Anti-Growth Group Wraps Itself in Green 

Opponents of Berkeley's groundbreaking plan for a dense urban center are attempting to fool voters into putting the issue on the ballot.

The Bush administration became infamous over the years for perverting the English language to disguise its true motives. When large timber interests wanted to log national forests, they called it the "Healthy Forests Initiative." And when corporate polluters sought to pollute the air even more, they dubbed it the "Clean Skies Initiative." In the last few weeks, however, a group of Berkeley anti-growth advocates has come up with a bit of language perversion that would make Karl Rove proud.

The group, led by councilmembers Kriss Worthington and Jesse Arreguín, is attempting to overturn a plan adopted last month by a majority of the Berkeley City Council that could lead to dense urban growth. The plan itself is groundbreaking. It would require that all new buildings in downtown Berkeley meet strict environmental standards and it pushes the envelope on what is possible for downtown development. The plan also could help Berkeley meet its aggressive greenhouse-emissions goals by increasing urban density, and thereby slowing the need for long commutes.

But the anti-growth group wants Berkeley voters to overturn the so-called Downtown Area Plan, because they say it doesn't go far enough. So they've launched a referendum campaign to put the issue on the ballot. The group calls itself the "Alliance for a Green and Livable Downtown." In truth, however, the group is advocating for a downtown that will be neither green nor livable because if its demands are met, it likely will result in a revised plan that will stifle downtown development, prohibit the city from doing more to fight global warming, and help spur suburban sprawl at the same time.

But the group's name isn't the only thing that's misleading. The language on the official referendum petition, for example, tells voters that the city's downtown plan comes "without the environmental protections and improvements essential for a vibrant downtown." In reality, however, page 27 of the plan specifically requires that all new buildings or major renovations in downtown Berkeley be rated "LEED Gold or its equivalent." LEED is an internationally recognized green-rating system developed by the US Green Building Council. It has four rating categories. A gold rating is the second most environmentally stringent after platinum.

"It's completely inflammatory and deceitful," Erin Rhoades, the volunteer executive director of Livable Berkeley, a pro-downtown development group, said of the referendum campaign. Rhoades, whose husband is a developer and former city planner, also said that the anti-growth group's signature gatherers have attempted to fool voters by asking, "Do want a green downtown?" when attempting to collect signatures. Livable Berkeley and other supporters of the council's decision have been showing up on street corners, talking to voters alongside the signature gatherers, trying to set the record straight. The petitioners must collect about 5,500 valid signatures by next week.

The Alliance for a Green and Livable Downtown also has come under criticism for posting a letter on its web site from the Sierra Club, making it seem as if the respected environmental group supports the referendum, when, in fact, it has taken no position. (The alliance's web site is GreenDowntownBerkeley.org, a name that also would surely make Rove smile.) The letter posting prompted Kent Lewandowski, chair of the Sierra Club Northern Alameda County Group, to write a second letter to the council and area activists, clarifying that the Sierra Club neither supports nor opposes the referendum or the city's downtown area plan.

In an interview, Lewandowski expressed disappointment that the alliance had posted the Sierra Club's letter, and thus had confused people as to the club's true position, saying he "would rather not see our letter on the web site." The letter came from the club in late May and expressed opposition to the downtown plan developed by the city's planning commission. The club backed a second plan put together by a city-sponsored panel. Originally, the council was leaning toward adopting the planning commission plan, but then in June and July it incorporated many of the requests made by the Sierra Club into the final downtown plan. "Let me put it this way," Lewandowski said, "we're not totally unhappy with what came out of council."

When asked whether the alliance planned to remove the Sierra Club's letter from its web site, Arreguín told Eco Watch that the issue was being "discussed." After Lewandowski sent out his clarification letter, the alliance posted an addendum on its web site, noting that the Sierra Club neither supports nor opposes the referendum campaign. "In no way do we want to mislead people into thinking that the Sierra Club has taken a position on the issue," Arreguín said.

But when asked if the referendum petition itself was misleading, Arreguín acknowledged that the final downtown plan requires LEED Gold ratings on new buildings and major renovations. But he maintained that the council also should have required developers to pay for "open space and transportation mitigations," along with more affordable housing. Arreguín also argued that such requirements would not kill downtown development, despite assurances from developers that they would and a city-commissioned feasibility that concurred with developers. "I think it will still be profitable for developers to build in downtown Berkeley, regardless of the requirements we put on it," the councilman said.

But of course, if that were true, then developers would have clamored to build in downtown Berkeley during the housing boom. But they did not, and they certainly won't once the housing market rebounds, if the anti-growth advocates have their way.

Comments (9)

Showing 1-9 of 9

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-9 of 9

Add a comment

Anonymous and pseudonymous comments will be removed.

Readers also liked…

  • The Man

    How Don Perata became the politician he is today.
    • Dec 8, 2004
  • Using Trees to Curb Pollution

    North Oakland's Urban Releaf leads a revitalization of neglected blocks while studying benefits of trees in storm-water management.
    • May 11, 2011
  • Russo Versus the People

    Oakland's city attorney is going gangbusters to prevent citizens from voting on a major waterfront development.
    • Feb 21, 2007

Latest in Eco Watch

  • Proposed Dam Sparks Government Fight

    Two federal agencies are at odds over a controversial proposal to build a giant dam on the San Joaquin River — as residents who would be displaced by the dam gird for battle.
    • Feb 3, 2016
  • Crude-By-Rail Projects Face Key Votes

    Environmentalists are hoping to block two projects that would bring Canadian tar sands oil through the Bay Area by train.
    • Jan 27, 2016
  • Keystone 2.0

    Environmentalists are concerned that oil companies will attempt to ship dirty tar sands oil through the Bay Area.
    • Dec 9, 2015
  • More »

Author Archives

  • PG&E's Assault on Solar Power

    Last month, state regulators gave in to PG&E's demands and made it tougher to expand large-scale solar projects. Now, the utility wants to roll back incentives for rooftop-solar energy.
    • Jan 27, 2016
  • Why Yosemite Was Right to Change the Names of Iconic Places

    The park service's decision to rename iconic place names in Yosemite National Park, because of a legal dispute, will likely eviscerate the exaggerated financial claims made by Delaware North.
    • Jan 20, 2016
  • More»

Most Popular Stories

  • The Real Brooklyn by the Bay

    Oakland is often compared to Brooklyn, New York. But did you know that much of East Oakland actually used to be called Brooklyn?
  • When Landlords Lie

    Last year, Charles Oshinuga’s landlord lied in court while trying to evict him and his neighbors. Yet despite winning a jury trial, Oshinuga still lost his Oakland home.
  • Proposed Dam Sparks Government Fight

    Two federal agencies are at odds over a controversial proposal to build a giant dam on the San Joaquin River — as residents who would be displaced by the dam gird for battle.
  • The Gunrunner and the Peacemakers

    Oakland's gun violence epidemic seems impossible to stop. But the story of a local firearms trafficker illustrates how laws that make it tougher to buy guns can help reduce violence.
  • Cap and Clear-Cut

    California's cap-and-trade system, which has been touted as a model for reducing greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, allows timber companies to clear-cut forests.

Special Reports

2015 Year in Review

Our writers reflect on housing, the arts, music, food, Black Lives Matter activism, politics, weed, and much more.

Holiday Guide 2015

Your guide to the best gifts, gadgets, toys, music, and books of the year; plus holiday food and drink, snow sports, winter getaways, and more.

© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation