Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Stand-off at Berkeley tree sit continues as City Council meets to discuss
The Stand-off between tree sitters and university police at the Oak Grove in Berkeley has continued unabated for more than a week. (4:10 MP3)
Listen now:
At tonight's Berkeley City Council Meeting, council member Donna Spring will ask for an urgent agenda item be added to confront the University over blocking the public sidewalk along Piedmont Ave at the Oak Grove.
SPRING: “I'm hoping that six members of the council will be willing to add it to the agenda, and there I want to make a motion to ask that we write a letter to the university telling them that we need our sidewalk back again. We need public access and to get their barriers off the public sidewalks. If they want to restrict the tree sitters they're gonna have to do it on their own property. Not use the public right-of-way to try to restrict the tree sitters from getting food and water.
Protesters first occupied the trees in the Oak Grove more than 18 months ago in an effort to stop a planned Sports complex adjacent to the stadium at UC Berkeley. Last Monday, in anticipation of a judge's ruling, UC Berkeley brought in a Watsonville tree service company to remove the sitters' platforms and traverse lines.
On Sunday, police blocked supporters from providing food and water to the tree sitters. Ayr a supporter of the Oak Grove, told KPFA that he did not know how much food or water the tree sitters have left, but indicated the situation is not urgent.
Ayr: "Obviously as each day passes their rations are getting lower and lower being that we're not able to get them any new stuff, so we're demanding that the university allow food and water in."
Dan Mogulof, executive director of public affairs at the university, said that the university feels it has achieved its goal of making it difficult for the tree sitters to maintain their protest.
Mogulof: “If they're tired and if they're hungry and thirsty then all they need do is come down and they can have everything they need. Having said that, we continue to monitor the situation on a day-by-day basis. We're in constant contact with the people in the trees, they're telling us that they have adequate supplies. But if we perceive, or hear about any significant change in the status quo, in so far as their health and safety and well-being is concerned, we'll be ready to reevaluate our current position.”
Mogulof would not say whether or not the university would allow the protesters access to food or water after they exhaust their existing supplies. In a formal letter to City Manager Phil Kamlarz, the university affirmed that it is monitoring the health of the tree sitters, and will provide food and water to any protesters who come down.
Mayor Tom Bates said that he does not feel the University should take action against the tree sitters until the legal case has been completely resolved.
Bates: “Eventually this is gonna wind down, just not that far off. The future is here, so it looks like, very shortly, we'll have a definitive answer to the question, “Can they cut down the trees?” And if they can cut down the trees in the near future, which I wouldn't like to see happen, and hope doesn't happen, then obviously the tree sitters are gonna have to come out of the trees. So it seems to me that, right now, that the university oughta not try to starve them out, or not allow them to have water too, in order to stay in the trees until we get a definitive answer from the judge.”
Mogulof said he did not know why the university contracted with Williams Tree Service in Watsonville.
Mogulof: “I personally have no idea where that firm is from I wasn't a party to any of those conversations, but to the best of my knowledge we selected a firm that had had specific experience with these sorts of events and activities in the past and were adaquetly trained and experienced to manage the situation. The fact is, is that no one was seriously injured last week, that we did manage to achieve our objectives and as far as I know the only one seriously injured was an arborist who was bit by one of the protesters.”
The company has done business with UC Santa Cruz in the past. During the winter break, Williams Tree Service removed materials left near the site of a tree sit there. The Metro Santa Cruz Newspaper reports that the tree service's activities at the Santa Cruz site led vandals to damage company property held in its service yard. Citing safety concerns the University is refusing to speak publicly about the Tree Service company.
Dennis Williams of Williams Tree Service also refused to comment on the companies operations saying that he can't speak about the matter until he has permission from the University police department. Mogoluf said he was unaware of any orders prohibiting Williams Tree Service from speaking to the media, and KPFA was unable to secure permission for Williams by the time of this broadcast.
For KPFA, in Berkeley, I'm Josh Wolf
SPRING: “I'm hoping that six members of the council will be willing to add it to the agenda, and there I want to make a motion to ask that we write a letter to the university telling them that we need our sidewalk back again. We need public access and to get their barriers off the public sidewalks. If they want to restrict the tree sitters they're gonna have to do it on their own property. Not use the public right-of-way to try to restrict the tree sitters from getting food and water.
Protesters first occupied the trees in the Oak Grove more than 18 months ago in an effort to stop a planned Sports complex adjacent to the stadium at UC Berkeley. Last Monday, in anticipation of a judge's ruling, UC Berkeley brought in a Watsonville tree service company to remove the sitters' platforms and traverse lines.
On Sunday, police blocked supporters from providing food and water to the tree sitters. Ayr a supporter of the Oak Grove, told KPFA that he did not know how much food or water the tree sitters have left, but indicated the situation is not urgent.
Ayr: "Obviously as each day passes their rations are getting lower and lower being that we're not able to get them any new stuff, so we're demanding that the university allow food and water in."
Dan Mogulof, executive director of public affairs at the university, said that the university feels it has achieved its goal of making it difficult for the tree sitters to maintain their protest.
Mogulof: “If they're tired and if they're hungry and thirsty then all they need do is come down and they can have everything they need. Having said that, we continue to monitor the situation on a day-by-day basis. We're in constant contact with the people in the trees, they're telling us that they have adequate supplies. But if we perceive, or hear about any significant change in the status quo, in so far as their health and safety and well-being is concerned, we'll be ready to reevaluate our current position.”
Mogulof would not say whether or not the university would allow the protesters access to food or water after they exhaust their existing supplies. In a formal letter to City Manager Phil Kamlarz, the university affirmed that it is monitoring the health of the tree sitters, and will provide food and water to any protesters who come down.
Mayor Tom Bates said that he does not feel the University should take action against the tree sitters until the legal case has been completely resolved.
Bates: “Eventually this is gonna wind down, just not that far off. The future is here, so it looks like, very shortly, we'll have a definitive answer to the question, “Can they cut down the trees?” And if they can cut down the trees in the near future, which I wouldn't like to see happen, and hope doesn't happen, then obviously the tree sitters are gonna have to come out of the trees. So it seems to me that, right now, that the university oughta not try to starve them out, or not allow them to have water too, in order to stay in the trees until we get a definitive answer from the judge.”
Mogulof said he did not know why the university contracted with Williams Tree Service in Watsonville.
Mogulof: “I personally have no idea where that firm is from I wasn't a party to any of those conversations, but to the best of my knowledge we selected a firm that had had specific experience with these sorts of events and activities in the past and were adaquetly trained and experienced to manage the situation. The fact is, is that no one was seriously injured last week, that we did manage to achieve our objectives and as far as I know the only one seriously injured was an arborist who was bit by one of the protesters.”
The company has done business with UC Santa Cruz in the past. During the winter break, Williams Tree Service removed materials left near the site of a tree sit there. The Metro Santa Cruz Newspaper reports that the tree service's activities at the Santa Cruz site led vandals to damage company property held in its service yard. Citing safety concerns the University is refusing to speak publicly about the Tree Service company.
Dennis Williams of Williams Tree Service also refused to comment on the companies operations saying that he can't speak about the matter until he has permission from the University police department. Mogoluf said he was unaware of any orders prohibiting Williams Tree Service from speaking to the media, and KPFA was unable to secure permission for Williams by the time of this broadcast.
For KPFA, in Berkeley, I'm Josh Wolf
For more information:
http://joshwolf.net/blog
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Why aren't activists demanding the Council direct the City Manager to issue orders to the BPD--if it is the BPD involved?
If the UCPD is setting barriors, why not order the BPD to remove them?
Blocking the sidewalk, as any homeless person knows, is a cowardly criminal act.
Satire aside, it's unclear to me why indignant letters to indifferent authorities are preferred over functional directives to police departments paid to respond.
Perhaps someone can clue me in?
If the UCPD is setting barriors, why not order the BPD to remove them?
Blocking the sidewalk, as any homeless person knows, is a cowardly criminal act.
Satire aside, it's unclear to me why indignant letters to indifferent authorities are preferred over functional directives to police departments paid to respond.
Perhaps someone can clue me in?
it is the university police involved in the conflict, not the Berkeley police. Neither Berkeley police nor fire departments are part of this. In fact, those arrested have been taken to Santa Rita instead of being held in Berkeley.
I wonder whether this is the battle we should be fighting. The universtity is still going to build this athletic center, or at least its most likely. Sitting in the trees isn't going to change anything at this point, only the courts will decide this one.
Maybe we could spend this energy trying to ensure that the discriminatory, anti-gay-marriage proposition doesn't pass in November. That would have huge consequences for the gay community and civil rights here in Cali and all over the US.
Or perhaps this effort could be directed to helping the homeless, who are increasingly populating the streets in this time of economic distress.
These are problems that the community could make a true difference on and issues that will be more global that the grove outside the stadium.
Just some thoughts. Maybe this could be a forum to discuss this...
Maybe we could spend this energy trying to ensure that the discriminatory, anti-gay-marriage proposition doesn't pass in November. That would have huge consequences for the gay community and civil rights here in Cali and all over the US.
Or perhaps this effort could be directed to helping the homeless, who are increasingly populating the streets in this time of economic distress.
These are problems that the community could make a true difference on and issues that will be more global that the grove outside the stadium.
Just some thoughts. Maybe this could be a forum to discuss this...
maybe the university could take the money they will spend on this athletic center and spend it to build housing for the homeless. What are our national priorities? How about housing, health care and jobs before extravagance? Oh, I forgot...this is america...it's all about excess, flash and celebrity...darwinian theory. Better yet, why don't we build the President and Chancellor another huge mansion and raise their salaries and hire more police by raising student fees, cutting back on services, etc, etc....why don't we build an astrodome on the Oak Grove and condos on top of that.....who cares about nature and things like earthquakes
The tree-sitters have been receiving donations of all sorts; sure, sometimes, they're attacked by police or whoever. BUT why don't they use this very same resiliency and passion to get a productive life and protest something worth-while? Are they hiding in trees or are they really protesting something worth-while?
YOU GO TREESITTERS, STAY UP THERE AS LONG AS YOU CAN
News Update from the Berkeley Daily Planet at http://www.berkeleydaily.org/issue/2008-06-26/article/30428?headline=Council-Shuts-Out-Public-in-Tree-Sit-Discussions
Council Shuts Out Public in Tree-Sit Discussions
By Judith Scherr
Friday June 27, 2008
While some tree-sit supporters applaud the city decision to look at suing the university over the barriers it has erected on city streets and sidewalks to keep tree-sit supporters away from Memorial Grove protesters, they also are saying that the city should include the public in discussions about the issues of the health and safety of the protesters.
At its meeting Tuesday, the Berkeley City Council voted to place the question of the health and safety of protesters carrying out civil disobedience in the trees as an emergency item on the agenda. Relegated to the end of a lengthy agenda, the item mustered only four of the five votes needed to extend the council meeting beyond 12:30 a.m.
Councilmember Dona Spring had made a motion to allow supporters to give tree-sitters food and water and to allow a physician to examine them, but without extension of the meeting, the motion could not be discussed.
According to its rules, the council will automatically hear the tree-sit question at the next council meeting, which is July 8.
“July 8 is late,” former mayor Shirley Dean, a tree-sit supporter, told the Planet Friday. “I don’t know what will happen to [the tree sitters] tomorrow. It’s a crisis situation.”
Councilmember Kriss Worthington told the Planet he was trying to muster five votes to hold an open session council meeting on Monday, the same day a closed session is scheduled. By late afternoon, he said he had secured only three of the five votes he needed to call an open meeting.
On the agenda of the closed session, scheduled at 5 p.m. Monday in the council chambers, the council is scheduled to discuss a number of legal issues, including the lawsuit against the university over building a sports training facility adjacent to the crumbling Memorial Stadium located on an earthquake fault. Also on the agenda is the question of whether to file a new lawsuit against the university to force it to remove the barriers it placed on city streets.
“Both of these issues have an impact on the public,” UC Berkeley student Matthew Taylor told the Planet Friday. A tree-sit supporter, Taylor was arrested by the UC police at the grove on Sunday when he crossed the police barrier on Piedmont Avenue.
“People should have a right to be at the discussions,” Taylor said, arguing that closed door discussions should be limited to legal strategies.
Taylor said that Spring’s council item was critical. “They need to take it up immediately. Every day of delay is problematic, when we’re not able to resupply the supporters.”
(On Thursday, tree sitters accepted water from UC police.)
Mayor Tom Bates told the Planet he thought it was unnecessary to hold an open council meeting before July 8.
Along with City Manager Phil Kamlarz and City Councilmember Laurie Capitelli, Bates met Tuesday with a number of university officials including Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom.
“Our concern is for the safety of the people in the trees—it’s a major concern,” Bates said. “Nothing much came out of it,”
Bates was among those who did not vote to continue the council meeting, which ended abruptly at 12:30 a.m. The council was therefore unable to discuss the emergency item in public. Bates told the Planet there was no need for an open council session before July 8.
“I would not rule out anything,” he added. “We have to see how events unfold.”
Linda Maio’s vote was key in the council's vote not to extend the meeting to permit a discussion of Spring’s motion.
On Friday, Maio told the Planet why she did not vote to extend the meeting. She said she was satisfied with a report from city staff whom the city manager had sent up to the grove during the council meeting. They reported, via the city manager, that the tree-sitters said they were not in an emergency situation and would not accept food and water from university officials.
The manager’s report, however, did not convince Councilmembers Max Anderson, Darryl Moore, Spring and Worthington. Worthington had spoken directly to the tree-sitters by phone during the council's discussion on whether to add the emergency item. Worthington reported that the tree sitters said they were in need of food and water and felt they faced a health crisis.
Maio said at this point there would be nothing gained by holding an open session to discuss the issue. “Now there is nothing more for us to do,” she said. “We have to be able to do something other than talking about it if we go into open session.”
The question of the barriers has been the subject of letters and discussions between the city and university.
Saying that the court case had not yet been settled and the university would not be able to prepare for construction on the site, Kamlarz wrote the university denying it a permit to encroach on its streets and sidewalks.
However, claiming that people occupying the trees constitute a crime scene, the university has fenced off the sidewalk and put up barricades on Piedmont Avenue, without a permit.
Kamlarz wrote the UC Berkeley police chief: “The city considers that any injury or damage that occurs as a result of the university’s actions to control the ‘crime scene’ will be its sole responsibility. In addition to the obvious risks to pedestrians, protesters and drivers, Chief [Debra] Pryor has expressed concern that the barriers you have been placing on the sidewalk and public street may interfere with emergency access to Memorial Stadium and the International House.”
“We certainly can demand to have our sidewalks back,” Spring told the Planet on Friday. “They’ve had them long enough.
Council Shuts Out Public in Tree-Sit Discussions
By Judith Scherr
Friday June 27, 2008
While some tree-sit supporters applaud the city decision to look at suing the university over the barriers it has erected on city streets and sidewalks to keep tree-sit supporters away from Memorial Grove protesters, they also are saying that the city should include the public in discussions about the issues of the health and safety of the protesters.
At its meeting Tuesday, the Berkeley City Council voted to place the question of the health and safety of protesters carrying out civil disobedience in the trees as an emergency item on the agenda. Relegated to the end of a lengthy agenda, the item mustered only four of the five votes needed to extend the council meeting beyond 12:30 a.m.
Councilmember Dona Spring had made a motion to allow supporters to give tree-sitters food and water and to allow a physician to examine them, but without extension of the meeting, the motion could not be discussed.
According to its rules, the council will automatically hear the tree-sit question at the next council meeting, which is July 8.
“July 8 is late,” former mayor Shirley Dean, a tree-sit supporter, told the Planet Friday. “I don’t know what will happen to [the tree sitters] tomorrow. It’s a crisis situation.”
Councilmember Kriss Worthington told the Planet he was trying to muster five votes to hold an open session council meeting on Monday, the same day a closed session is scheduled. By late afternoon, he said he had secured only three of the five votes he needed to call an open meeting.
On the agenda of the closed session, scheduled at 5 p.m. Monday in the council chambers, the council is scheduled to discuss a number of legal issues, including the lawsuit against the university over building a sports training facility adjacent to the crumbling Memorial Stadium located on an earthquake fault. Also on the agenda is the question of whether to file a new lawsuit against the university to force it to remove the barriers it placed on city streets.
“Both of these issues have an impact on the public,” UC Berkeley student Matthew Taylor told the Planet Friday. A tree-sit supporter, Taylor was arrested by the UC police at the grove on Sunday when he crossed the police barrier on Piedmont Avenue.
“People should have a right to be at the discussions,” Taylor said, arguing that closed door discussions should be limited to legal strategies.
Taylor said that Spring’s council item was critical. “They need to take it up immediately. Every day of delay is problematic, when we’re not able to resupply the supporters.”
(On Thursday, tree sitters accepted water from UC police.)
Mayor Tom Bates told the Planet he thought it was unnecessary to hold an open council meeting before July 8.
Along with City Manager Phil Kamlarz and City Councilmember Laurie Capitelli, Bates met Tuesday with a number of university officials including Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom.
“Our concern is for the safety of the people in the trees—it’s a major concern,” Bates said. “Nothing much came out of it,”
Bates was among those who did not vote to continue the council meeting, which ended abruptly at 12:30 a.m. The council was therefore unable to discuss the emergency item in public. Bates told the Planet there was no need for an open council session before July 8.
“I would not rule out anything,” he added. “We have to see how events unfold.”
Linda Maio’s vote was key in the council's vote not to extend the meeting to permit a discussion of Spring’s motion.
On Friday, Maio told the Planet why she did not vote to extend the meeting. She said she was satisfied with a report from city staff whom the city manager had sent up to the grove during the council meeting. They reported, via the city manager, that the tree-sitters said they were not in an emergency situation and would not accept food and water from university officials.
The manager’s report, however, did not convince Councilmembers Max Anderson, Darryl Moore, Spring and Worthington. Worthington had spoken directly to the tree-sitters by phone during the council's discussion on whether to add the emergency item. Worthington reported that the tree sitters said they were in need of food and water and felt they faced a health crisis.
Maio said at this point there would be nothing gained by holding an open session to discuss the issue. “Now there is nothing more for us to do,” she said. “We have to be able to do something other than talking about it if we go into open session.”
The question of the barriers has been the subject of letters and discussions between the city and university.
Saying that the court case had not yet been settled and the university would not be able to prepare for construction on the site, Kamlarz wrote the university denying it a permit to encroach on its streets and sidewalks.
However, claiming that people occupying the trees constitute a crime scene, the university has fenced off the sidewalk and put up barricades on Piedmont Avenue, without a permit.
Kamlarz wrote the UC Berkeley police chief: “The city considers that any injury or damage that occurs as a result of the university’s actions to control the ‘crime scene’ will be its sole responsibility. In addition to the obvious risks to pedestrians, protesters and drivers, Chief [Debra] Pryor has expressed concern that the barriers you have been placing on the sidewalk and public street may interfere with emergency access to Memorial Stadium and the International House.”
“We certainly can demand to have our sidewalks back,” Spring told the Planet on Friday. “They’ve had them long enough.
All these comments of; "Why don't treesitters do something else more important, like stop the war in Iraq, or protect the rainforests of the Amazon or help the local homeless population of Berkeley are most likely coming from UC Berkeley PR reps who follow the imc website details on the treesits..
Why bother with this site?? In the court of public opinion, the UC is losing ground in their arguments for their athletic center at the expense of the oaks. The tree-sitters are winning the PR battle, so now the UC PR reps need to hijack indymedia in attempts to make the tree-sitters look like distractions from other more legitimate causes..
This is nothing more than dog-chasing-tail logic, as ANY single issue cause will no doubt detract time and energy from other causes. What about the people struggling for the liberation of the Palestinian people from Israeli occupation, are they not taking time and energy away from people trying to end the U.S. military occupation of Iraq? Are the people battling against the nuclear waste disposal in Yucca Mt. not taking time/energy away from others trying to stop the use of depleted uranium (DU) by the U.S. military? Are the people saving the northern redwoods of CA not taking time away from others trying to save old growth Sitka Spruce forests from clear cut logging in Canada??
Of these issues, which could be ranked in the scale of importance? Are some humans more worthy of being rescued than others? Are some trees and endangered species more worthy of being rescued than others? Who decides which crisis in the ecosystem is more valid than another, and how do we measure these ratings?
The point is there will never be a shortage of issues, causes and concerns for activists to be involved with. Activists will never find themselves bored or without some sort of crisis to prevent, stop or fight. To attempt to derail a community effort like the UC Berkeley treesits by saying it is unimportant or energy could be used elsewhere is simply poor logic and should be identified on imc as the work of UC PR professionals, no matter who they claim to be..
Am personally very impressed with the positive energy of the UC treesits and wish that they continue as long as needed until the community can convince the UC admins that other options will be needed, and the oak grove is guaranteed safety..
Am sticking with an earlier suggestion for an outdoor greenway fitness trail within the oak grove, with horizontal pull-up bars and other exercise equipment available for people to work out in a oxygen rich microclimate of the oak grove. No oaks need to be destroyed in this process and the atheletes can have some neat equipement to work with. That should satisfy both groups in the debate with the least amount of ecological destruction AND at the lowest cost to the public..
outdoor fitness equipment;
http://www.outdoor-fitness.com/
greenway fact sheet;
http://www.americantrails.org/resources/greenways/NPS2Grnwy.html
other trail info @;
http://www.americantrails.org/resources/health/index.html
Why bother with this site?? In the court of public opinion, the UC is losing ground in their arguments for their athletic center at the expense of the oaks. The tree-sitters are winning the PR battle, so now the UC PR reps need to hijack indymedia in attempts to make the tree-sitters look like distractions from other more legitimate causes..
This is nothing more than dog-chasing-tail logic, as ANY single issue cause will no doubt detract time and energy from other causes. What about the people struggling for the liberation of the Palestinian people from Israeli occupation, are they not taking time and energy away from people trying to end the U.S. military occupation of Iraq? Are the people battling against the nuclear waste disposal in Yucca Mt. not taking time/energy away from others trying to stop the use of depleted uranium (DU) by the U.S. military? Are the people saving the northern redwoods of CA not taking time away from others trying to save old growth Sitka Spruce forests from clear cut logging in Canada??
Of these issues, which could be ranked in the scale of importance? Are some humans more worthy of being rescued than others? Are some trees and endangered species more worthy of being rescued than others? Who decides which crisis in the ecosystem is more valid than another, and how do we measure these ratings?
The point is there will never be a shortage of issues, causes and concerns for activists to be involved with. Activists will never find themselves bored or without some sort of crisis to prevent, stop or fight. To attempt to derail a community effort like the UC Berkeley treesits by saying it is unimportant or energy could be used elsewhere is simply poor logic and should be identified on imc as the work of UC PR professionals, no matter who they claim to be..
Am personally very impressed with the positive energy of the UC treesits and wish that they continue as long as needed until the community can convince the UC admins that other options will be needed, and the oak grove is guaranteed safety..
Am sticking with an earlier suggestion for an outdoor greenway fitness trail within the oak grove, with horizontal pull-up bars and other exercise equipment available for people to work out in a oxygen rich microclimate of the oak grove. No oaks need to be destroyed in this process and the atheletes can have some neat equipement to work with. That should satisfy both groups in the debate with the least amount of ecological destruction AND at the lowest cost to the public..
outdoor fitness equipment;
http://www.outdoor-fitness.com/
greenway fact sheet;
http://www.americantrails.org/resources/greenways/NPS2Grnwy.html
other trail info @;
http://www.americantrails.org/resources/health/index.html
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$150.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network