"Are we under siege? We're gonna have to talk very loud over the helicopters"

It was pretty hard trying to concentrate on what the professor was saying in class yesterday because of all of the media coverage of the tree sitters. KTVU, which is our local channel 2 news station in the Bay Area had an awesome (can't believe I just used the word awesome, but yes awesome) picture of helicopters circling the last remaining tree in the oak grove, which still had about 4 tree sitters perched on top. In case you are unfamiliar about what's going on down here in the Bay Area, or should I say, what has been a 21 month long political battle between UC Berkeley and the environmentally conscious, let me briefly recap.


In a nutshell, UC Berkeley wants to build a new sports center in a space that is home to a community of oak trees. This was a very bad idea to those who care about the preservation of nature, the possible further disturbance of Native burial ground, and of course, the fact that many of the University's buildings already sit on a fault line, which places these buildings in danger if an earthquake that is stronger than just our normal jolt happens to hit. A student family housing complex that is pretty much crumbling around the tenants, which sits on the fault line, is scheduled for demolition some time next year. So, as you can see, there were many issues that literally brought people to the trees.

The tree sitters were successful in stopping the destruction of the trees while the courts took these issues into consideration, but ultimately, the big dogs won the battle and the little dogs were rounded up and carted off to the kennel. Since the tree sitters were in violation of a court order to come down from the trees they were taken to jail once they did come down. This was also the fate of other tree sitters who came down months ago, along with having to pay some fines. You are probably thinking, "well, good, they should be going to jail for being in the way... they had no business even causing all of this trouble in the first place ", and there are many UCB students who would agree with you. However, I am not one of them. I understand their viewpoint and although I could care less about the trees, which I know that I probably should, I care more about exactly how the University chooses to spend its money.

UCB has a system of housing for its students. There are the dorms, which are located on-campus and then there are two apartment complexes for students who have families, which are located off-campus. I mentioned one already that will be torn down soon. Way back in the day, the family housing was great because it was affordable, but now rent is just out of control. You have people who take on extra jobs and take out loans up to the max each and every semester just to be able to keep their housing. Some even have to choose between paying the rent and having food in the fridge since the majority of the time loans are still not enough, in addition to all of the expenses that come with having a family. I have been in this situation more than once. Its ridiculous. To make a long story short, very few families can really afford to live in university housing because each year that school fees go up, so does the rent. While the tree sitters were fighting for the rights of the oak trees by trying to stop the construction of the new sports center, student parents were trying to figure out why the University was eager to shell out millions toward this center and while completely closing its checkbooks to other areas of the institution that are desperately in need. You see, even though the family housing is run by the University and rent is paid "to" the University, the family housing complexes get NO funding from the University. Let me say that again. Even though these family complexes are considered University housing, the same as the dorms, unlike the dorms, they get absolutely NO funding from the University!

This means that newly constructed units in the complex that I live in were made possible by the taking out of bonds by the University department that oversees the complex. Which means that in order to pay these bonds back, debt that is now around $120 million, rent has to be increased because the complex has to be generating a certain amount of income in order to be able to make the payments. So ultimately, the families struggle, starve and live under stressful conditions, while the University plans to shell out $120 million for a new sports center. Why the hell weren't there a few parents with baby bassinets perched up in those trees right along with everyone else? I attended a meeting last night with the land developer and University representatives, where parents voiced their concerns with the constant rent increases, the construction that is still taking place in our complex and other issues. In the end, we were pretty much informed that rent will continue to rise and that there are no immediate solutions. When people started asking about the Chancellor's real role in hearing our pleas and actually providing assistance, we were again told that the Chancellor is not obligated to fund us and that we are not even really on his radar.

I wonder how much student parents would register on the Chancellor's radar if we, along with our families, started showing up at his house (which is located on campus BTW) for dinner every night, and then rolled out our sleeping bags and pitched our tents on his front lawn?