2006 Election Endorsements
City Measures

Measure A:

Measure A makes makes concrete financial commitments to Berkeley public schools concrete and will lay a foundation for the future of K-12 education in the district.

The measure comes with many endorsements from district educators, along with local officials such as Keith Carson, president of the Alameda County Board of Supervisrs—and with good reason. Without it, Berkeley schools would be at risk of losing a number of teachers, making small class sizes harder and harder to achieve.

The measure is also there to protect the extra things often overlooked in times of tight school finances such as physical education and music instruction that contribute to the educational experience.

Vote yes on Measure A.

Measure E:

Measure E is a solution that is so simple it’s surprising it hasn’t been developed before. It would change city regulations so a vacancy in the city’s rent board will be filled through the general election.

While this may not seem too impressive, the measure will save the city thousands of dollars. By mandating that the position be decided in November, it removes the necessity of a costly special election over the summer.

Summer elections are also notoriously underrepresentative of student votes because much of the campus population is gone. This measure ensures that student voices are heard in an election for a position with a big impact on their lives.

Vote yes on Measure E.

Measure F:

Measure F is a rarity among Berkeley measures—it achieved a unanimous endorsement from the city council. But unlike other proposals to have achieved this consensus, Measure F will actually accomplish something.

The measure adopts an amendment to the city’s development for an area near the waterfront known as the Gilman Street Playing Fields, which would allow the city to rezone the land. This rezoning would enable the city to build much-needed sports fields for local residents where today there stands a parking lot.

The measure also brings no new costs because all of the funds for the fields, about $5 million, are already raised and earmarked specifically for the project.

Vote yes on Measure F.

Measure G:

Passing Measure G is the first step in making Berkeley one of the leading U.S. cities in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and would send the right message to other cities across the country.

The measure is purely advisory, asking voters if the city should work toward a 10-year plan to reduce greenhouse emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050. But this measure is more than just a symbol because it sets a firm timetable for the creation of the plan and has a realistic ultimate goal.

Vote yes on Measure G.

Measure H:

Measure H should be voted down because it encourages precisely the wrong kind of Berkeley activism.

The measure asks voters to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. It doesn’t take a Zogby pollster to tell you that Berkeley-ites overwhelmingly disapprove of the the Bush administration’s record in almost every field of presidential endeavor. But as strongly as we may feel, having this measure on the ballot just encourages future measures that are ultimately an ineffectual waste of taxpayer’s money.

Vote no on Measure H.

Measure I:

Measure I is blatantly opposed to the interests of students and low-income Berkeley residents and deserves to be voted down.

The measure would allow developers to convert 500 rental units into condominiums per year as opposed to the current 100. This will constrict the already limited choices of UC Berkeley students in finding off-campus housing. The measure also reduces the time allotted to find new housing after conversion from a year to an unacceptably brief 30 days.

Vote no on Measure I.

Measure J:

Measure J is an unjustifiable and unrealistic barrier to necessary development in the city of Berkeley.

The measure is intended to counteract Mayor Tom Bates’ proposal made earlier in the year. Bates’ proposal does a much better job of providing a sustainable middle ground between development and preservation and would maintain all current landmarks. Bate’s idea would also save money by streamlining future construction projects.

Vote no on Measure J.

Tags: