Opinion: Why Even Have A Noise Ordinance?

Council Uses Noise Ordinance For Re-Election

We Need Noise Ordinance Enforcement

With much fanfare, back in 2003, the Emeryville City Council officiously enacted a Noise Ordinance as part of its ballyhooed new promise of increased livability for our town. The council members must have thought very highly of themselves by this action as they have been featuring the ordinance in their respective re-election campaign literature ever since.

Apparently the city council members want us to know they value peace and quiet as part of livability for the residents except for the unadvertised inconvenient truth that the noise ordinance is rarely enforced.

. . . . .

The ordinance was written with a waiver clause so that those with special circumstances might be allowed to make undesirable noise on a temporary basis as determined by the council.

Big time corporate developers as it turns out, are very nearly always graced with 'special circumstances' since they are routinely granted waivers by the council majority, sometimes with no explanation as to any circumstances at all. Commonly, these are the same developers that have been generous with donations to these council members at election time.

One case in point: the ongoing Pixar expansion and their construction firm Hathaway Dinwiddie. Last December, Pixar & Hathaway requested a waiver to the ordinance in view of what they characterized as a unprecedented amount of rain that had set back their construction schedule. Apparently rain in the winter was something not accounted for, never mind the fact that when the request was made, the Bay Area was actually slightly behind on expected rainfall. Nevertheless the Council felt Pixar's pain and granted the waiver through mid June, the date needed to make up for time lost to rain. So the normally quiet Park Avenue neighborhood Saturdays became instead just another day of noise and dust.

At the end of the June 19 time of 'special circumstances', Pixar & Hathaway asked for and was granted a six month extension to the waiver, only this time no excuses were proffered excepting the "difficult and complex nature of our Pixar work" according to Senior Superintendent Ed Manifold of Hathaway Dinwiddie. Since time is money, it would appear the special circumstance in the case of the Pixar & Hathaway construction project is the need for profit maximization by all concerned.

None should draw any conclusions about any possible special favors here. What's remarkable about Pixar & Hathaway Dinwiddie is how unremarkable it is. The Pixar noise ordinance waivers are only the latest in a long list of waivers granted to developers by this council.

Former council member John Fricke on the other hand, was a fan of weekend peace and quiet and he used to keep a running tally, made available on his council website, of developer noise ordinance waivers granted by his council colleagues. We're saddened that it now appears none on the council are willing to honor the resident's reasonable expectations for an ordinance that amounts to something.

It matters not why noise waivers are given so freely by this council; be it lack of respect for the residents or simple pro-developer ideology at play or something more nefarious. If these council members are so proud of the noise ordinance they helped write as their campaign literature suggests, they can show us by abiding by its provisions, otherwise it looks like so much window dressing; only existing in order to give people the impression Emeryville is a legitimate city and to re-elect these council members.

Unfortunately, when it comes to loud crashing and banging, the city council might want us to think they're listening to the resident's interests but what's loud and clear for those paying attention is that it's the developers who really have the council's ear.

53rd Street Neighborhood Committee Appeals To Council

Press Release

53rd Street Neighborhood Committee Organizes Against Ikea Expansion

The following is an unedited message to Emeryville residents concerning the proposed Ikea warehouse customer pick-up center:

Giant IKEA vs. Emeryville Neighborhood

Despite its reputation as family-friendly, IKEA isn’t being very family friendly to a small community in Emeryville, a little city nestled between Berkeley and Oakland in the Bay Area. IKEA Emeryville wants to move its warehouse and customer pick-up operations for large items from its retail store to a building in area zoned for Office/Technology uses.

The building, at 5000 Hollis on the corner of 53^rd and Hollis Streets, is adjacent to a residential community of 142 family homes, 2 preschools, a secondary school, and a children’s gym and across the street from a new pocket park. In addition, Emeryville’s new General Plan, completed in October 2009 at a cost of $1.5m, designates 53^rd Street as a greenway and bicycle boulevard; the IKEA customer pick up area would face 53^rd Street.

The Plan also restricts regional retail to west of the tracks, and 5000 Hollis is east of the tracks in an area with a mix of compatible uses including residential and parks and the Pixar campus.

In their application for a Conditional Use Permit, IKEA stated that they need additional warehouse space so they can stay fully stocked and their—regional—customers won’t have to make two trips to the store. This may work for IKEA, but the 53^rd Street neighbors have made it clear that it won’t work for them.

A small group of residents formed the 53^rd Street Neighborhood Committee to fight IKEA. They initiated a letter writing campaign to the Planning Commission and City Council, collected 137 signatures on a petition, filled to overflowing the Planning Commission hearing on August 26, and 20 of 21 speakers spoke passionately against the IKEA proposal. The only speaker in favor of the project was the lawyer for the owner of 5000 Hollis.

At the August meeting, the Planning Commission approved the project by a vote of 4 to 3. Disappointingly, Frank Flores,Planning Commission chair, who had earlier suggested that IKEA’s application would be denied, cast the deciding vote to approve. Commissioners Gail Donaldson, Vanessa Kuemmerle, and Steve Steinberg, responding in part to the concerns expressed by dozens of Emeryville residents, employees, and small business owners who opposed the project, voted to deny the application.

Undaunted, on September 2, 2010, the 53^rd Street Neighborhood Committee filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision. The Planning Department has scheduled the appeal to be heard by the City Council at their October 19, 2010 meeting.

The appeal cites provisions in the General Plan that permits warehousing and distribution facilities as ancillary uses only, and questions the finding that IKEA would be a “secondary” use, required per Zoning Regulations to grant a Conditional Use Permit in the Office/Technology zone. It cites the effects this facility would have relating to traffic, noise, safety, and air quality, and points out IKEA’s history of poor planning—they grossly miscalculated their predictions for their Emeryville store which required them to build a four story parking garage shortly after opening and have based their calculations for customer volume at the proposed offsite warehouse on a manual count by an IKEA employee of receipts for 14 days in June.

The appeal notes that the Planning Department did not consider the impact on the neighborhood when it prepared its staff report and makes a strong argument about the negative impact this facility would have on the quality of life and property values of the adjacent residential community. It points out the differences between office/technology uses, which are compatible uses (Novartis, Bayer, and Pixar have campuses in the area), and how large scale regional retail with continuous truck and customer activity from 7:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m. would be detrimental to the general well being of the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, it cautions that allowing IKEA to locate outside the area zoned for “retail uses that serve as a regional draw,” regardless of the General Plan or Zoning Regulations, would put all Emeryville neighborhoods and businesses at risk.

In an urban environment like the Bay Area, residential communities are fragile. Emeryville must decide if it is truly committed to supporting its residents and creating the “livable, walkable, sustainable urban community” envisioned in its General Plan. City Council members are urged to approve the appeal filed by the 53^rd Street Neighborhood Committee and send a clear message to Planning Department staff and Planning Commission members that the following required finding in the approval procedure for a Master Use Permits or Conditional Use Permits should be given priority:

(d) That the proposed use or uses at its proposed location will provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the surrounding neighborhood or community.

What can you do?

Attend the City Council meeting on October 19, 2010 approximately 7:30 p.m. The number of people at the meeting will impact the outcome.

The agenda will be set on October 5 and can be found on the City of Emeryville’s Web site. Go to Departments®Planning & Building®Planning Division®Planning Commission, http://www.ci.emeryville.ca.us/index.aspx?NID=104.

Write to City Council Members:

Mayor Ruth Atkin - ratkin@ci.emeryville.ca.us

Kurt Brinkman - kbrinkman@ci.emeryville.ca.us

Ken Bukowski - kbukowski@ci.emeryville.ca.us

Nora Davis - ndavis@ci.emeryville.ca.us

Jennifer West - jwest@emeryville.org

Help Get the Word Out

You can talk to your neighbors, friends, and colleagues and help collect more signatures on petitions and distribute flyers. To contact us, post a comment on our Facebook page or email the 53^rd Street Neighborhood Committee at noikeawarehouse@gmail.com

