News in Brief

Oak Grove Activist Posts Bail, Says He Plans to Sue University

A lead protester at the oak grove near Memorial Stadium posted bail yesterday after being arrested Friday on a felony charge of making threats against a police officer.

Zachary RunningWolf said he was released from the Santa Rita Jail in Dublin at about 9 a.m. after oak grove protesters and community members posted $20,000 bail. He now says he plans to sue the university for “false arrest and harassment.”

“I’m totally going to fight this,” he said. “I’m not backing down from the tree protest. It is a burial ground of my people.”

RunningWolf said he is currently seeking an attorney to aid him in his planned suit against the university. He has been living in the oak grove with several other activists since Dec. 2 to protest a proposed athletic training facility that threatens 26 oak trees with removal.

Berkeley police said RunningWolf made serious threats to police officers while being transported to the Berkeley Jail Facility on Feb. 16 after he was arrested on a count of misdemeanor vandalism.

RunningWolf said there is “no way” he made the threats. His attorney Che Hashim said RunningWolf did not make any specific threats to police officers.

RunningWolf was ordered Tuesday to attend a pretrial hearing March 9 at the Alameda County Superior Court.

“I’m not going to sit here and be victimized,” he said. “I will defend myself physically and legally—this is clearly a violation of my civil rights.”

Julie Strack

ASUC Suit Against Constitutional Amendment Rejected

The Judicial Council rejected a case yesterday challenging the placement of a constitutional amendment on the ballot during last spring’s elections.

The case, filed by graduate student Justin Azadivar, alleged that a constitutional amendment calling for three graduate students to sit on the Judicial Council was improperly placed on last spring’s ballot. He requested that the amendment be nullified.

The council decided that because students voted for the amendment last spring, the council could not remove the amendment so long after its passing.

“The council feels that, while there is the possibility of a violation, the late nature of the charge calls into question the Judicial Council’s ability to render a constitutional amendment unconstitutional,” Judicial Council Chair Marisa Cuevas said in an e-mail.

“As it has already been voted upon by the students and become part of the Constitution itself, it is almost impossible to undo the will of the students this late into the year,” she said.

Azadivar had previously filed a case on Feb. 9 containing similar allegations, which requested that both the constitutional amendment and the Memorandum of Understanding between the ASUC and Graduate Assembly be nullified as a remedy to his suit.

However, the council rejected the case, saying that Azadivar’s remedy was too harsh for the alleged violations, among other reasons.

Azadivar said that, while he understood the council’s most recent decision, he did not fully agree with it.

“I think the precedent being set is if you break the rules and no one catches it fast enough, it’s OK,” Azadivar said. “(The decision’s) understandable, but I don’t think it’s the right decision.”

Tamara Bartlett

Mayor’s Amendments Would Make Party Ordinance Proposal Less Strict

The Berkeley City Council debated the terms of an ordinance Tuesday night that would punish party hosts who allow underage drinking at their events and increase fines for noise violations.

Mayor Tom Bates submitted three amendments to the proposal which was introduced Jan. 30 by the Berkeley Alcohol Policy Advocacy Coalition, which would make policies more lenient in response to community concerns.

One amendment specifies that party hosts be punished for underage alcohol use at their residence only if they “reasonably should have known” underage persons were drinking.

City Councilmember Gordon Wozniak said all the amendments have majority support in the City Council, although the wording is still contentious.

“No final decisions have been made, and there’s some legal wrangling that will go on for a few weeks,” Wozniak said.

Another proposed amendment would lessen the probationary period that begins after police first respond to a neighborhood complaint about a party from 180 to 120 days.

During the probationary period, a police response to a second complaint at the same residence would result in fines and citations against the host.

In response to concerns by UC Berkeley students that the proposal will make hosts afraid to call police for help in an emergency, Bates proposed waiving financial penalties when a host reports underage drinking and excessive noise before a complaint is made to the police.

Wozniak expects the proposals to be finalized and voted on by the end of March.

Keith Brown

Tags: