A complaint was filed on May 2 through the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Nahla Droubi, the landlord of the property that houses the dispensary. The lawsuit threatens to seize the property for allegedly violating federal law, which prohibits operating a marijuana dispensary.

Berkeley City Council members and representatives from Berkeley Patients Group held a press conference Wednesday afternoon in front of the Old City Hall expressing their opposition to the lawsuit.

“There is no legitimate reason to target Berkeley Patients Group,” said Sean Luse, chief operations officer at BPG. “They’re in compliance with state law. The U.S. attorney general … has chosen to hurt our patients by diverting attention from the real issues.”

Berkeley Patients Group also came into opposition with the federal government in February 2012, when it received letters from the U.S. attorney’s office for violating a federal law banning dispensaries from being located within 1,000 feet of a school. Even though California law dictates that the distance only has to be 600 feet, the dispensary voluntarily closed down and reopened at a new location in December a few blocks away.

According to the complaint, the U.S. attorney began sending Droubi letters again in November 2012 before the new location opened, warning that the new location would be in violation of the same federal law by being within 1,000 feet of two preschools. A second letter sent in February noted that the group could face criminal and civil penalties if operation continued.

Luse said that the federal government should focus its attention on other crime problems in the city, like illegal drug and gun trafficking. He also said that they plan to fight the lawsuit.

“We look forward to having our day in court and believe we will ultimately prevail,” Luse said.

City Councilmembers Darryl Moore, Kriss Worthington, Laurie Capitelli and Jesse Arreguin voiced their backing of Berkeley Patients Group at the press conference. Mayor Tom Bates also showed his support for the dispensary.

“I’m very, very disappointed that this has happened, and we’ll do anything we can to make sure they get back into business,” Bates said.

Councilmember Kriss Worthington said that the federal government was overstepping its boundaries, referencing the recent California Supreme Court ruling on City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center. In the ruling, the court recognized the legality of medical cannabis dispensaries but allowed that local governments may ban dispensaries despite state law.

“Being a U.S. attorney doesn’t give you the right to change state law or city law,” Worthington said. “It’s so absurd. It’s a waste of time, and it’s threatening patient care.”

In the meantime, the dispensary will remain open, according to Henry Wykowski, attorney for Berkeley Patients Group.

“The only people that would benefit from the closing of Berkeley Patients Group are the gangs and cartels,” Wykowski said. “This action will cause them to prey on the patients who now have a clean, safe place to get their medicine.”

The federal government filed a similar lawsuit against a medical marijuana dispensary in Oakland last July. The city of Oakland filed a lawsuit in response, claiming that the federal government had overstepped its jurisdiction. A federal judge later dismissed the lawsuit, saying that only the dispensary and its landlords could contest the government’s seizure of property.

Wykowski said that they intend to file a claim in response to the lawsuit and will also present their case in court.

Contact Tara Hurley at thurley@dailycal.org.

The post Berkeley marijuana dispensary threatened by federal government appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Moore, who died in Berkeley police custody on Feb. 12, became the focus of controversy during Tuesday’s council meeting. As the City Council attempted to move an item on mental health for further discussion later in the meeting, vocal protests erupted, eventually culminating in police officers forcibly removing one protester who refused to give up the floor.

Before the council meeting, protesters also held a rally in front of City Hall, holding signs stating, “We won’t forget Kayla!” and “Justice for Kayla (Xavier) Moore.”

Much of the anger in the room reflected protester frustrations about the scarcity of information regarding the case. Berkeley Police Department currently has a “press hold” on Moore’s autopsy report, and although the BPD has assured that the report will be released in the near future, the situation has resulted in strong criticism from members of the family as well as the community.

During the public comment session, two protesters ceded their speaking time to Arthur Moore, Kayla’s father, who directed most of his criticism toward Bates.

“I’m very, very disappointed that your chief of police put a hold on this case,” Arthur said to Bates. “We haven’t heard anything from your office stating that things are going to change … Nobody has said anything about my son. Nobody from your office. What I’m asking you to do is change your mind and give us some answers.”

