Protesters Declare 'Housing Is a Human Right' While Marching Against New Housing Construction
New housing construction for 1,100 UC Berkeley students and 125 homeless people was paused Wednesday in response to protests.

On Wednesday, protesters flooded People's Park in Berkeley, California, chanting, "Housing is a human right, fight, fight, fight!" The reason the crowd was protesting? The University of California, Berkeley, was set to begin construction on a student housing project, which would not only house 1,100 Berkeley students at below-market rates, but also provide subsidized apartments for 125 homeless people. And the protesters want to stop this project.
According to the Associated Press, protesters threw rocks, bottles, and glass at construction workers. They also removed several sections of the chain-link fence surrounding the park. On Wednesday, the university announced that it would pause construction of the park, citing protester violence.
"All construction personnel were withdrawn out of concern for their safety," Dan Mogulof, UC's assistant vice chancellor, said in a statement to NBC News. "The campus will, in the days ahead, assess the situation in order to determine how best to proceed with construction of this urgently needed student housing project."
The University has tried since 2017 to construct more student housing in a city where rents are often so high and student housing supply so low that some students have resorted to sleeping in their cars. The construction project would provide much-needed affordable housing to many students. However, the project has faced considerable pushback, including lawsuits to prevent the construction. In typical NIMBY fashion, the lawsuits claim that the University did not consider enough other building sites. According to The Real Deal, a San Francisco real estate news website, the University considered over a dozen.
"Ever since we announced plans for the People's Park project in 2018, I have been convinced that we have an opportunity for a win-win-win benefitting our students, unhoused people in our community, and our neighbors across the city," said UC Chancellor Carol Crist in a 2021 email obtained by The Daily Californian.
The main source of controversy is the housing site's location, People's Park, a university-owned plot of land with a history as an activist site. Most famously, the park was the site of "Bloody Thursday," a 1969 student protest-turned-riot that left 50 injured and one dead after police fired buck and bird shot into the crowd. Protesters thus view the park as a crucial historic site, and even though over half of the park will remain intact as a green space, many of them believe it should not be changed. The park is also the "home" of dozens of homeless people.
"Since its founding in 1969, People's Park has been home to countless houseless individuals in Berkeley," wrote The Daily Californian editorial board on Thursday. "It has served as the prime location for political events, performances and recreation, among countless other affairs. From these, a community bloomed, and it has quickly become a cultural and historical landmark."
Ironically, this oft-criticized building project would create housing for homeless people, not destroy it. According to the A.P., during the duration of construction, the nearly 50 homeless people living in the park were offered shelter (which almost all of them accepted) at a motel paid for by UC. When the project is complete, it will include 125 apartments for homeless individuals.
Those that oppose the housing project voice a uniquely Californian kind of NIMBYism when discussing homelessness. Sure, the project would provide much-needed housing for the homeless, but it would also displace the small number of homeless people who like sleeping in an open-air tent encampment with no running water. Apparently, we should prize the interests of a few—in the case of People's Park, the two or three individuals who refused shelter out of nearly 50—over the surely plentiful number of homeless who desperately want shelter and privacy.
"I think that it's really unjust what the university is doing trying to build housing here but at the cost of moving out all of these residents," UC student Sarah Hager told local news station KTVU. "You're causing significant amounts of harm by moving residents who have lived here forever and are absolutely integrated into the community."
If construction on People's Park is permanently stopped, cash-strapped students and homeless people will be the ones to suffer. Stopping the construction of new housing in a city with one of the worst housing shortages in America—below-market-rate housing aimed at students and the homeless no less—seems deeply at odds with the claim that "housing is a human right."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A friend of mine lives in Berkeley. He's also a Republican state delegate. He has several properties in the city that he simply stopped renting out. His grandkids can live in those spacial apartments, but he will no longer rent them out to anyone not in his family. Especially not any students. And I don't blame him. That's eight units (16 students) within walking distance of the university that are now permanently off the market. The legal and financial liability is just too high.
Want to attend Berkeley? Then plan on living elsewhere and taking the BART into school. Emeryville, Oakland, Hayward, Fremont, etc. Hell, I know students commuting from San Jose. At least that's a reverse commute. Jeepers. But don't expect to live in Berkeley.
Generally college students are not the best tenants but in my experience they are not that bad. You just can't rent them nice places. Give them something not that nice and they will pay the rent and leave the place more or less as it was.
That said, what the hell is wrong with Berkeley students that caused your friend to stop renting to them? Do they think they should be able to not pay the rent or something?
