In another recent demonstration supporting People’s Park, local activists and community members closed off a block of Telegraph Avenue late Saturday night.
The “block party” — which consisted mostly of socializing in the street to the sound of live music — prevented traffic from moving down the avenue between Dwight Way and Haste Street. A flier advertising the event stated it was sponsored by a group called the Telegraph Community Improvement District, and though the group did not have a permit, the Berkeley Police Department did not put an end to the event.
“This is in response to generally the attack on People’s Park,” said local resident Kate Degraaf at the event, adding that for her, it was “about re-asserting common space.”
According to Berkeley police Sgt. Mary Kusmiss, though the department was alerted to the traffic-blocking event at about 10:54 p.m., a significant amount of its resources — including 12 officers and two sergeants — were responding to an armed pedestrian robbery in South Berkeley.
The department requested assistance from UCPD, which sent four officers to monitor the activity until the concert at the Hearst Greek Theatre let out and UCPD “tapered down,” Kusmiss said in an email Tuesday.
UCPD kept BPD’s dispatch center informed of activity at the event and requested that a Berkeley police sergeant respond when available, according to Kusmiss. At about 11:35 p.m., a sergeant left the South Berkeley robbery scene to assess the event on Telegraph and determined the department would “go out if something else happens more serious than the traffic hazard,” Kusmiss said in the email.
“There are many times, if not hourly, in the course of policing that prioritizing is essential,” Kusmiss said in the email. “This was one of those challenging times … there was no threat to life at the Telegraph street blockage.”
The block party came after a tree-sit in the park — held partly in response to a Telegraph Business Improvement District proposal suggesting a ban on unlicensed events in the park — ended last Tuesday after one of the demonstrators fell from the tree.
Locals at the event Saturday expressed similar frustration with the Telegraph Business Improvement District.
“It’s never been like any other park in Berkeley, and I don’t think people are going to stand by,” said Berkeley resident Russell Bates at the event.
According to Kusmiss, the department’s Computer Aided Dispatch noted at 2:55 a.m. that the street was open.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
Time for the People’s Park advocates to fish or cut bait. If you want the park to remain an open haven for undesirables, you need to go through the same process as everyone else. Incorporate yourselves into some legitimate organization, raise some cash, make an offer to UC based on the fair market value, then go through the local planning, zoning, and licensing authorities to get the stamp of approval needed – just like EVERYONE ELSE who has property and wants to do something with it in your city. Otherwise, you’re a bunch of spoiled little parasites, and nobody is obligated to listen to you or put up with your incessant nonsense…
“nobody is obligated to listen to you”
You mistake the people you’re addressing. They have an organization (http://www.peoplespark.org/) and they assert that property laws are unjust and invalid. They’re prepared to back their position with violence. Are you?
If they try to back their position by coming onto my property then yes, I will. And I’ll be legally justified in doing so, whereas they will be trespassing.
The denizens of People’s Park have not invaded anyone’s residential property. How does your comment clarify anything?
“They have an organization (http://www.peoplespark.org/) and they assert that property laws are unjust and invalid. They’re prepared to back their position with violence.”
Property law is not limited to the grounds of the UC. The UC may not be willing to defend their property, but I’m willing to defend mine.
But this discussion is about what to do with People’s Park. Your property is not threatened or affected. Make some relevant suggestions.
[You mistake the people you're addressing. They have an organization (http://www.peoplespark.org/) and they assert that property laws are unjust and invalid. They're prepared to back their position with violence. ]
I know damn well who I am addressing. They are the same bunch of fascistic filth masquerading as “progressives” who have infested Bezerkeley for several decades now. I’m quite aware they want outright civil war in this country. Maybe it’s to take them on and get it over with…
“get it over with…”
Those three dots appear to imply “regardless of the law.” During the riots, James Rector was killed by a blast from a police shotgun. He was an innocent bystander, watching from a rooftop. I doubt that the Regents want to take the responsibility for sending in storm troopers to remove people who are currently not breaking any laws.
Storm Troopers?
You silly children have no idea what “storm troopers” are.
You’re skirting the issue. Applying deadly force is not the appropriate response.
Ive been saying it for years: Pave over the entire park and put up housing and parking. There is no “people” element in this park. It only serves as the home to people trying to relive the 60s and crack heads. Its a dangerous disgusting place and breeds crime.
And why would the police NOT end that ridiculous block party? Only in berkeley (which I love and it hurts to see these things) does this make any kind of damn sense.
You dont need a permit to shut down a street and they hand them out to assholes to protest Marine recruitment.
Disgusting.
“Berkeley Government: Grade F”The park does not belong to the City of Berkeley.
What really grinds my gears is that the police shut down the celebration at the Cheesboard for blocking the street without a permit, but allowed this “block party” to carry on without a permit.
The inconsistency from the BPD is what really bothers me. If it’s wrong in one situation, it should be wrong in both. If it’s acceptable in one, it should be acceptable in both.
Honestly, blocking the streets for this?
You’ve a right to speak your mind, but not to arbitrarily block traffic.
“about re-asserting common space”
yeah, about the ability of the commoners to drive down the streets that the city maintains
(or sometimes fails to maintain, whatever)
Here’s one for Degraaf to ponder:
Legally, who owns the deed to peoples park?
The UC does, ie the state.
Now does the gov’t (state/local/federal) regulate parks?
Yes.
Closing hours? Camping by permit?
Yes, to both.
Degraaf has no justification for this one park to be a lawless free-for-all.
These people who fell out of a tree, when they go to the hospital who pays that bill?
Taxpayers, that’s who.
If only it were so uncomplicated. The phrase “re-asserting common space” is more charged than it appears. The Regents hold title to the land, but the community activists say that “the people” are the government and their needs take priority over private ownership. It’s essentially a communist expropriation of the land. It sounds like a silly prank, but one attempt to pave over part of the land was foiled by a mob who tore up the asphalt and piled it into barricades. During the initial struggle for the land, one bystander was shot dead.