District Desperation, School Plans on Life Support

Unconfirmed reports suggest that Emeryville's school district and city administrators have fired up a boiler-room operation of telemarketers, in an attempt to counteract a scathing column and story in local papers highly critical of the district's $95 million bond sale to build a new school campus.
The pieces, published in the Oakland Tribune and its affiliated papers including the Contra Costa Times, urged Emeryville voters to take a long hard look if not outright reject the bond measure due to its exorbitant and unknown costs. Respected columnist Daniel Borenstein noted that Emeryville taxpayers will likely be stuck paying Wall Street investors $383 million by the time they are finished paying back all the interest. The amount could even be higher depending on where rates stand when the various series of bonds are sold.
Numerous residents have contacted the Tattler, saying that they have received the call in recent days.
Apparently, the district has descended into panic mode, hiring teams of callers to interrupt the dinners of local voters, in an effort to gauge the damage the stories have inflicted on their campaign.
Our schools need real investment, but not if three quarters of what taxpayers will be shelling out goes to Wall Street fat cats rather than our own children.

Oakland Tribune: Emeryville Is Keeping Voters In The Dark

Emery School District Involved In A "Cover Up"

Edited and re-printed from the Oakland Tribune Sept 19, 2010:

Daniel Borenstein: Voters kept in the dark on school bonds

By Daniel Borenstein
Staff columnist

VOTERS IN seven East Bay school districts will be asked Nov. 2 to approve a collective $854 million of bonds to fund school construction. By the districts' estimates, which they're not sharing with voters, repayment with interest will increase property tax bills $3 billion.

Despite the high stakes, voters who read the information that comes with their sample ballot won't be able to intelligently evaluate the measures. Disclosure requirements are grossly inadequate. Voters are being asked to cast ballots in the dark.

In today's editorial, we evaluate those measures. We on the editorial board can extract information from the districts that most voters cannot. After all, district officials want our endorsement of their bonds. But the school districts should provide that information to all voters.

Unfortunately, I suspect most voters don't understand bond measures. I wonder how many realize that this is a loan that must be repaid. I wonder how many voters realize that property owners are going to pay more taxes to retire the bonds.

Of the seven East Bay measures, the ballot wording for six of them -- each up to 75 words long -- never mentions the word tax, never indicates that property owners must cough up more money.

Most of us want to support public education. But school officials need to start being straight with voters about the cost -- and it looks like it will require new state laws to ensure that happens.

The deception doesn't end with the ballot language. The cover-up continues with the supplemental materials mailed to voters. If you live in Martinez, Pittsburg, Knightsen, Berkeley, Emeryville, San Leandro or the Ohlone Community College District, look carefully at the official information you receive from the elections office next month about your school bond.

You'll find two key statements, the county counsel's analysis and the tax rate statement signed by the superintendent. Buried in this boiler plate is some minimal information about the bond measure.

It tells you the amount of the bonds that will be sold. And it tells you about the tax rate. (Finally a hint that your taxes are going up.) Tax rates are usually expressed as dollars per $100,000 assessed valuation. For example, a $60 rate means that the owner of a house assessed at $300,000 would pay $180 each year.

Tax rates often fluctuate. The tax rate statement tells you the rate charged to property owners after the first series of bonds is sold and after the last series of bonds is sold. (Bonds are usually sold in groups, or series, not all at once.) Finally, it tells you the top tax rate. That's all good information, but it's not nearly enough.

If you took out a home loan you'd want to know how long the payments would last and how much interest you'd pay. You'd also want to factor in your payment obligations for other loans. The same goes for bonds.

But the official information doesn't tell you that in the Emeryville school district, three out of every four tax dollars will go to interest on the bonds rather than the principal. (By contrast, if you bought a house today and paid it off in 30 years, you'd pay equal parts principal and interest.)

Finally, the tax rate statements contain "the best estimate of the highest tax rate." But those estimates are dependent on forecasts about property values in the school district. The higher the total assessed value, the lower the tax rate for each property owner.

Unfortunately, as we've found, the projections of assessed value growth are all over the map, anywhere from 3 percent annually in San Leandro to 7.5 percent for 2014 to 2018 in Emeryville. Interestingly, none of the financial analysts forecast a decline for next year. But that's what Christopher Thornberg of Beacon Economics, who does this sort of forecasting for a living, predicts will happen.

What if the projections are wrong? Property owners will pay a higher tax rate if the bonds have already been issued, or the districts will have to delay issuing some of the bonds, stretching the tax payment farther into the future. Either way, the taxpayers lose.

That doesn't necessarily mean we should oppose school bonds any more than we should not buy a house because it might not appreciate as much as we'd like. What it means is that voters should go in with their eyes wide open, and district officials should be honest and upfront about the costs and real risks. Then we can make educated decisions.

Unedited story is here:http://www.contracostatimes.com/daniel-borenstein/ci_16118801?nclick_check=1

Oakland Tribune Says Emeryville 'Measure J' Is Too Expensive

Re-printed from the Oakland Tribune Sept 19 2010:

Measure J, Emery Unified School District

Amount borrowed: $95 million

Total cost with interest: $383 million

Financing analysis: The district plans to repay these bonds over 47 years, resulting in very high interest costs. The ratio of the repayment cost to the original amount borrowed is 4.0, which is unacceptable. Moreover, the repayment schedule makes aggressive assumptions about development in the city of Emeryville producing new tax revenue. If the growth does not materialize, that would mean higher tax rates for existing residents or delays in issuing some of the bonds and extension of the Measure J tax beyond the projected 47 years.

Under the district's scenario, it would seek bridge financing if some of the bonds were delayed, an option we find unacceptable. As for the advertised tax rate of $60 per $100,000 assessed valuation, it doesn't account for repayment through 2022 of the district's existing bonds. The combined tax rate would be about $74 in 2011.

How the money will be used: The district, which serves about 800 mostly low-income students, is proposing to rebuild its two schools at adjacent sites. The new schools would be part of a community center project, planned with financial contributions from the city, that would also include other community service programs. While the project is interesting, the school district's share of the cost requires an excessively expensive bond program.

Recommendation: No.

Emery Schools Hide Declining Test Results

Measure J Claims Refuted

School Bond Hyperbole

Academic achievement is improving by leaps and bounds according to a 'community update' brochure the school district mailed to Emeryville voters showing dramatic improvement between 2007 and 2009, but the mailer declined to share the most recent State mandated test scores, which show a retrenchment from 2007-2009.
The 2010 test results distressing: Just 37.3 percent of students in grades 2-11 tested as proficient in English. Only 29.1 percent were rated as proficient in history, 35.2 percent in Math, 33.8 percent in science and 11.3 percent on end of course science tests. After years of improved scores, the new district-wide results are broadly down from last year.

School District Obfuscates

The district, which had access to the most recent scores weeks before the brochure was sent out, chose to trumpet gains made between 2007 and 2009 and highlight that the district students improved "more than any other school district in Alameda County."
Meanwhile, the mailer conflates the passage of two recent voter approved parcel tax measures with increased academic achievement, intimating that a $95 million Measure J, a school bond/community center initiative slated for November 2, would likewise increase achievement and that it "allows us to continue this academic growth".

School Board member Josh Simon asserted unequivocally a "clear link between providing resources teachers need and academic outcomes". He warned against the danger of spotting a trend from one year and went on to say his concern is "without quality facilities, it will be difficult to continue this progress". School Board member Cheryl Webb noted the brochures were "worked on well before" the new test results were announced by the State, regardless of the mail date. The other school board members were unavailable or didn't respond.

In response to a recent Oakland Tribune story on the sagging test scores in Emeryville, Superintendent of the schools John Sugiyama noted improvement in key areas saying, "Student achievement scores are only but one measurement. Other measures include graduation rates, dropout rates and percentage of students accepted into four year colleges/universities among other data collected". Nonetheless, Mr Sugiyama added the district is "not satisfied that we are doing everything we can to foster student success. We know we can do better and we are working toward that goal".

The release of the Emeryville brochures coming after the State announcement of the new test results is something Mr Simon said he "couldn't speak to" but he highlighted the positive at the district; "beyond test scores, we've created a college-going culture in which an increasing number of kids have been accepted into two and four year college".

