Tonight’s council agenda — Berkeley’s independent foreign policy
Eagerly awaiting the Berkeley reports
When I read the agenda for tonight’s city council meeting, I didn’t notice anything particularly newsworthy. There’s establishing Berkeley as a Tree City USA — no problem there. Even the parking amendments — increasing the rate to $1.50 an hour and expanding pay and display areas — struck me as ordinary council business.
I clearly need to take lessons in agenda exegesis because the proposal from the Peace and Justice Commission to have the city adhere to UN treaties completely passed me by. The Chronicle’s Carolyn Jones is more eagle eyed. The nub of the recommendation is: “That the Berkeley City Council affirm the value of localities complying with relevant UN Treaty recommendations”.
I’m all in favor of UN treaties on human rights, racial discrimination and torture, but why does a municipality need its own compliance with treaties aimed at sovereign states? I have friends that work in the UN, and the last thing that over-stretched organization needs is a deluge of reports from every city in the world with 100,000 or more people. Of course, there’s only one city in the world that would ever contemplate such a thing. I can just imagine the joy of a junior civil servant at the UN at opening her annual package of compliance reports from Berkeley.
I know there’s a history of Berkeley asserting itself on the world stage. Some of that is admirable, but the city really has more pressing problems than wrestling with national treaty obligations.
The city council meeting is open to the public and also available through a webcast.
Photo from United Nations Photo
InBerkeley on Twitter
InBerkeley on Facebook
Lance, your journalistic restraint is so disappointing. I was all ready for you to lay the smack down, and then you go all respectfully polite on us. Come on, Lance. We can take it.
I’m a restrained person. I don’t think it’s a journalistic thing. Perhaps I was too polite, but I thought I made my distaste clear.
Should I have said the obvious? It’s ridiculous, a waste of time, a diversion from real issues, gestural politics at the worst.
I’ll be more pugnacious next time.
Ah. I knew you had it in you.
(I kid, Lance, I kid….)
@Lance Knobel It’s not much of a departure from them. You should, if you haven’t already, read the code that created them (BMC 3.68).
@Thomas Lord err. that’s “for them”, not “from them”