Free speech, day laborers and the poor and homeless are under attack in Berkeley. Historically, we are used to standing up and saying no to such attacks from right-wing politicians or corporations. Sadly, this time the attacks come from our very own mayor. It is deeply disappointing and breaks my heart to see someone I helped elect suppressing free speech. Friendship or appreciation for his prior work must not blind us to these travesties of justice. Fear of his political dominance must not silence us.
Mayor Tom Bates forced a vote on the anti-sitting ordinance without debate from the City Council. This vote appears to violate the Brown Act, which is a state law allowing public comment. There were people waiting to speak. Instead, the mayor rushed the vote and denied them their right to speak. There were also three council members on the speakers list whom he refused to let speak, and no member of the council was allowed to discuss the motion or make amendments or compromise proposals. That is a violation of council rules and Robert’s Rules as well. The fact that a few dozen residents sang two protest songs is not a legal reason to take away people’s free speech rights. There were multiple solutions that did not take away people’s right to free speech.
I am proud of the diversity, compassion and intelligence of the residents who spoke. Sixty residents gave their one minute to testify, read poetry and sing in opposition to the anti-sitting law. The public comment reflected an astounding display of the diversity of Berkeley. There were black, white, Asian, Latino, Native American and mixed race speakers. There were senior citizens, reflecting the Gray Panthers’ opposition. There were high school, college and graduate school speakers, including ASUC senators expressing the Cal student government’s 18-1 vote against a sit-lie law. There were attorneys questioning the legality of the proposal, and there was expression of the ACLU’s opposition. There were disabled residents concerned about how this would hurt them. There were homeless residents giving gripping personal stories of their struggles to make ends meet in order to survive. There were experts who are homeless service providers who indicated that giving poor and homeless people an arrest record would be a barrier to care and limit poor people’s chances to get services or jobs. There were gay, straight, lesbian and bisexual speakers, including a gay leader pointing out that a disproportionate number of homeless youth are from foster homes, escaping abusive or violent homes or disowned because of their sexual orientation. There were official city commissioners from the four commissions that have voted to oppose a sit-lie law (Community Health Commission, Housing Commission, Mental Health Commission and Peace and Justice Commission.)
Rae Zhuang/Staff
Alternatives were proposed that included enforcing existing laws, keeping the youth shelter open all year long and letting businesses sell stuff like books and CDs on tables in front of their stores. The excessive cost of the ordinance was described. This includes costs for lawsuits, police overtime on protests, costs to the courts and jail and public defenders and probation officers, etc.
Numerous residents attending in regard to other important items on the July 10 agenda experienced or observed mistakes or mistreatment of their issues at the same meeting. West Berkeley residents, small businesses and artists were present to advocate for changes to the West Berkeley Project. South and West Berkeley residents were in attendance to advocate for a fair share of the watershed bond to advocate for the discontinuation of flooding of their homes and businesses. Environmentalists were attempting to reduce the pollution of Aquatic Park and the bay. Taxpayers were concerned about bonds and taxes and how many millions they would have to pay. None of these issues received the amount of attention it deserved. There was much conversation among the public in attendance and seemingly increased recognition that since we are all being mistreated, perhaps we all could work together and possibly get better policy results. Some of the public speakers even made reference to patterns among the issues.
Please keep an open mind. I invite you to watch the entire City Council meeting online or on videotape. Decide for yourself after you see the facts of the meeting. Whatever our different opinions might be on the sit-lie ordinance, these violations of the Brown Act are unwarranted, unreasonable and unacceptable. The City Council should rescind this vote and allow free speech for the public and City Council and save us all the expense of a lawsuit simply to get people their free speech rights.
Kriss Worthington is a Berkeley City Council member.
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.
Kris Worthington’s political career depends on portraying himself as an ultra-liberal champion of the poor at any cost. His ultra-liberal long-haired supporters wouldn’t mind seeing the entire Southside become a vegetable and Cannabis commune. Unfortunately many idealistic young students vote for him (before their first mugging) and then move away after graduation so the next wave of Berkeley students have to deal with the filth and crime. Kris’ passion is finding affordable housing for poor people in Berkeley. Berkeley is too popular though, so naturally he wants to turn our sidewalks into affordable housing.
At the risk of repeating myself, aggressive panhandling is most often done by people when STANDING, not sitting or lying. Also, if I feel unsafe in the city, it’s particularly at night after 10pm, which is exactly when the sit-lie ordinance DOES NOT APPLY.
Dear Cal students,
Worthington, a candidate you guys keep electing for this fair city (will you PLEASE STOP by the way?) is misrepresenting facts about the city council meeting and is completely mischaracterizing the Civil Sidewalks measure.
If you have lived in Berkeley for a while (I’m born and raised) you’ll soon notice there are two different kinds of people referred to as “homeless”. There are those who are genuinely down on their luck, then there are those who expect you to fund their street life. Part of this city’s diversity and tolerance includes welcoming and helping the truly homeless as part of our community. However, there’s been an increase in aggressive panhandlers that are forcing the hand of the citizenry to respond in ways we usually might not. Generally these are gutter punks – disillusioned youth who have chosen to opt out of society and who will harass any passersby who have not made that same choice, especially if you don’t submit to them and give them change. Targets generally include young families, professionals, and even students. If you are contributing to society, then you are part of the system and therefore fair game.
So that’s what we Berkeleyans are tired of. It’s not the poor, it’s not the homeless, and it’s not the struggling. Though there are many laws on the books that limit the impact of aggressive panhandling, they are often difficult to implement because you have to catch acts of aggression in process. So it does you very little good if you report something after the fact. Also, if you are caught reporting something you can be targeted by street people later. When you’re here to succeed at college, the last thing you want is to worry about getting to and from class without being singled out.
And just in case you feel like strangers in a strange town, please remember that these guys generally are too. That’s right, they’re usually not from around here either. They travel up and down the west coast stopping at Seattle, Portland, and the SF BAY. they also love to act tough in little coastal communities.
You students use Telegraph more than most permanent residents in Berkeley, so the Civil Sidewalks measure is extremely important to you. If your experience of walking up and down Telegraph is made unpleasant by aggressive panhandling, then you should consider voting “yes” on it. It doesn’t mean you hate homeless and poor people. Hell, I know plenty of homeless people from growing up here who can’t STAND the wave of aggressive gutter punks.
Anyway, will you at least PLEASE not give them spare change when you walk by? If you feel like making cash contributions, please give to one of our local homeless shelters or other services.
And as for Kriss Worthington, the candidate for your district, PLEASE think very seriously about how your voting for him will impact this city, especially if you don’t plan on living here past college.
Thank you.
P.S. I’d comment about the city council meeting, but if Worthington is posting an unedited video I thing it really speaks for itself.
“they also love to act tough in little coastal communities.”
How true. You never see these little snots acting like this in Oaktown or Richmond, where there are genuine working poor people and others who wouldn’t hesitate to give them the ass-kicking they need so badly.
What a bunch of nonsense. The genuine working poor aren’t sitting on sidewalks – they are at work trying to make ends meet.The only ones on the sidewalks are the professional panhandlers, who are disproportionately adolescent suburbanites and twenty-somethings who think it’s somehow cool and hip to hang out and panhandle. The one good thing about this issue is that even the usual feel-good liberals are getting fed up and seeing the light. However, the hard-core lefty ideologues will do everything they can to push their vision of class conflict on everyone else.
I’m no fan of liberals, but do you know why a liberal politician like Mayor Bates finally had enough of this silliness? It’s because the politically correct posturing has finally threatened this city’s very lifeblood: its small businesses. Sales taxes from small businesses make it possible for the city to provide services to some of the very disadvantaged groups that Kris tries to enlist as his allies.