Prior to the council meeting, much frustration was taken to the streets. On March 12, for example, about 70 protesters gathered at People’s Park and marched on Berkeley Police Department.

Though the protest was nonviolent, the anger was tangible as participants chanted slogans like “Vengeance for Kayla Moore.”

The march was soon followed by a birthday memorial for Moore, who would have turned 42 this year. The memorial also had a march with turnout similar to that of the march on Berkeley Police Department headquarters.

The council meeting, however, was not all emotional pleas and outbursts. Moore’s sister, Maria, proposed that the city have a mental health awareness month.

“What the city needs is more mental health services,” Maria said. “Let’s allocate those funds that would hire more cops to mental health services.”

The heated discussion on mental health and Moore’s death cooled down after the forced removal of one of the protesters. Councilmember Kriss Worthington emphasized that the council must focus on helping move the Berkeley community past this issue and toward a healing process.

Gladys Rosario covers academics and administration. Contact her at grosario@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @gladysrosario93.

The post City Council meeting erupts in heated debate over Kayla Moore’s death appeared first on The Daily Californian.

If the plan is approved, the city manager will draw up a list of costs for traffic analysis, traffic control methods and construction for the conversion of the two streets.

Benefits of the conversion would include a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists, less traffic due to reduced vehicle speeds and more convenient access to the campus due to the relocation of bus traffic to Bancroft, proponents say.

We’re trying to follow best practices,” said Berkeley Design Advocates President Anthony Bruzzone. “Current best practices suggest that two-way streets are better for traffic and better for business.”

The proposal is one of many improvements to Telegraph Avenue’s current design suggested by Berkeley Design Advocates, a volunteer group of architects and urban planners. Other proposed improvements include extended sidewalks, improved street lighting and more interaction between retail and entertainment spaces.

The campus currently supports the proposal because it has the potential to improve safety, said Christine Shaff, communications director for UC Berkeley’s Facilities Services.

City Councilmember Kriss Worthington, however, has introduced a separate list of his own goals.

His proposal, called the Telegraph ACTION Plan, includes improvements like outdoor merchandise tables for retail stores, increased visibility of parking and a monthly music festival, all of which, he estimates, would cost $50,500.

While the financial impact of the project has yet to be calculated, Worthington has said his 12-item plan may cost less than the two-way street proposal.

“The focus on two-way streets and sending all that money at the expense of not doing these things is very problematic,” Worthington said. “I would say that these are more important and more time-sensitive than which way the cars are going.”

The Telegraph Business Improvement District also opposes the conversion of the two streets, said Executive Director Roland Peterson, and would rather see other improvements, like creating parklets — small parking spot-sized spaces for recreation and beautification —  which will also be discussed at Tuesday’s meeting.

“We’re very intrigued, but we need to flesh out more about parklets,” Peterson said. “We’re very much interested in possible redesigns of the street in ways that make it better for pedestrians and traffic.”

For those who walk or drive down Bancroft and Durant daily, the change would have mixed results.

“As a driver, two-way streets do have their conveniences,” said senior Amanda Garcia, who has been driving in Berkeley for several months. “As a student, though, one-way streets are kind of convenient. It’s easier to cross. I can see this being a positive change, though.”

Megan Messerly covers city government. Contact her at mmesserly@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @meganmesserly.

The post City Council to consider converting Bancroft, Durant to two-way streets appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The city sent the information to Bay Area News Group on March 11 for a database of municipal salaries published yearly and realized the error at the beginning of April. The city sent employees a letter, dated April 15, apologizing for the error and notifying them that the information had been destroyed.

“Unfortunately, a staff member made a mistake,” said Donna LaSala, director of the city’s department of information technology. “There was another column deeper (in the email) that was not labeled Social Security number, and they didn’t catch it and didn’t delete it.”

Bay Area News Group requested a specific format that the city did not follow because the format required a lot of staff time, according to LaSala.

“Instead, they sent us this voluminous file of data, and shortly after, someone realized that data included Social Security numbers,” said Bert Robinson, managing editor for content at Bay Area News Group.

The news group immediately responded to the city’s request to destroy the information, Robinson said.

Some city employees, however, have criticized the amount of time it took the city to inform them of the error and are concerned about identity protection.

“I just feel like as an employee, it is really disheartening not only that this happened but that it took so long for us to find out,” said Jennifer, a city employee whose last name is held out of concern for her career. “An apology just isn’t enough to make up for that mistake.”

LaSala said, however, that it took a while to send out the letters because there were so many to distribute. She said that 11,000 city employees’ Social Security numbers were shared and that only 2,000 were those of active employees.

The city informed employees that they are currently entitled to free credit reports to ensure their identities are protected, she said.

Others city employees, however, are glad that the city responded to the error in an appropriate manner.

City Councilmember Kriss Worthington, whose Social Security number was also shared, said he would have disputed the error further if the city manager had not handled the situation as carefully. The city manager put a staff member to work putting information into the format originally requested for the news group and sending the letter to employees, he said.

The city came up with an automated report system for public records requests to avoid this problem in the future and save staff time, LaSala said.

“The people involved feel horrible,” she said. “It is a big mistake, and everyone feels very sorry. We automated the report so a person will no longer do it individually.”

Alyssa Neumann covers city government. Contact her at aneumann@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @AlyNeumann.

The post City apologizes for accidentally sending out Social Security numbers appeared first on The Daily Californian.

There are, of course, restrictions — establishments selling off-sale alcohol (selling alcohol to be consumed at a second site) can only stay open until midnight, regardless of location, while on-sale alcohol (selling alcohol to be consumed on-site, i.e. restaurants and bars) can occur until 2 a.m.

I know you’re thinking it, so say it with me: hell yes. More drunchies. Or munchies, depending on the day of the week.

How sad is it that our first thoughts turn to late-night eating options? Actually, it’s not sad. Embrace those extra carbohydrates. If you weren’t thinking “more food!,” you are either not a normal college student or you spend an inordinate amount of time at Walgreens.

Unfortunately, just because the city has granted permission for a 24-hour district doesn’t necessarily mean that businesses will follow suit. I called around to a couple of Telegraph hotspots and I received the following: a “no one wants to stay open 24/7” from Blondie’s, a “no” from Chipotle and a “that’s not something we’ve discussed yet” from C.R.E.A.M.

Goddamn it. So I have to stick to La Burrita for my Mexican food fix? What’s the point of all this if I can’t get Chipotle at 2 in the morning?!

I called up Councilmember Kriss Worthington, whose district encompasses Telegraph Avenue, in dismay. He confirmed my worst suspicions — no business has actually stepped forward saying it will participate.

What is this gonna do, then? Worthington acknowledges that “it’s gonna take a while before we see practical effects. It will contribute to changing the ambience (of the street), potentially in the long term … If we don’t address parking, signage, lighting, economic issues or safety, this policy will have very little impact at all.”

Hence, Worthington has put forth a Telegraph action plan for short-term improvements, attempting to address the aforementioned issues.

One public commenter at this past Tuesday’s meeting feared that a 24/7 Telegraph would equate to a “24/7 public restroom.” Um, I’m pretty sure that’s the way it already is.

Councilmember Linda Maio, however, brings up a real concern: What about sexual assault incidents in connection to alcohol consumption? She’s not against late hours, but her reason for voting “no” on the policy has to do with the doubling of reported rapes in Berkeley over the last year.

“The general pattern (of rape) is acquaintance rape, the confluence of that with alcohol,” Maio said. “This policy ends retail of liquor at 12, but it allows businesses to appeal the zoning department for later hours. I personally don’t want to open that door.”