This being California, the solution is simple (as it would be for ultra-blue states and/or cities). While forcible quartering of the homeless, or students, would likely be ultimately overturned by the courts, personal property taxes are pretty much "immune" to challenges as long as they are not levied in a discriminatory fashion.
Property taxes could be proportional, i.e., so much for the first 1,000 sq.ft., a bit more for the second 1,000 sq.ft, and woo-hoo let's party per sq.ft. above 2,000. In addition, houses that are not the domicile of the owner could be tax levied at some factor (2X, 3X, 4X, sky limit) of houses utilized as the domicile of the owner. Lastly, because of the hesitancy of some homeowners to rent out spare bedrooms, levy an annual $25,000 surcharge for each unoccupied bedroom of houses underused by owner-residents. Of course, fair housing laws should apply, the homeowner with young children thereby being prohibited from refusing to rent to hard-core dopers or convicted sex offenders. (I suppose it would be permissible to require that the dopers pick up their syringes from the yard and the sex offenders safely discard their condoms, if they use them.)
I believe adoption of the above measures would go a long way to providing shelter for the homeless and alleviating the housing shortage in California, even though it might result in a few (more) tens of thousands of employed, tax-paying, middle/upper-middle class citizens departing the golden state. The market being unable to absorb that many houses preventing departing owners from selling their homes, the vacant properties could be claimed under eminent domain, or condemned to forfeit to the state on the basis of public nuisance, or merely ceded to what squatters move in and establish squatters' rights. (the latter two of the three options being cheaper for the state.) If only the California legislature had the courage to take these necessary actions, homeless in California would be no more than a few paragraphs in somebody's history book. Guided by the wisdom of various government bureaucrats, what could go wrong?
This being California, the solution is simple (as it would be for ultra-blue states and/or cities).
The actual solution is to herd these people into an enclosed area with the story that it's a free housing project, and then drop a MOAB on the place.
Then expand that to the entire leftist movement.
""Lastly, because of the hesitancy of some homeowners to rent out spare bedrooms, levy an annual $25,000 surcharge for each unoccupied bedroom of houses underused by owner-residents.""
Liberals, they just want your cash. Pay if you do. Pay if you don't
After all, your home belongs to the state right?
Disgusting as hell.
What better way for the state to take your property than to add outrages fees you can't pay.
This can all go away. We just need to say “enough is enough” and cleanse the left from America.
"Property taxes could be proportional, i.e., so much for the first 1,000 sq.ft., a bit more for the second 1,000 sq.ft, and woo-hoo let's party per sq.ft. above 2,000."
Property taxes are proportional, but it's based on assessed value, not size.
Also, property taxes cover land as well as improvements to land such as buildings.
And in california, land is by far the biggest value add. My house represents less than 20% of my property's total assessed value.
Up here in Northern Michigan you can get a special assessment if you can see the water. Not kidding.
Some townships add a special tax if you can view the lake even for a few months.
Lastly, because of the hesitancy of some homeowners to rent out spare bedrooms, levy an annual $25,000 surcharge for each unoccupied bedroom of houses underused by owner-residents.
That is the most oppressive and stupid idea I have ever heard. What the fuck is wrong with you?
What the fuck is wrong with you?
It started with,
Do you really need the /sarc tag to see the sarcasm in that? It's not like it was sarcasmic posting.
I missed the sarcasm. My sincere apologies. What is "wrong with me" among many things is that my sarcasm meter is almost nonexistent.
Have you read many of the earnest leftist comments advocating things similar enough to make the sarcasm tag necessary? May as well rename Califirnia Mos Eisley.
You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy......
I think this is where it's appropriate to say "Fuck off, slaver." and tip out a glass for Old Mexican.
This seems like sarcasm but poes law is broken so I can't tell.
That said, what the hell is wrong with Berkeley students that caused your friend to stop renting to them? Do they think they should be able to not pay the rent or something?
If they're going to Berkeley, I guaran-fucking-tee that's EXACTLY what they think.
I don't think it's the students per se, but the attitude of I don't have to pay rent mixed with government that agrees not paying rent is not a reason to evict.
Same thing here in NY.
It's not just not paying rent, once you view housing as a human right there's almost no valid reason to evict someone.
It's Berkeley, so if you prohibit drag queen heroin orgies on your property you're violating their rights. I wouldn't rent to anyone there either. Sell it to some other dipshit and let them turn it into a free range homeless toilet, that seems to be what everyone wants.
what the hell is wrong with Berkeley students that caused your friend to stop renting to them?
