’Schmeer’ Cop Report Refused By Council
Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

’Schmeer’ Cop Report Refused By Council

First Published: Berkeley Barb, May 13, 1966.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.

The Scheer for Congress Campaign Committee asked the Berkeley City Council to receive directly a report which alleges to document police “persecution” and “repression.” The City Council declined.

At Tuesday’s Council meeting, a letter by Jerry Rosenfield and a talk by Robert Avakian argued that the nature of the charges required direct submission of the evidence to the Council. The usual procedure, giving the report to the City Manager, would allow the police to single out individuals for further harassment, Avakian said.

Councilman Bort replied that the document could be given to the Council men and to the press, as well as to the City Manager. Avakian expressed doubts about the adequacy of press coverage in such a case.

Congressional candidate Robert Scheer had been expected to present the document, but was in Princeton, N.J. debating William Rusher, publisher of National Review. The campaign committee expects him to address the City Council on May 17.

Councilman Harris expressed the opinion of the Council when he said, “I don’t see that it’s necessary for Mr. Schmeer (sic) to present this report.” He said that any citizen could make his own complaint to the Council, and that he did not want Council meetings to become “a political platform.”

Mrs. Robert Avakian asked the Council why the Scheer Campaign had been denied a permit to solicit funds in a public park.

She was cut short in the midst of her enquiry by Council agreement to adjourn lest the questions prove “interminable” and the meeting “run on until midnight.” The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.