I say yes

It's a shame that this is so controversial.

I say yes

We have two daughters who like to visit downtown to shop, go to movies and the library. We would like to be sure that they are safe and are not going to be accosted by dangerous and threatening individuals. We have noticed that the panhandling on Solano and Downtown has gotten more aggressive. Sometimes it feels like we have to run a gauntlet of panhandlers when we take walks on Solano and Downtown. We feel that this measure is needed. It is obvious that many of these individuals who stand on the streets yelling and swearing need to get into a program in order that their lives can be improved. The same goes for the despondent ones who probably could be helped with antidepressant medication. It violates their human rights to just leave them out there when they need treatment in order to make a competent decision.
We also feel that the city needs to have public restrooms. It is hard to shop for any amount of time when so few of the merchants allow people to use their bathrooms

I say yes

It's OK to set standards for public behavior.

I say yes

Telegraph Ave and the downtown are now unpleasant to visit. This measure is very important if we are going to restore those areas.

Kathryn Snowden

I say yes

I live in the Gourmet Ghetto area, and the only black people my kids see are his parents and panhadlers. I find this to be a huge source of frustration. Are the folks in front of cheesboard, B of A, and Peets really being served by being allowed to set up shop outside of these places? I think the true purpose they serve is helping curb white guilt. I feel strongly that they need to go.

I say yes

It is not a 'right' to disrupt the lives of others w/ out-of-bounds behavior... even if you are mentally ill ... this is the real issue to be addressed.
Pat Scott

I say yes

the city of berkeley's historical permissiveness to individuals who verbally abuse and threaten citizens has created an environment difficult to operate a succesfull retail business. i moved out of berkeley because of constant harassment as i walked down the street. i believe there is a way to preserve berkeley's unique culture while protecting its citizens.

I say yes

I have two young children. There are a lot of families with young children on my block, and we are ready to spend money on Shattuck Avenue. However, the blight on Shattuck drives people away. I walk from the downtown berkeley bart station along Shattuck to my home every day, and I'm well familiar with the problems. My issues:
1) Not everyone can walk or bike all the time: just ask anyone who has young children! We need downtown parking if business is to survive.
2) I'm tired of seeing the same panhandlers every day on Shattuck. Some of these people are clearly ill, and as many or more seem pretty satisfied with whatever income they make by panhandling every single day. I'm really tired of it. I support the mayor's policy. I believe in freedom of expression, but Berkeley has become the tragedy of the commons.
3) We need public restrooms downtown, and we also need them to be serviced & cleaned. My young child needed to use the portable toilet at the new 'skate park' near city hall, and it was entirely filled up to capacity. Let's keep the restrooms but also pay to service them!
4) I'm pleased that UC will open a building downtown for meetings/conventions. Frankly, we need SOMETHING new to happen on Shattuck! I object to the rants in the 'Daily Planet' about the university as if it were the essence of evil. Is ANY other business-generating enterprise likely to happen on Shattuck? I highly doubt it.

I say yes

Public restrooms are key, and greater enforcement. I do not believe that a subset of people should be held to a different standard of behavior that the rest of us. It is not compassionate to enable behavior that is destructive. It is not compassionate to relieve a certain subset of humanity from consequences.

I say yes

It is really annoying to be accosted on the street, when we pay so much for social services in Berkeley.This is NOT a civil rights issue.

I say yes

Its very important to the continued viability and growth of Berkeley that the for-profit and not-for-profit places of business have a climate for their customers and employees that is safe, clean and efficient. This proposal is a very important investment in continuing to serve both the needs of our community, including those within our community that need support services (e.g. the homeless),and the needs of the organizations that serve our community (business and organizations). I fully endorse this proposal and would hope that it is a first step, not the only step in this direction.

I say yes

As with all attempts to assist the "street" people we run up against the paradigm of "Civil Liberties" versus "taking care of those who can't take care of themselves." As most of those individuals who live and sleep on the streets of Berkeley, have serious mental illness issues or have addictive personalities, they have been in and out of treatment facilities and usually correctional facilities as well, and have demonstrated repeatedly that they cannot take care of themselves. Is it truly a violation of an individual's civil liberties for a caring community to insist on a more comprehensive approach to taking care of those unable or unwilling to care for themselves? In my opinion, there are many of these individuals, who, with the right combination and availability of assistance, can become more productive and live a more meaningful life. This may require new laws as well as the enforcement of laws and regulations which show the caring and concern of the City and to present a more positive image of the program(s) to facilitate this goal.

Always an issue is financing as well. I would be more than willing to have increased meter fees if this will provide the revenue to create and operate programs which work. Regardless of what program and funding is available, the programs must accomplish the goals established, and these goals have to be realistic.

I strongly support the Mayor's proposal as at least a start for improving the quality of life for these individuals.

I say yes

I live just off of Solano Avenue and feel the situation with the street panhandlers is a difficult one to address, both for the merchants who run a business there and those of us who like to bring our business to Solano. There is that fine line of getting by someone who wants to hustle you to feeling overwhelmed by the hustlers every time one takes my business to Solano Ave. Our household gives to Berkeley Food and Housing a couple times a year in hopes of aiding these unfortunate people within our community. In addition, when I have visitors from outside the Bay area come and visit us, they often ask where they can make a contribution to help the begger situation on the Berkeley streets as they seem to be visibly upset by their experience of visiting/shopping within the downtown and Solano business district. Also, since the City has been addressing the situation on Telegraph Avenue, some of the panhandlers have relocated to the Solano Avenue upper district, creating a competion scene between regular known panhandlers who want to maintain the most valuable spots on the street(like in front of Peets). Please act on these measures and more in the near future as it can no longer be ignored by the City Council. Please find other ways to redirect those who are mentally ill and in need of social services to a place that could truly aid them and not continue their pattern of dependence on strangers for their daily survival. Thanks.

I say yes

I respect the rights of homeless and mentally ill people, and believe that they should be treated with basic decency by both citizens and law enforcement. In addition to buying Street Spirit, residents can support the local food bank, BOSS, and other local organizations that serve people with few means and no homes.

However, I also believe it's essential for residents, particularly the disabled, to be able to navigate clean city sidewalks without being accosted on every shopping trip.

I support the mayor's proposal, which incorporates elements from the successful plans of other local cities with similar problems.

I say yes

I usually avoid stores who have noisy or bothersome street people hanging nearby. We need to do something to keep our merchants here in Berkeley.

I say yes

Some areas of Telegraph and downtown have become scary and unpleasant due to street people blocking sidewalks and mentally ill people acting out, hopefully these measures will help moderate their behavior, and this will encourage regional shoppers to return and stop the hemorrhage of local and independent businesses.

I'm not sure we need more restrictions on outdoor smoking, but all the other items seem very reasonable. I am especially in favor of more public restrooms!

I say yes

I would like to give this proposal a try. However, I agree with most of the comments about giving community policing a try as well as I have seen this be effective in other parts of the Bay Area. Perhaps this approach can be added to the Mayor's proposal. I would also add that we do need to do much more with housing; particularly for those in need and who will utilize good transitional housing with support services.

I say yes

I am in favor of providing a more friendly atmosphere in public places throughout Berkeley, and the plan sounds reasonable and humane. If approved, I hope the measure is implemented with the positive and helpful spirit that characterizes the intent.

I say yes

Does not go far enough.
Take the New York approach.

I say yes

How is it that Albany and El Cerrito police don't have to worry about the same "civil liberties" issues Berkeley police do when it comes to inappropriate street behaviors? Don't they operate under the same consistution? Or is it that these issues really aren't legitimate after all?