Lies the Lobbyists in Berkeley Tell You

"East Bay Forward" have been using social media, and presence at city council meetings, to make false arguments during debate on development in Berkeley. They slander people who critique developers as being wealthy and as being racists. These slander tactics were on view last night, as Berkeley residents tried to preserve _The Village_, an example of Hippie Modernist architecture which has played a role in the Berkeley counter culture sine the 1970s. "East Bay Forward" lobbyists claimed that rich white homeowners only wanted to preserve _The Village_ to keep racial minorities out of the Telegraph neighborhood, by limiting housing in that area. However, in reality, the majority of the speakers who wanted to preserve _The Village_, are apartment renters and are low to middle income. Furthermore, defenders of the _The Village_ were are various racial backgrounds. The majority of the establishments in the _The Village_ are not white owned businesses. The neighborhood is not a rich, white neighborhood; it is ethnically diverse, and has many lower income individuals.

"East Bay Forward" claims that is standing up for affordable housing, but the lobbyists support the proposed development which only has 11% of affordable units, which amounts to 8 units in the entire proposed 7 story building. The issue of affordable housing was mentioned by some of the speakers who wanted to keep _The Village_. Neighborhood residents felt that it wasn't worth losing a piece of history for a primarily high-end housing project, and that feelings would be different if the project has more affordable units. The neighborhood was afford crumbs.

"East Bay Forward" supports the eviction of minority owned business, while slandering preservationists as white racists. "East Bay Forward" lobbies for high-end housing, while slandering low-income residents as elitists. The lobbying group is sleazy, dishonest, and uses double speak to muddle debate.

Another lobbying group is "Livable Berkeley". "Livable Berkeley" plays the same strategy as "East Bay Forward", spreading disinformation and slander against residents who are concerned about increased high-income developments at the loss of Berkeley's history. "Livable Berkeley" promotes a libertarian-like 'build build build' mentality, without taking into consideration the different needs and characteristics of Berkeley's diverse neighborhoods. Like "East Bay Forward", these lobbyists tend to to criticize lower income Berkeley residents whose major criticism of new development is that there isn't enough low income units.

"Livable Berkeley" doesn't lobby for the other aspects of urban infrastructure that make a city livable. For example "Livable Berkeley" doesn't lobby for new parks, in fact they openly support the coming demolition of a parklet/garden-space in the Telegraph area. "Livable Berkeley" doesn't lobby for environmental concerns. "Livable Berkeley" doesn't lobby for social justice reforms which help create a sense of equality in Berkeley. Nor do they lobby for homeless rights and homeless services. The lobbyists criticize when social rights issues appear on the city council agenda, arguing that they take time away from agenda items pertaining to housing development.

Both "Livable Berkeley" and "East Bay Forward" try to support the notion that development in Berkeley has been blocked by organized NIMBYs (not in my backyard), and that housing growth has been frozen by regressionism. In reality there is new housing stock opening all over Berkeley. In reality, there is no shortage of new construction. The biggest constraint to new housing in Berkeley is the city's geographical borders, not so-called NIMBYism. Berkeley's city limits confine it from growing outward.

Another constraint to Berkeley's housing is the University. Curiously, neither "Livable Berkeley" nor "East Bay Forward" lobby for new housing for students and faculty on UC Berkeley property. The lobbyists state that affordable student housing is a major concern, but have yet to put pressure on the UC to create housing solutions on property that it owns. "Livable Berkeley" and "East Bay Forward" also does not lobby for decreased student fees which would ease financial pressure on students. If education at UC Berkeley were free, or at least extremely affordable, students would have more income to use towards comfortable housing.

The lobbyists have allies in Berkeleyside, a local source for news which has an editorial bent in favor of uncompromising development. Berkeleyside often promotes the tweets from "Livable Berkeley", and has a particularly friendly working relationship with lobbyist Eric Panzer. In news items about controversial developments, Berkeleyside rarely gives fair representation to concerned citizen groups, tending to instead promote new buildings without delving into much thoughtful analysis of neighborhood concerns. Oftentimes, Berkeleyside seems like a real-estate website instead of a website for news.

Lobbyists working in favor of less regulated development have decreased the landmark process in Berkeley, and have pushed city government bodies to dismiss concerns about environmental degradation in the city. Decisions made by city council members are being effected by lobbyists, who use influence and threats of slander to get votes for deregulated development.

The NIMBY myth is not real. the NIMBY myth is a logical fallacy used by lobbyists. Berkeley always has been a city of change and a city that moves forward. There is no NIMBY movement that is trying to freeze the city in perpetual encapsulation. There are low-income residents, and ethnically diverse residents that are merely asking for compromise and fairness. There are residents that feel that Berkeley has given way too much in terms of history, the environment, aesthetics, and social neighborhood cohesion. There are residents that feel that decision making is being dominated by developers who don't reach out to the average citizenry. The reality is that the average Berkeley resident wants more housing, but they want truly affordably housing. Berkeley citizens want more housing, but they want development to be evenly spread around the city so there aren't some neighborhoods that get overdeveloped while others get underdeveloped. Unfortunately, city government is being manipulated by lobbyists, who use media and public meetings for disinformation and the stifling of real progressive growth.