Would you rent to a communist? I wouldn't.
-jcr
I wouldn't either.
"...That said, what the hell is wrong with Berkeley students that caused your friend to stop renting to them? Do they think they should be able to not pay the rent or something?..."
Same cause as all the SF units no longer offered as rentals:
"The Berkeley Rent Stabilization and Eviction for Good Cause Ordinance has two separate protections that are best thought of as distinct: rent increase limitations and just cause eviction protection, these are often referred to as Berkeley Rent Control."
https://www.tobenerlaw.com/berkeley-rent-control/#:~:text=The%20Berkeley%20Rent%20Stabilization%20and%20Eviction%20for%20Good,are%20often%20referred%20to%20as%20Berkeley%20Rent%20Control.
That said, what the hell is wrong with Berkeley students that caused your friend to stop renting to them?
I think "Berkeley students" adequately explains it.
i sold my rental units because of government overreach. covid showed us that the state & federal government can and will invalidate a legal contract and remove my private property rights with no due process. being a landlord these days is very risky and i'll never do it again.
If we’re going to have a functional country we need to acknowledge that the left has to go. Complete removal at all levels of business and government.
After their protest, they went home to their parents basement and mooch off of them.
Look at the photos of these people. None of them screams "productive worker".
????
After their protest, the trust-fund babies went to the apartments their parents rent for them. Most Berkeley kids aren't plebians anymore.
Meanwhile Dad perused his Blackstone investments.
After not doing anything productive but pushing a pencil all while some other does the labor and some get the benefit. Not that all pencil pushing is bad, but clearly there is something broken here. Libertarians get it. I am just saying it would be easier to swallow the pill that money was being redistributed if people were actually producing a good or service, but instead it's given to worthless people.
They also removed several sections of the chain-link fence surrounding the park.
Insurrection. Right there, man. INSURRECTION!
Hang on, its student housing AND homeless shelter in one? Like you can choose whether to pay low rent or none at all?
And go to class or not. College degrees are a human right!
I look forward to all the sexual assault allegations in that 'dorm/homeless shelter'.
Should be entertaining.
It's not assault when the homeless do it. You have to understand that due to class based discrimination they don't have the same opportunities to pursue consensual sex as the rest of us do. It's actually bigoted to resist their advances.
Doubleplus ungood to resist a woman with a penis.
Sounds like parents would be better off sending their kids to UC-Irvine or UC-Davis.
If they raised their kids in commiefornia they already failed lol.
Or UT Austin
Hang on, its student housing AND homeless shelter in one? Like you can choose whether to pay low rent or none at all?
Two separate facilities - one dorm and one for a social program that works with at-risk individuals and assists them with getting housing.
Homeless rights to shelter, plus public masturbation, ruination, and defecation should extend to college campuses like Berkeley. In fact, conservative groups should charter buses to relocate the nearest homeless population center to the Berkeley campus.
"Housing is a human right: don't build any more housing."
This is why that town has been called "Berzerkly" for the at least the last fifty years.
Housing is a human right, therefore only the government should be allowed to build housing.
They used to protest in favor of free speech rights for all, instead of protesting against hosting speakers they disagree with.
Leftists lie, it is their nature. When they championed free speech it was only because it was denied them and they were relying on the nature of others to be allowed to speak;now that they are in power it is their nature to ruthlessly suppress dissent.
The "activist community" that opposes this numbers in the dozens. They're just really loud. Most students, and essentially everyone in the community supports the project.
Those pictures above? That's not a slice of the crowd - that's the whole crowd.
The biggest problem with Trump's wall is that he didn't put Alta California on the Mexico side.
Yeah. I will take pretty much any population in the world over woke, white people. Woke white people are the dumbest, most destructive group of people in the history of the world. They are just a plague on humanity.
Pretty much every time I see this public service announcement, all I can think is, "White people ruin everything."
The worst of them being ...liberal white suburban wine moms.
Hey knowing your kid will be rooming with a bum or "homeless person" when they go to college, should really increase the attractiveness of attending Cal Berkeley. But wait, there is more. The students who go to Berkeley seem to be functionally retarded and unable to understand basic things like "to have a house, someone has to build it." So Cal Berkeley has got that going for it.
Um, for some families, these are all positive values.
yes. incoming freshman can now elect to have an unhoused as a roommate in the name of equity and social justice. separating the homeless from the students is racist and must be abolished. starting in 2026, it will be mandatory for all students to have unhoused roommates.
Sockpuppet need Grammarly, Angry Edition.
Retards gotta tard.
So, who would hire a modern Berkeley grad?
all of woke corporate america
Another group that needs to go.
Protesters Declare 'Housing Is a Human Right' While Marching Against New Housing Construction
Well no shit. They're footsoldiers. They're told to march, not to think.
Yep. Follow the money. The money to be made on building on land Berkeley already owns is miniscule compared to the money to be made if they have to buy some piece of land nearby and build on it.
I won't have you disparaging our brave Teatalitarian Anschluss Caucus like that!
Dumasses. Maybe some buck shot would calm them down?
The above comment associating Berkley student protesters with dumbasses is insulting....to dumbasses.
Where I live there is literally no zoned space left for any kind of "affordable housing" without a variance being granted. And just try to get one with the neighborhood mobs screaming "traffic issues" (when they really mean "Those won't be 'my kind' of folks who buy these houses.'")
Good for them. I don’t blame anyone who paid more to get away from shit neighborhoods for being against progtards who want to export shit neighborhoods to them.
A building that costs 30 million to build will never be affordable housing.
Lapdances are a human right!
And then you end up getting lap dances from fat Bubba.
Contracting and passing monkeypox is a human right!
So is grooming five year olds, according to Jeffy.
The Real Deal is an industry mag/journal, not a SF specific mag. Its HQ is in NYC. There is a SF local section, but it's dwarfed by the NY, LA and Miami editions.
No NIMBY or inconsistency here. The students are content to keep the park as is and the housing is a human right chant references the dozens of homeless living there now. The students are being consistent - the protest signs speak of gentrifcation, i.e. everyone knows that after the project is complete, the 125 homeless units will one day be eliminated and the students will have lost 50% of the park's open space. So it's the opposite. They are content to have the homeless in their backyard as long as they can keep the park 'open'.
Wow, the new guy gets it. Impressed.
No students use that park.
Not unless they're buying drugs.
So the students often use the park is what I'm reading
Lol all these good little comrades? They never color outside the lines it's why they get rewarded.
The UC students not so much, but the Berkeley High students, hell yeah.
Not unless they're buying drugs.
^
The park actually has neighborhoods - the hookers and drug dealers don't like mingling with the schizophrenics, so they take opposite sides.
LA is thinking about all non booked rooms by 2pm each day to go to he homeless free of charge.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/l-a-city-council-to-vote-on-initiative-requiring-hotels-use-empty-rooms-for-homeless
That is a "taking" under the 5th amendment, and if they go ahead with that idiotic scheme, the taxpayers would be on the hook for the fair market value of the nightly use of those rooms, plus whatever damage the forced occupation causes.
-jcr
They'll pull some fuckery with business licensing and claim that all they did was revoke your license for not complying with the policy. That won't be a "taking".
Hotels will just close up and leave because this policy will make them unprofitable. It's the same thing as retail stores closing once shoplifting got legalized.
They didnt just make shoplifting illegal. They made it illegal to STOP shoplifters. The security guards and the employees have to just stand there and watch some homeless degenerate sweep the shelves clean and waltz out.
If owners had a right protect their property there would be a very different situation with retail in LA and SF...
Owners of property always have the right to defend it. Whether exercising that right in this fascist society is worthwhile on the other hand...
A lot of professional arson jobs will be made available. If I had a hotel and this came about, I'd certainly burn it down rather than give them a dime.
Sounds like a job opportunity to provide screened guests to the hotels at a steep discount before 2 PM.
that's a great way to have all the hotels shut down in la, just like the other stores are leaving these areas
From what I read this morning, it didn't pass muster.
If LA does that, then the hotel owners should pony up some cash and have the city council there eliminated.
Not inconsistent if you understand their philosophy.
Oh, and mostly peaceful.
protesters threw rocks, bottles, and glass at construction workers.
Remember when construction workers could be relied upon to kick the shit out of misbehaving hippies?
-jcr
It occurred to me that one of the protesters needing a hospital visit due to acute rebar poisoning would probably get the construction back on track a lot faster than whatever these administrators plan on doing.
I hear hippies make the most delightful sounds when dragged behind a pick up truck. We should test that.
Mostly peaceful.
They suspended James Lindsay again.
It's time to start delivering consequences to these people.
https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1555542816453017601?t=gx9_CY25zLuPajNJSVIa-w&s=19
Like people are going to vote libertarian anytime soon. The other solution is open to any individual.
