Part of the Bay Area News Group

What the Sheriff’s office said about Occupy Cal

By Josh Richman
Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 10:53 pm in Berkeley.

I helped my colleague Matt Krupnick gather some string for our coverage of Occupy Cal today, talking with Alameda County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Sgt. J.D. Nelson about decision-making and use of force. Several dozen sheriff’s deputies had assisted UC Police in dispersing the crowd and making arrests Wednesday on Sproul Plaza.

As today’s Occupy Cal and Occupy Oakland stories got rolled into one, much of what Nelson told me got dropped, so here it is.

“This is UC Berkeley’s gig,” Nelson said Thursday afternoon. “UC Berkeley called us, they asked for help, so we go. They give an order, whatever their order was – that’s a better question for them. At some point, they’re going to go in and complete their task, whatever their task is, and we go in and help them achieve that.”

If a no-camping policy is defied and a crowd refuses to disperse, he said, “they certainly have the right to move them out of that area.”

Nelson said “they playbook gives many different options” for how to achieve that. “Sometimes taking one person out at a time is more hazardous than just moving forward to clear the area. … You should ask UC about that, because it’s their call.”

First, he said, police ask people to disperse or move back. If protesters not only refuse but lock arms or otherwise resist removal, taking them one by one for arrest and citation isn’t possible. At that point, police might use tear gas – which they didn’t Wednesday night at Cal – or do a “stomp and drag,” meaning they push forward with batons a half-step at a time, shouting “MOVE.”

Which tactic to use is left up to the incident commander on the scene, he said. “It’s UC’s incident, so they’re the shot-callers on that one.”

I also talked today with Cal Graduate Assembly President Bahar Navab. The GA, with delegates from most campus departments, had overwhelmingly voted to support the day of action and peaceful protests. Navab, 29, said she was on Sproul Plaza when police moved in Wednesday.

“I understand the campus policy on encampments but if you look at the video … students were standing there peacefully when police started pushing and hitting with batons,” she said. “That type of violence seems very unnecessary and questionable.”

Navab said she and other campus leaders are discussing what to do. “We obviously can talk to administrators and the chief of police, but our concern moving forward is how to we prevent this from happening in the future.”

She said they’re all hoping the police violence doesn’t overshadow the protesters’ message about “the state of funding for higher education in California … and that instead of shifting the cost onto students we have to have corporations pay their fair share in taxes.”

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • John W

    How about dropping buckets of ants into Camp Quan? Or perhaps releasing a few skunks?

  • Elwood

    “That type of violence seems very unnecessary and questionable.”

    The cops were given orders to clear the area. The “students” were resisting. The cops were simply doing their job as they had been trained to do.

    “we have to have corporations pay their fair share in taxes.”

    California corporations are taxed at the second highest rate in the country, second only to Taxachusetts. No wonder businesses are leaving and new ones don’t want to come here.

    Isn’t liberal rhetoric fun?

  • John W

    Re: #2

    This is a legit question for Elwood, or whoever can answer, about California having the second highest tax rate on corporations. Is there such a thing as a specific corporate income tax in California? Or is it that they pay on the same scale as individual taxpayers? If the latter, a profitable corporation would have most of its income taxed at the 9.3% rate. I’ve never found a specific corporate income tax listed and defined on the Franchise Tax Board web site.

  • Elwood

    One minute search on Google:

    California’s 2011 Business Tax Climate Ranks 49th
    California ranks 49th in the Tax Foundation’s State Business Tax Climate Index. The Index compares the states in five areas of taxation that impact business: corporate taxes; individual income taxes; sales taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; and taxes on property, including residential and commercial property. The ranks of neighboring states are as follows: Washington (11th), Oregon (14th), Arizona (34th), Nevada (4th) and Hawaii (22nd).
    50-State Comparison of Business Tax Climates (data only)
    2011 State Business Tax Climate Index, Eighth Edition (full study)

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html

  • David

    @John W,

    California has a corporate income tax rate of 8.84%. This is separate from the personal income tax.

    See here: http://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2011_California_Tax_Rates_and_Exemptions.shtml

    Alaska, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Washing D.C all have higher corporate income tax rates for large corporations.

    See here: http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/corp_inc.pdf

  • John W

    “…and taxes on property, including residential and commercial property.”

    Hmmm. I thought we were so good on property taxes, on account of Prop. 13 — unless you are a new company that needs a new building, or employees of that company being transferred in from another state and have to pay on current market value so that others can pay on 1978 market value — granny or her lucky kids who get to inherit the house without reassessment.

    Still, I don’t think there is such a thing as a corporate income tax in California, just the same income tax that individuals pay. No, I’m not defending the 9.3%. I agree the business climate here sucks, for many reasons, including deteriorating infrastructure, schools and universities.