California Golden Blogs: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Anquan Boldin Asks Arizona Cardinals for Trade.....Again Bar-right-arrows

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.

Link 27 days ago P1_marshawn_tiny TwistNHook Comment 71 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

A woman just said “I see two realities here” and then listed 3 realities. I’m not sure what side she was on, though, because she ran out of time.

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 6:08 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 6:20 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

Exceuse me, needs to save “Berkeley from itself.”

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 6:20 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 6:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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!

by ragnarok on Jul 24, 2008 6:27 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Books are made of paper. Paper is made from trees. You murderer!!!

by sec119 on Jul 24, 2008 9:38 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Nope, probably not. But that’s kind of cool.

If COB appeals, they will celebrate. We, on the other hand, will count the days.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 6:28 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 6:34 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Stop getting me all excited like that.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 6:42 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 7:00 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I’ve always thought ‘public’ sessions were more show than substance anyway. Usually minds are made up way in advance. Hope so.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 7:04 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 7:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I'm not a hero, I'm just a regular guy.

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 6:43 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

BERKELEY IS GOING TO DISAPPEAR!

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 6:47 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 6:49 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

How so?

Sorry, I literally cannot bear to watch it myself.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 6:52 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

People keep trying to talk over their time and he’s laying the smack down. I hope he doesn’t lay the smack down on any of the councilmembers trying to vote not to appeal.

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 7:01 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Living near UC equals suffering.

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 6:54 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

I just turned on the webcast for a second and LOL at the RunningWolf for mayor sign

by 408 on Jul 24, 2008 8:14 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 8:17 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:21 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 8:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:23 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

My guess is the City will join if the COA issues an injunction, if not, there’s no point.

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 8:25 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:27 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 8:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Do they have to post bond before injunction request is considered… or can they post it only when it is approved?

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 8:51 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:58 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

You are pretty much right Twist. My question is whether since there is an injunction is in place right now and an appeal filed, then do they have to post a bond immediately or only if the COA issues a new injunction?

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 9:18 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

hooray?

no appeal? sounds like no appeal!

by WilltheBear on Jul 24, 2008 8:22 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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!

by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 8:58 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 8:59 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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 to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Wait, they're going to front this money?

Did you hear this somewhere or are you inferring?

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 9:10 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Spazzy

WE DID IT!! AND WE ATE SOME DELICIOUS SHORTBREAD IN THE PROCESS!

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 9:19 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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 to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Inferring...

how else are the PHA and Save the Oaks going to appeal?

by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 24, 2008 9:15 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

They can appeal without an injunction. Trees get cut, construction starts, but the points of the case can be discussed.

Now, if they want to maintain status quo, bond + ask the appeals court for new injunction.

They are two separate things.

I feel like I just went through law school.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 9:17 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 9:17 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Does anyone know if they actually appealed yet, or whether they just prepared Miller’s court by saying ‘please prepare the paperwork we will need for an appeal’ (and spend $5,200 for them do to so)... It seemed like this is all they did to me.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 9:20 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 9:29 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Clearly, this is a job for OAKTOWNMARIO: Legal Superhero! Quick put up the OTMLight!

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 9:29 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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 to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Are you trying to tell us something?

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 9:36 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

He wants us to vote for a Republican congressman from Houston?

by sec119 on Jul 24, 2008 9:43 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 9:44 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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.

by bearlaw on Jul 24, 2008 9:43 PM PDT reply reply   0 recs

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/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 9:48 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Replying to myself

Anybody know where we can find how the individual council members voted?

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 10:12 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Bates said at the meeting that the votes are secret and not publicly disclosed.

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 10:14 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 10:22 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Thanks for using my own highly speculative analysis to answer my own question, Twist!

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 10:24 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Am I the only one who thinks Bates is on the fence a bit, though certainly leaning toward appeal?

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 10:27 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I said “we.” You were included in there.

Plus, had you said nothing, nobody would have known it was reflexive logick!

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 24, 2008 10:30 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by CBKWit on Jul 25, 2008 11:23 AM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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

by TwistNHook on Jul 25, 2008 11:32 AM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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.

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 10:12 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

heehee

‘city’s wish’

by PolarBear on Jul 24, 2008 10:12 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Did he really think Cal wasn’t going to refit the stadium relatively soon? If this had not been blocked for so long, that would probably already be in the works.

http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/

by BeastMode on Jul 24, 2008 10:16 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

This is consistent

with what Laurie Capitelli told us during the 2PM meeting. I’ll have more on this meeting tomorrow

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Jul 24, 2008 10:21 PM PDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

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 to parent up reply reply   0 recs

You went BEASTMODE on all of them!

"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 25, 2008 6:33 AM PDT