Measure for measure

From playing fields to impeachment

By Alexander Marlow
From the November 2006 Print Edition

Sacrifice is an inherent part of life. To watch the Golden Bears play football live at Memorial Stadium, you have to stand up for three straight hours; to drive a car, you have to pay for gas and parking; to go the best public institution in the world, you have to endure the city of Berkeley.

By now, you might have registered to vote in the city of Berkeley (hopefully not through a Cal Berkeley Democrat) and are geared up to tackle the seven city measures on the ballot this year. Below is a voter’s guide in which I outline the measures and offer my endorsements.

Measure E: Rent Stabilization Board Vacancy (Charter Amendment — Majority Vote)
 What it is: Should a vacancy occur on the Rent Stabilization Board, an interim board member with requisite qualifications shall be appointed by the sitting board to sit until the next general election. Without the measure, a special election would be held to elect a new member.
 Financial Impact: Avoiding an unnecessary special election could save the city up to $400,000
 Alex Says: No-brainer. If any of you want to have a special election to elect another Berkeley bureaucrat whose sole purpose is to minimize the financial freedom of landlords, then you are reading the wrong magazine. YES.

Measure F: Gilman Street Playing Fields (Resolution — Majority Vote)
 What it is: This gives the go-ahead for development of a minimum of two fully lit, artificially surfaced playing fields on the waterfront property in West Berkeley at Gilman Street. This is part of a partnership with four other cities to develop these fields.
 Financial Impact: Allegedly none.  Alex Says: The measure itself is not asking for money, which is a plus, but despite receiving $5 million in grant money from California bond measures, the project is underfunded. The real key here, however, is that there is merely one regulation-size baseball field in all of Berkeley — Evan’s Diamond, home field for the Cal Bears — so, as you can imagine, field time is tough (that is, impossible) to come by. If there is ever use for city government, it is to ensure kids and college students alike have fields on which to exercise and play. YES.

Measure G: Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Resolution — Majority Vote)
 What it is: The city advises the mayor to work with the community to devise a plan by 2007, complete with targets, to cut greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent within the city by 2050.
 Financial Impact: Nothing immediate, but the committee will certainly cost thousands and implementation will perhaps cost millions.
 Alex Says: The measure’s applicability rests on two incorrect assumptions: 1) emission of greenhouse gases by humans is confirmed to be causing global warming, and 2) increased amounts of atmospheric CO2 is pernicious. Contrary to what Al Gore and other politicians would like you to believe, there is little conclusive scientific evidence that humans are causing the current trend of global warming. As UC Berkeley astronomy professor Alex Filippenko notes, “There have been huge episodes of global warming and heating before humans had even a significant population here on Earth.” What’s more, according to the Oregon Petition, which was signed by more than 17,000 scientists, “there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects.”
 This measure demonstrates many Berkeleyans are illogically panicked into demanding greenhouse gas emissions be limited before they have decided how that should be accomplished. Elimination of SUVs, limits on car ownership, and suspension of driving for a day per week, among other freedom-infringing options, are all on the table if this measure passes. NO.

Measure H: Impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney (Resolution — Majority Vote)
 What it is: I covered this measure in detail in my article in September’s California Patriot. From the article: “(1) Berkeley will ask Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney, (2) Berkeley will ask the California State Legislature to do the same, and (3) there will be a costly committee established in Berkeley to numbingly repeat steps (1) and (2).”
 Financial Impact: $10,000 minimum.
 Alex Says: Basic civics: rogue city governments can’t impeach the president and vice president. NO.

Measure I: Amending Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Citizen Initiative — Majority Vote)
 What it is: Increase the annual number of units that can be converted to condominiums from 100 to 500. Also entitles tenants to purchase their unit at a discount of 5 percent.
 Financial Impact: Transfer fees and property taxes will generate revenue for the city.
 Alex Says: The people that own property should have a right to convert it to condos. Even converting the maximum 500 condos would reduce the city rental market by less than 2 percent. The tenant has the option to buy at a 5 percent discount, and if he chooses to leave, he gets 2 percent of the asking price in cash — it sounds like a sweet deal on both ends. Besides, people that own their properties tend to keep them in better physical condition, which means this measure could actually beautify the city. YES.

Measure J: Amending Landmarks Preservation and Demolition Permit Application Ordinances (Citizen Initiative — Majority Vote)
 What it is: Any changes to landmarks or possible landmarks would have to be approved by voters, making it more difficult for the city to get rid of monuments. If the measure doesn’t pass, Mayor Tom Bates’ alternative, which makes it easier to demolish hundred-year-old houses than to obtain a permit to repave a driveway, will become law.
 Financial Impact: Elections cost money; possible liability.
 Alex Says: Give people a chance to vote on landmarks. I like the idea that the city would have to go through a measured, detailed process in order to destroy landmarks and potential landmarks. People argue that Berkeley already has an excess of landmarks, but we don’t want more government autonomy. YES.

Measure A: Berkeley Public Schools Educational Excellence Act of 2006 (Tax — 2/3 vote)
 What it is: Property tax increase to go to Berkeley Unified schools.
 Financial Impact: Remember Waterworld?
 Alex Says: You’re living in a dream world if you think throwing money at these schools will make them better. Let’s revamp the system — scale back union clout, get a voucher program operational, and hold teachers to a higher standard — and only then can we talk about raising taxes. NO.

Remember, while we are in school, we have a stake in Berkeley. It is important to cast our votes on these key issues and have our voices heard. Besides, a little political balance could be exactly what this city needs.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot