Skip to content

Corky Booze speaking from the council dais

Council divided over alleged attack on Booze

on October 17, 2012

With exactly three weeks until the upcoming election, Richmond’s key political players were out in full swing and the council’s division on full display at Tuesday night’s meeting.

The main source of tension for the evening was a recent fight between Corky Booze and Richmond Progressive Alliance member David Moore. The much-disputed incident between the two men resulted in an exchange of blows outside the Sept. 20 Point Richmond Neighborhood Council’s Candidates Night forum.

Councilmember Nat Bates placed an item on the agenda to talk about the altercation, but Tom Butt then moved that the council table the discussion. Jeff Ritterman seconded the motion by Butt, which removed the item from the agenda. Due to the council’s official rules as read by City Attorney Bruce Goodmiller, further comment on the issue could not be made from the council dais, and any councilmember who wished to speak would have to do so during open forum.

Nat Bates, Jim Rogers and Corky Booze did just that.

Booze took the one minute allotted to individuals in public comment to say he would call the District Attorney to press charges against Moore the following morning, and to call out Butt’s block of the item.

“As long as we’re doing what you want it’s OK,” he said to Butt. “But you really showed your true colors tonight.”

Bates, speaking from the podium, said he was looking out for the rest of the council.

“The attack on Councilmember Booze could have been directed at any one of us,” Bates said. “My concern has to do with the safety of all of us.”

Rogers, who typically sides with the council’s progressive alliance, agreed with Bates and said that discussion of the incident should rise above the council’s divisive nature. The item was really an issue of public policy, he said.

Bates said we live in a “violent society,” and both he and Rogers suggested metal detectors as a solution to the concerns raised by the incident.

“If a person comes up unprovoked and attacks another person, that’s a serious crime in my opinion,” Bates said. “Especially if it’s an elected official.”

Other speakers during open forum, like City Council candidate Bea Roberson, said they suspected the decision to table the item stemmed from a fear that discussion of the issue would bring to light details from the incident—including suspicions that the RPA planned the alleged attack—that the group would rather keep secret.

“If you are not afraid of the facts that are going to come out, let it be brought forward and spoken about,” Roberson said.

RPA member Michael Parker, though, said the item’s placement on the agenda in the first place was an abuse of council power by Bates and Booze.

“It was put on there to divert attention from the fact that Councilmember Booze is himself involved in other assaults,” Parker said.

After the meeting, Bates said that by attempting to present the item, he was hopeful that the council would discuss the incident and take a collective position that incidents of this kind would not be tolerated regardless of who is being attacked.

Bates said he recognizes that the tabling of the issue comes down to the council’s consistent struggle with divisiveness.

“Had it been someone other than Corky, I know that it would have been another reaction,” he said. “That’s not the way government should operate.”


  1. Cindy Lopez on October 17, 2012 at 5:12 pm

    Why should the Council talk about an altercation by adult men?
    Let the courts settle it.
    Shouldn’t we have better things to do?
    Are you really afraid for the safety of the councilmembers or is it just ploy for political advantage?

    • Jeff Ritterman on October 17, 2012 at 11:21 pm

      You got it right Cindy and Bea Roberson’s comment about a planned RPA conspiracy to attack Councilmember Booze is ridiculous and of course untrue. Is Ms. Roberson also just vying for political advantage or is her judgement so faulty that she could seriously entertain such a notion. Do we want someone on council with either bad judgement or who resorts to political maneuvering.

    • Felix Hunziker on October 18, 2012 at 5:08 pm

      I doubt the RPA planned the attack on Booze but I will say they are prone to threatening behavior. See below for my email detailing an incident from last December:

      Friends and neighbors,

      On Friday evening, only two nights before Christmas and apparently running low on holiday spirit, the Richmond Progressive Alliance issued a veiled threat against private citizens who speak out for fairness and an end to hateful political rhetoric.

      Roberto Reyes, a founding member of the RPA, walked into Caspers restaurant and delivered the following warning to City Councilman Corky Booze and resident Sims Thompson: “Tell Felix to back off or we are going to take care of him”.

      As referenced in Tom Butt’s recent E-Forum, this again illustrates ongoing belligerent behavior by key members of the RPA and I’m thankful they are so accommodating in proving those points. The Grinch’s cowardly delivery aside, I worry what this means for all other Richmond residents who “dare” to question our elected officials and their methods. Will you be shouted down, publicly slandered, or your home picketed if you exercise your First Amendment right to speak your mind in Richmond?

      I’ll say it again: when democracy, respect, and diversity become empty words that belie the real actions of those in power then someone must speak up. It’s my hope that soon the rest of the RPA say “enough!” and guide their organization back to the earnest practice of those tenets. Until then I’ll keep speaking up and I hope you all do as well.

      Wishing you all joyous Holidays and best wishes for the New Year. Even to the Grinches out there.


      “The term Grinchy shall apply when Christmas spirit is in short supply” – The Book of Who

Richmond Confidential welcomes comments from our readers, but we ask users to keep all discussion civil and on-topic. Comments post automatically without review from our staff, but we reserve the right to delete material that is libelous, a personal attack, or spam. We request that commenters consistently use the same login name. Comments from the same user posted under multiple aliases may be deleted. Richmond Confidential assumes no liability for comments posted to the site and no endorsement is implied; commenters are solely responsible for their own content.

Card image cap
Richmond Confidential

Richmond Confidential is an online news service produced by the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism for, and about, the people of Richmond, California. Our goal is to produce professional and engaging journalism that is useful for the citizens of the city.

Please send news tips to

Latest Posts

Scroll To Top