Watch The City Council Meeting
Edit: It looks like no appeal, as we theorized inside. I was watching Daily Show rerun (oh, Jon Stewart, swoon), but BeastMode, who was paying attention says this:
Council voted not to take action on the appeal for 58 days. Essentially there were not enough votes for the appeal methinks.
I just heard "Trees Speak Through Dona Spring."
Now, the President of PHA is speaking and says he will be appealing.
over 3 years ago
TwistNHook
71 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Matthew Taylor, UC Berkeley student, says that the Council needs to say itself from itself. Because the trees will be cut and then Cal will lose. Now, he requests that Dona Spring have a vote.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Exceuse me, needs to save “Berkeley from itself.”
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Does he not realize that even if they join, they injunction will likely not be stayed by the Court of Appeals? Idiot.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
the list of things these people don’t realize could fill a book. lots of books, by the way. which i’m sure none of these people have never read.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
I might have explained that poorly. He mapped out everything going forward as this:
Appeal starts
Trees cut
Cal loses appeal
Has to start all over
So, to join the appeal is to actually HELP Cal. To save Cal from itself.
Also, I just spoke with CBKWit (who I actually watched speak on the video and he had a sweet speech). He noted that Worthington and Bates have been going at it. So, if Bates wants to appeal, it seems unlikely that Worthington will, too. Apparently, Councilmember Betty Olds is not there. That means she doesn’t speak to the equation at all (similar to Dona Spring not being there, albeit for other reasons).
So, there are currently 7 people there to vote. I think they need 5 votes to appeal. Woz won’t. If CBKWit and Spazzy McGee and others were successful today with Capitelli, he won’t. That’s two right there. If Worthington is on the opposite side of Bates, then he won’t either. I think he abstained last time. I have also heard that Moore will not vote to appeal and/or abstain.
Now, my understanding is that Bates, Maio, and Anderson will vote to appeal. If I am understanding this correctly, 3 will vote yes, 4 will vote no, and Olds and Spring won’t figure into this. I hope I am right, because under that analysis there is no appeal!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Yeah, maybe I’m way off. There’s a lot of verbal pressure here. There are a LOT more pro-tree people than anti-tree. So, some people can change their mind. I hope not!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I’ve always thought ‘public’ sessions were more show than substance anyway. Usually minds are made up way in advance. Hope so.
I would think that given the clear public nature of this issue and the fact it has gone on for so long, there is nobody on the Council who is saying “Well, I’m not sure which way I lean, maybe I’ll let the people who speak tonight make up my mind for me.” If so, Cal is screwed and in a big way. Because it appeared that there were many, many more speakers for the appeal than against and that there would be applause after pro-tree speeches.
But I doubt that there are many Councilmembers going in with that mindset. I hope not!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Damn, Bates is kicking all kinds of ass here. He ain’t taking no guff from anybody. His guff supplies must be full, because he is not accepting any more guff. Guff.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Vote not to take action? What the hell?
If I am right, that means STO and PHA are on the hook for the bond during this time period.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
Dude, whats up? Im watching it now again, but its the zoning board. What did I miss????
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Council voted not to take action on the appeal for 58 days. Essentially there were not enough votes for the appeal methinks. Also, it means PHA and STO are on the hook for the bond. I could be wrong, but I think that’s what just happened. Extremely anit-climactic.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
Sounds like watching Daily Show rerun was the way to go! I’ll edit this to include your information.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
My guess is the City will join if the COA issues an injunction, if not, there’s no point.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
Sounds like they are basically holding their cards back and waiting. Not going to make the tree-people happy, but like I give a doodle.
Hmmm. Now, if the tree-people appealed (as they apparently did), does that mean a 20 day stay exists? So, that would mean mid-August as compared to July 30th. sigh More frigging delays, but there is an end to this tunnel!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Yes the automatic stay was triggered by today’s appeals. That said, the stay will dissolve well before the council next meets. So, they will have to get the COA to issue a new injunction before the automatic stay dissolves otherwise . . . timber!
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
We keep having a series of hurdles to leap over. We can only focus on them one at a time. And tonight was a big one. So, we are one step closer to success.
Congrats to all who experienced Democracy in all its guts and glory!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Do they have to post bond before injunction request is considered… or can they post it only when it is approved?
I am not totally sure what the situation is, having little experience with either construction cases and/or appeals. However, my brief understanding is that they’d have to get the bond if the injunction is allowed. The injunction would be, in theory, delaying the case and the bond would be insurance if the plaintiffs were wholly wrong about the need for the injunction.
Which they would be. But hopefully it won’t get that far. And there is a strong possibility I am very, very, very wrong.
Either way, can I just say that this is the greatest educational tool for the court’s legal system. We are all learning so much!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
City council meeting was anticlimactic
Nothing we haven’t seen before. Although this is the first time I’ve come face-to-face with the hippies in person and I must say it was exceedingly difficult not to Follett-tackle that loudmouth egotist Erik Eisenberg (Ayr).
Dear god, the rudeness with which these people conduct their lives toward anyone who is not 100% in line with their utterly ridiculous belief system is the ultimate enemy.
On the plus side I did try some of the MRE bar that the UCPD have been giving the protesters. It was like a delicious pastry!
If you remember from our post way back when from when CBKWit and I went deep undercover, Ayr was the “authority challenging leader” who found his authority challenged by Long Bo/Mask Maker guy.
This would all be hilarious, if it wasn’t more tragic.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
He is a serious douchebag. Seriously.
Also, I can’t freaking believe that someone from the PHA is going to front 27 million for 14 days of delay…
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait, they're going to front this money?
Did you hear this somewhere or are you inferring?
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Spazzy
WE DID IT!! AND WE ATE SOME DELICIOUS SHORTBREAD IN THE PROCESS!
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Actually that shit was a little foul. Ok not foul but not something I’d want to eat for weeks straight. But then again I’d also not want to sit on a branch all day.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions
er, that was supposed to be a reply to CBK
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think they will be able to post the bond
I think they were counting on COB to join in the appeal and waive the bond requirement. That’s probably why the appealed today, to try to force the city to come along. Now that the city is out, I really doubt they will be able to pay the bond, which many of the pro oaks people admitted during their public comments.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
The stay is up
but in order to get a new injunction after the 20 days, I believe they will have to post a bond, and I do not believe they will have the financial capability to do so
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Pardon me for my unbridled pessimism (blame judaism if you must, but....)
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.Delay.vDelay.Delay.Delay.Delay.
Delay.Delay.Delay.
v
Delay.Delay.Delay.Delay.Delay.
Delay.
Delay.Delay.Delay.ctrlv
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
Delay.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, that is exactly right CBK, the automatic stay is in place (assuming the appeal is indeed filed) and STO and PHA have to go to the COA for a new injunction. It is very unlikely they can get the injunction granted so once the automatic stay is dissolved let the chainsaws begin.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
Appeal
The city declining to appeal is a huge victory. Practically, UC could not really just say f-- you to the City of Berkeley and proceed with construction during the appeal, injunction or not. The posture of the case before the court of appeal is now 100% different: crazy enviros vs. legitimate project proponent (UC). The appeals courts have seen hundreds of these cases and are now much less likely to grant the requested injunction. From what I’ve heard, the bond requirement won’t be the real barrier. If the appeals court really thinks that STO/PHA have a legitimate probability of prevailing (one of the considerations for issuance of the injunction) they won’t let the bond requirement stand in the way of the inunction - the court can waiver/reject the bond requirement as STO/PHA will claim poverty, justice denied, bla bla bla.
Well, yes UC could begin construction during the appeal without an injunction in place – though it is risky because if they lose the appeal they will have to pay for any modifications. That said, they could still get rid of the trees and therefore rid themselves of the crazies.
Also, I sincerely do not believe the OA will not place a bond requirement on STO and PHA. While they can take into account poverty, the court also has to take into account the fact that UC was the primary pervailing party and is incurring extraordinary costs as a result of this litigation.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
Sooooo happy
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/24/BA5911V405.DTL&tsp=1
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Replying to myself
Anybody know where we can find how the individual council members voted?
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Bates said at the meeting that the votes are secret and not publicly disclosed.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
The analysis we came up with was:
Pro Appeal: Maio; Anderson; Bates
Anti-Appeal, Abstain, Or Not Attend Meeting: Moore; Woz; Worthington, Olds, Capitelli
Passed Away: Spring
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Thanks for using my own highly speculative analysis to answer my own question, Twist!
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Reading the BDP article
It sounds like Worthington definitely voted to appeal. They very likely could have had 4 votes to appeal. Fortunately, the one council member not in attendance, Betty Olds, would not have and apparently will not vote to appeal. As long as the “no” or “abstain” members stick to their guns, we’ll be fine.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Or he’s just trying to talk tough. Nobody knows what happened in there. And it’s all a bluff. Really, if they vote to appeal in 58 days, it will most likely (hopefully!) be too late, so he doesn’t have to back his talk up.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Interesting
from the article:
“Bates said he was encouraged by assurances from Cal on Thursday indicating readiness to move forward on the city’s wish that the stadium be seismically retrofitted soon. The costly refit is part of the university’s long-term plan, though it still requires approvals and funding.”
Who knows what the trust with him, but if this is the case then yeaaahhh.
This is consistent
with what Laurie Capitelli told us during the 2PM meeting. I’ll have more on this meeting tomorrow
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Be sure to mention how I singlehandedly convinced Mr. Capitelli to abstain, and to adopt Marshawn Lynch as deputy Chief of the new Ghostriding department.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions
All the photos in there are absolutely hilarious (esp. the one I put on the front page), but this one confuses me:
Is that a recent photo? How did they rebuild everything?
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Well, I don’t think that one tree was touched was it? And even then, what the hell else are they going to do all day…be productive?
None of us are!
Why should they?
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
About Us
• About the Golden Bloggers
• Our previous site @ Blogsome
• Avinash @ Bears Necessity
• Best of the Golden Blogs
• Golden Blogs Interviews
• HydroTech's Cal Football Analyses
• Ron Fimrite's Anatomy Of A Miracle
• CGB Weekly Guides
• GoldenBlogs' Community Guidelines
• GoldenBlogs' FAQ
• CGB GIF Army
Learn More About The California Golden Blogs Clothing Store
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
Pacific-12 Conference Standings
(updated 1.2.2012 at 11:12 PM PST)
| North | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
Oregon Ducks
|
8 | 1 | 12 | 2 |
|
Stanford Cardinal
|
8 | 1 | 11 | 2 |
|
Washington Huskies
|
5 | 4 | 7 | 6 |
|
California Golden Bears
|
4 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
|
Oregon St. Beavers
|
3 | 6 | 3 | 9 |
|
Washington St. Cougars
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
| South | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
USC Trojans
|
7 | 2 | 10 | 2 |
|
UCLA Bruins
|
5 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
|
Utah Utes
|
4 | 5 | 8 | 5 |
|
Arizona St. Sun Devils
|
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|
Arizona Wildcats
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
|
Colorado Buffaloes
|
2 | 7 | 3 | 10 |
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
