Author Topic: Berkeley Commission Turns Down “Dharma Way”  (Read 3753 times)

Namdrol

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • Email
Berkeley Commission Turns Down “Dharma Way”
« on: October 08, 2012, 01:39:35 AM »

By Steven Finacom

Friday October 05, 2012

The City of Berkeley will not be renaming the 99-year-old Harold Way in Downtown Berkeley “Dharma Way” if a recommendation made by the Public Works Commission stands.

After hearing testimony from a half dozen members of the public (including this writer) and having a lengthy follow-up discussion of its own onThursday, October 4, 2012, the Commission voted 6-0 to advise the City Council not to approve the name change. (One commissioner was absent, and another resigned on the eve of the meeting, leaving the Commission with seven voting members and six present.)

Representatives of the network of affiliated Tibetan Buddhist businesses and institutions that have moved onto the west side of the block under the umbrella of “Berkeley Dharma Way”, and proposed the name change, spoke, arguing that they thought they were the “only stakeholders” when it came to choosing a new name for the street, and that “Dharma” should not be construed as a religious term.

Critics of the proposed re-naming (including this writer) argued that the term “Dharma” did have religious connotations, including in the literature of the organizations themselves, that adopting it would be a violation of separation of Church and State, that City policy discourages the changing of historic street names except under extraordinary circumstances, and that the proposal was a form of “branding” and privatizing the public street name for the benefit of private institutions and businesses.

It was the latter argument that seemed to sway a majority of commissioners who, in a variety of ways, expressed skepticism that the proposal coincided with the City’s naming guidelines or would be appropriate for a Berkeley street.

“When you connect an existing business with a public facility (including street names)…that same precedent could be done for a number of things across the City”, worried Commissioner Ray Yep. One Commissioner compared the proposal to a hypothetical instance of Safeway asking to name a street in front of one of their stores for the business.

Most Commissioners did demur on the issues of whether they should officially decide if the proposed name was religious or not, or the relative historic significance of Harold Way.

Instead, they said they were conforming to the City naming policy which most felt emphasized keeping street names in a steady state, and preferring names of places, people, or natural features to names that expressed ‘concepts’ as one Commissioner put it.

In the end, they unanimously adopted a short motion that “we will be voting to deny the application, and revising and approving our final recommendation to Council at the next meeting.” That recommendation will come in the form of a summary of the meeting discussion and issues from City staff, which will appear in draft form on the Commission agenda in November.

As time permits, I’ll write a much more extensive account of the meeting, for a future issue of the Planet.

yontenjamyang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
    • Email
Re: Berkeley Commission Turns Down “Dharma Way”
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2012, 05:46:23 AM »
For me, there is really no argument to the thinking and decision of the Commission of The City of Berkeley. I think naming a street after a religious word or concept is not a very good idea for a country like the US. I do not agree with the Representatives of the network of affiliated Tibetan Buddhist businesses and institutions that they are the "only stakeholders" and it is rather a surprise to hear this coming from Buddhists as we are never alone or the "only stakeholders" in a interconnected world. Simply put, "Dharma Way" would never be the only dot on the city map. Others not working or living there still have a "stake" as many travel through that street, are neighbors or simply live in the same city. All are stakeholders.

After all, I cannot recall any other street that is named is this way. If this recommendation is passed, the we may have many streets names as "Protestant Avenue", "Catholic Drive" or "Sunni Way". If this happens then it will contribute to the segregation of geographical locations with the community. Protestants would not work or live in "Catholic Drive" or "Sunni Way". Muslims would not want to work on "Dharma Way". 

In this age, we should advocate common values and grounds. Names like "Compassion Way", "Kindness Drive" or "Forgiving Avenue" would have been more acceptable.