I asked Worthington what his opinion was of Maio’s thoughts against the policy. “We’ve seen nearly a doubling in rape without this policy change,” said Worthington. With this policy, “there won’t be an increase in alcohol in late hours. Because of state law, even if a business is open 24 hours, they can’t sell alcohol the entire time.”

Both Worthington and Maio agree that the best way to address the increase in sexual assaults around the city is through education.

While I completely understand the problems we face with sexual assault, I don’t believe there’s much of a direct connection between allowing businesses to stay open 24 hours and a potential increase in rape incidents.

Having the city and university work jointly to improve public safety, education, prevention and enforcement will go a lot further than simply preventing shops from staying open or selling alcohol later.

Craig Becker, owner of Cafe Mediterranean and president of the Telegraph Business Improvement District Board, believes that Maio’s concerns are a misunderstanding of what a 24-hour district is attempting to do.

“The problem of rape has more to do with off-sale liquor. I don’t think this originates in restaurants and bars,” Becker said. “I think (this policy) actually has the potential to improve the safety of the nighttime environment. It’s a strategy that’s been used by other cities to decrease alcohol problems. Now, places can serve alcohol until 2 a.m. but stay open until 3 or 4 a.m. … people can sober up and eat before drifting out.”

Oh, people will certainly eat, all right. If the marijuana doesn’t do the trick, the midterms will. Now it’s up to the city to hold up its end on bettering public safety measures.

And to lobby Chipotle to extend hours. Who’s with me?

Contact Lynn Yu at lyu@dailycal.org or follow her on Twitter: @lynnqyu.

The post Southside story appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Action on the plan, a list of short-term improvements for Telegraph Avenue proposed by Councilmember Kriss Worthington, has been held over for the city council’s meeting on April 30th for further discussion.

The plan incorporates suggestions from groups like the Telegraph Livability Coalition. Improvements in the plan include outdoor merchandise tables for retail stores, increasing the visibility of parking and a monthly music festival. Worthington’s proposal estimates investment costs of about $50,500.

Gautham Thomas covers city government. Contact him at gthomas@dailycal.org.

The post Telegraph ACTION plan postponed until later City Council meeting appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The meeting, led by the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce’s Government Affairs Committee, served as a forum to discuss various plans to lure more businesses into the iconic Berkeley street. Attendees, among whom were members of the Chamber, city officials and Berkeley residents, remained optimistic about revitalizing Telegraph as a commercial space.

“Telegraph used to be a place where people would go 30 years ago, so it’s pretty exciting to talk about ways to turn the area into an actual destination,” said Polly Armstrong, CEO of the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce.

One of the focal points of the meeting was the discussion of Councilmember Kriss Worthington’s short-term, immediate proposals to be voted on Tuesday at the City Council meeting.

Worthington, who represents the Telegraph area, has put forth a “Telegraph ACTION Plan” for improvements slated for this year and the next. Costs from his office are estimated to be around $50,500 according to his agenda item.

Worthington’s proposed improvements include programs to permit retail tables, which would allow a few retail stores to put merchandise tables in front of their stores. Other ideas include drafting a design of a transit center on Dwight Way to bring in more people from around the Bay Area.

He also proposed to improve lighting, restore murals, enhance pedestrian safety, build more parking and make the street more accessible.

“With all of this construction going on, we don’t want businesses to suffer in the short term,” Worthington said. “It is essential to increase access to parking, since I see people driving around the place without actually going to the stores and restaurants all the time.”

Other long-term considerations were discussed at the meeting, like plans to build a museum that celebrates the unique history of People’s Park, to transform the district into a center for music and arts, and to create office spaces for student entrepreneurs.

Mayor Tom Bates, for instance, plans to overhaul an existing law that forbids the city from using the office space located above retail stores in the area.

“I’m sure there was a good reason for the law at the time, but this makes no sense today at all, since the area’s close proximity to the university makes it an ideal place for startups,” Bates said.

By the meeting’s end, many were optimistic that meaningful action would happen with regard to developing the area.

