace Garden in honor of John Lennon and roses planted for Betsy the Dog Lady are there. The Fred Cody Redwood Grove is named for the founder of Cody’s Books. The gardens at the west end grow carrots and cucumbers, artichokes and beets. In among the greenery are daisies and clusters of pink angel trumpets. There are purple irises and yellow daffodils. “I love this park,” said Terri Compost, editor of “People’s Park, Still Blooming”, “it’s just got such a nature about it. It’s very much alive. I’ve gotten a lot from giving to this park.”

In Tom Dalzell’s opinion in Berkeleyside, May 3, he states, “The park is important open green space in an increasingly dense south campus. William Wurster was a fierce advocate of a “greenbelt of natural beauty” with no buildings around the campus. Hearst, Bancroft, Telegraph, Shattuck, and University are seeing big new buildings. As we debate the future of People’s Park, l urge that we keep in mind its unique value as a greenbelt, not just as hallowed historical ground.

“I also question the underlying assumption of the push for housing, the assumption that the university’s rapid increase in enrollment is good, necessary, and a problem that the city of Berkeley has to solve.”

To quote Lee Trampleasure’s letter of May 6, “While the open space of our parks provides us with beautiful areas to enjoy the outdoors, the very nature of this space makes it easy for those less fortunate, with little income or housing to ‘set up camp’ and, frequently trash our parks. People’s Park, not fitting in the protected category of a City of Berkeley or East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) park, becomes an easy target for closure.

“There are similar problem associated with homelessness in Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park but no one is going to suggest we build housing there. If we build on that lot, we will never get that open space back. | ask residents to take the long-view of development in Berkeley. As empty lots are built on and small buildings are replaced with taller buildings, the population of our city will continue to increase. We will continue to need more open space.”

— Ed Monroe, edmonroeartist@gmail.com, August 20, 2018