What other solution? Kleptocracy
lootingrule of non-objective prohibitionist law?"Protesters Declare 'Housing Is a Human Right' While Marching Against New Housing Construction"
You say this like you actually expect logic from Progressives.
15 homeless people camping in the park reminds everyone of their plight and the need to do more to help them(at taxpayer expense).
125 homeless people living in a student dorm with 1,000 students are no longer homeless, and are out of public view.
Just another mostly peaceful protest from the left.
"... protesters threw rocks, bottles, and glass at construction workers. They also removed several sections of the chain-link fence surrounding the park. On Wednesday, the university announced that it would pause construction of the park, citing protester violence."
I don't understand why any prospective college student would want to attend Cal Berkeley, and I don't understand why any parent (other than committed communists and socialists) would want their children to attend Cal Berkeley.
It's the top-rated public university on the planet.
For communism?
SJW's and environmental extremists too!
Nope. #22 in the US.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
It's common for socialists to spread the idea that "A human need is a human right". Of course, this is disconnected from reality and is a powerful propaganda tool to seed discord, hate, division, envy, resentment, and violence in our society because it is an impossible proposition.
Reality is and will always be that economic means are limited and human needs are unlimited. That's how our world works and every other idea is pure fantasy. This is backed by empirical facts.
The free market economy is the best solution we've developed to balance means with human needs. It's not perfect but it's the best we've got and does the job pretty well.
Simply ask: at whose expense?
This could all be easily solved with a Phalanx CIWS
That's overkill. OTOH, buck and birdshot like 1969 is underkill. A few submachine guns loaded with hollow point would be just right.
I graduated from Berkeley in 1991 and at least back then People's Park was a nasty shithole full of garbage and needles (before the rest of the Bay Area got like this.) It was one of the most dangerous places to walk near at night as there were drug deals, shooting up, and violent assaults. It was full of homeless people festering in filth. It was as if the entire hippy movement died there and rotted in place.
I doubt very much it's changed since then. Why anyone would want to "preserve" it is beyond me. Then again, I am part of the reality-based community.
I doubt very much it's changed since then.
It hasn't.
I encourage Berkeley to keep going down this road. Really, please do!
It's Berkeley . Nothing else needs to be said.
I remember this well. Anarcho-communists were everywhere cashing in on unmistakable door-breaking positive christian nationalsocialism where Nixon's Moral Majority were what people pointed at and shrieked "capitalism!" Their problem was that youths knew communism only too well as the same violent thing. The Libertarian party didn't arrive a moment too soon, but hardly anybody found about about it until 1980. Nowadays anarcho-fascists are struggling to bring back Nixonism and memory-hole the LP.
OK children, here is a (short) list of things that are NOT human rights:
Food
Clothing
Shelter
Healthcare
College Tuition
Tuition of any sort
Free transportation
This is not an exhaustive list, there are many, many more items that can be added. They have one common element: they all cost someone something to produce.
Here is a (non-exhaustive) list of actual human rights:
Life
Self defense (and defense of one's family, friends and community)
Liberty
Property that you have purchased or produced
The freedom to speak your mind, worship (or not) G(g)od(s) of your conviction, to PEACEFULLY assemble (and to get, at your own expense, to the location of that assembly)
Please note that none of these items have any monetary value. Again, this list is NOT exhaustive.
Protesters Declare 'Housing Is a Human Right' While Having No Idea What Rights Are. They do not have a right to force someone else to provide them housing. This shit is so stale...and so f'n senseless.
I can't help thinking that if you gave the construction workers baseball bats and pieces of rebar the protesters would stop being a problem.
Am I sure they all vote democrat.
George Orwell called it doublethink:
In George Orwell's dystopian classic 1984, doublethink is the act of holding, simultaneously, two opposite, individually exclusive ideas or opinions and believing in both simultaneously and absolutely. Doublethink requires using logic against logic or suspending disbelief in the contradiction.
Squatters, homeless, etc, are not residents.
Can you imagine what the homeless apartments will look like in a very short time? With more homeless people crashing there with their stink, drugs and thievery.
Illogical this is!
If we listened to the nimby’s and bananas NOTHING would ever get built. This is a prime example of both!
I am a student and I do work part time on this website to meet my needs. One who is jobless or want to earn more money for himself, (buc-62) should must try this because this is really very easy and less time consuming and also advantageous without investing any amount.
.
SEE MORE:>>>> https://workofferweb24.pages.dev/