“This meeting was great because I could just sense the excitement and optimism among everyone, and I’m truly hopeful that Telegraph can become a great Bay Area destination,” said Armstrong.

Contact Jason Liu at jliu@dailycal.org.

The post Public meeting sparks discussion on revitalizing Telegraph appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The three food trucks will be able to reopen at Bancroft Way and College Avenue in April, according to Councilmember Kriss Worthington. Worthington and Mayor Tom Bates have both been personally involved in advocating for the food trucks’ return in recent weeks. The food trucks were asked to leave campus in December following construction on Lower Sproul.

Ann Vu and Jack Huynh, respective owners of Healthy Heavenly Foods and Kettle Corn Star, plan on reopening as soon as the city completes necessary preparations, like new signage and street markings. Michael Koh, owner of Dojo Dog, anticipates that it will take longer for Dojo Dog to return.

“(Reopening) will take time,” Koh said. “On the operations side, we have to restock inventory. I had no hope of coming back, so I was not prepared.”

He plans to open briefly in the summer and make a full return in the fall.

Koh, Vu and Huynh were notified Tuesday of the new location, Huynh said.

Huynh cited media coverage and pressure from Worthington as reasons the issue came to the forefront of the City Council’s busy agenda. Though the owners are appreciative of action that has been taken, they are still anticipating what the future will bring.

Vu said, however, that the new spot “is a little far, with less business — I can tell this for sure.”

“We’re satisfied in the sense that we get to go back to work,” Huynh said. “As for how that new location will work out, only time will tell. We’re taking it one step at a time and are grateful.”

Contact Christine Tyler at ctyler@dailycal.org.

The post Food trucks to reopen due to efforts from City Council appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The first faction consists of Max Anderson, Jesse Arreguin and Kriss Worthington. They are referred to as the “WAA” coalition, but I like to call them “The Three Musketeers” because they’re the more outspokenly progressive members of the council and are known for fighting for the “causes of the people.”

The other five are “The Clique.”

Tommy B. gets to be ASB President, Linda Maio is Everyone’s Best Friend Forever, Laurie Capitelli is the Sarcastic Kid on the Debate Team, Gordon Wozniak the Nerd, Darryl Moore the Kid Who Never Talks and Susan Wengraf the Dozer.

It’s the Breakfast Club, Berkeley style.

The Three Musketeers and The Clique clash on the most controversial of issues, with The Three Musketeers consistently losing out.

However, these two lively factions may not last forever. With the upcoming redistricting process, it’s very possible that district lines may be redrawn in such a way as to favor certain members and disadvantage others.

Rather than try to understand redistricting — a very important process that is now a whole different ballgame for Berkeley due to the passage of Measure R last fall — myself and its potential implications for a “student district,” I hit up a few of our lovely council members.

Arreguin explained in an email that “In an ideal situation, redistricting is a technical process in which legislative district boundaries are drawn to achieve equal population in each district, to protect the principle of one person, one vote.’”

But, of course, we don’t live in an ideal situation that speaks so diplomatically, so there’s sure to be drama.

Clique members Wengraf and Bates both expressed enthusiasm about seeing the new maps that are due to the city clerk on Friday, March 15, while Wozniak chimed in with an email that he believed these efforts to keep “communities of interest together” was an example of “participatory democracy alive and well in Berkeley.” What a PC group of folks we got here.

Bates was especially keen on having the maps “make sense” — “I want boundaries that make sense, lines that make sense.” But what makes a boundary or line sensible? One that pleases a certain side? The Clique certainly sounds genuinely interested in what the public has to propose and probably has the city’s best interests at heart.

Not everyone agrees, though. People’s Princess Worthington noted in an email that, “Even in Berkeley we have had … lines drawn to include specific candidates in a district and block candidates out of a district.” Arreguin backs up his buddy, saying, “Measure R … opens the door for Councilmembers to politicize the redistricting process and draw lines that punish opponents. This particular City Council is partisan and sometimes more petty than professional.“

Guys, this is like Gossip Girl for Berkeley nerds, so pay attention.

When I asked Wengraf and Bates what they thought of the idea that redistricting could be done in a way that would hurt certain council members, Bates said, “I don’t think that’s even possible,” and Wengraf scoffed, “I think that’s a very paranoid approach for redistricting … if you are a strong candidate, I don’t think it’s a problem.”

Can we please pop the popcorn and get this show on the road already?

I know I shouldn’t condone political drama for the sake of my own entertainment, but let’s be real — do we honestly think this is going to end any other way than in bloodshed?

Arreguin added that he hopes the city can have a “grown-up” discussion on this topic. Unless your last name is Solo, hope is pretty much futile.

We can strive as much as we want to make sure redrawn lines are objective, rational and sensible, but at the end of the day, there’s no way politics doesn’t come into this.

If you’ve reached the end of this column and you’re thinking, “Wow, this is gonna be a shitshow,” then I’ve done my job. If you aren’t thinking that, here’s some logic for you:

1) The Three Musketeers (more like two, as Anderson was nowhere to be found) don’t like the implications of redistricting.

2) The Clique does.

3) Put them in a mixer and blend well. You’ll get a dirty martini, shaken not stirred.

Makes sense, right?

Contact Lynn Yu at lyu@dailycal.org or follow her on Twitter: @lynnqyu.

The post There will be blood appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Steinberg finds herself among a growing group of people who work in Berkeley but reside outside the city — often due to the city’s high living costs.

“I never thought I’d leave Berkeley because of the creative diversity,” she said. “My work and business is here … (but) my husband and I couldn’t find a place in Berkeley that was affordable.”

Only 17.1 percent of Berkeley jobs are held by city residents, according to the city’s quarterly economic development report released Tuesday. By contrast, nearly 44 percent of Berkeley jobs were held by Berkeley residents in the 1990s, according to a city report compiled in 2000.

“We have a giant economic divide,” said Councilmember Kriss Worthington. “If you’re getting minimum wage working at a job, you can’t afford to live in the city of Berkeley.”

Though Steinberg owns her own business and dislikes commuting, she finds it less expensive to live in neighboring Oakland. In 1980, Steinberg’s rent for a large one-bedroom apartment was $250. By the time she left in 1995, rent had increased to $650.

Even in the last decade, rental prices have risen dramatically in Berkeley. In 2002, a two-bedroom unit in Berkeley cost $1,650 a month. By the end of 2012, the same unit averaged $1,995.

This issue also extends to houses in the city. Berkeley has one of the most expensive real estate markets in the Bay Area, with average home values exceeding $500,000, said Councilmember Jesse Arreguin.

The city suffers from a disparity between the supply of housing and the demand for homes, according to Polly Armstrong, CEO of the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce.

“The desirability of Berkeley and the growth of the campus has far outpaced our ability to get housing built,” Armstrong said. “People were being priced out … A better way of dealing with the problem might be to build more housing.”

For Jacquelyn McCormick, a Berkeley resident who also works in Berkeley, the city’s unique environment and culture have kept her here, although she acknowledges the high housing costs.

“There’s the ability to discuss and debate points of view that just doesn’t really exist in many other places,” she said. “It’s a very intellectually stimulating environment … (but) there’s a schism between people who can afford to live here and the people who are barely making it.”

Arreguin believes there must be more done in this city to address this issue, such as building more housing close to where people work and creating public transit areas that may encourage people to live in the city.

“That was the best part of my life — to eliminate any type of commute, to walk to work or go home for lunch,” Steinberg said. “Berkeley is about being local, so when people have to live in Oakland, there’s a disconnect there … It’s vital to the local economy that we should be able to make housing available.”

Daphne Chen is the lead city government reporter. Contact her at dchen@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @dchen_dc.

The post High rent forces many who work in city to live elsewhere appeared first on The Daily Californian.