After Four Year Battle, Woodfin Throws In The Towel

The People Of Emeryville Prove Stronger Than Woodfin

The former workers at the Woodfin Suite Hotel today have announced their four year fight to get the hotel to pay their back wages and honor Measure C, the will of the people of Emeryville, is over. Today EBASE, the workers, Unite Here 2850, and the Woodfin announced a settlement agreement which puts an end to this conflict and protects Measure C, the 2005 voter passed 'living wage for hotel workers'. Sam Hartage, the San Diego billionaire owner of the hotel chain who for four years made every effort, legal and otherwise, to not pay the workers their back wages as the Emeryville ordinance requires, has now agreed to pay up.

The East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE), an Oakland based organization concerned with building social and economic justice for workers, the hotel workers representitives Unite Here 2850 and Woodfin jointly released the following press statement:

Woodfin Suite Hotels and EBASE today announced that a settlement had been reached in the litigation between Woodfin, the City of Emeryville, and the workers assisted by EBASE over claims related to Emerville's Measure C, an ordinance setting labor standards for Emervyville hotels. Workers during the time period in question will be receiving claim forms in the mail in order to participate in the settlement. EBASE and UNITE HERE 2850 has called off its boycott activities. The parties praised mediator William Cahill and each other for bringing the long-running dispute to an end.

And here's what worker leader Luz had to say:

"We are very proud to have fought for living wages and immigrant rights, and we are very happy with this agreement. To all who have supported us during these four years: thank you so much!"

Opinion

Oakland Children Welcome Here

We are saddened that there seems to be a mean spirited campaign in our town to divide children lately. Ever since the Emery Unified School District joined with the City of Emeryville some five years ago to build the Center of Community Life, a growing number of residents have complained the expensive school rebuild/community center would benefit "Oakland students" owing to the 46% of children enrolled here from out of our district. This chorus has increased in volume since the City and the District have asked voters to support the $95 million Measure J school/community center bond. These disparaging comments have even occurred in the comments section of the Tattler.

At the Tattler, we feel there is much to dislike in the Center of Community Life and Measure J; an appalling lack of transparency and quashing of dissent among the myriad and glaring problems. We also agree Emeryville needs to attract more families with children to our town to create a more diverse community. We do hope that the percentage of Emeryville children at our schools increases and we will work toward that goal but we feel it is out-of-bounds to disparage Oakland children. This is bordering on scapegoating and its not flattering for Emeryville. We must remember that a child is a child, regardless of incidental municipal boundaries.

Exotic Finance Bonds Presented For Controversial School Rebuild Project

'Zero Coupon' Bonds Raised As Magic Bullet

Emeryville Plans To Defer Debt For The Center Of Community Life

Speculation ended about how the little town of Emeryville can raise $125 million to build the Center of Community Life when sales of normal 'general obligation' bonds can only net about $45 million, given our tax base. Most of the difference will be made up with 'zero coupon' bonds, the magic bullets for over leveraged municipalities, and bond underwriters told city and school district officials Monday night these bonds can be counted on for another $50 million for a total of $95 million. Kick in about $25 million from the City's coffers and some hoped for grants from the feds and we're fully financed, ready to break ground.

The bond underwriter explained to a dumbfounded School Board the arcanery of zero coupon bond financing as a way to make up for Emeryville's fiduciary deficiencies for the expensive school/community center project. These exotic financing products are sold to investors at no interest for the first ten years, deferring payments and accumulating interest to be paid back at a much higher rate later on. Sometimes called 'discount' bonds, they are bought at a lower price than their face value, with the face value repaid at the time of maturity.

This kind of borrowing is great for buyers of the bonds but not so good for sellers in the long run. In Emeryville's case, the $95 million Measure J bond initiative slated for November 2 will net bond buyers about an extra $25 million in 10 years in interest payments with the inclusion of the zero coupon bonding . Emeryville residents however will be on the hook for more than double the total debt as compared to normal general obligation bond financing. The term of the payments has also increased and talk of a 45 year debt retirement was kicked around.

One resident who wished to remain anonymous called the financing scheme fiscal chicanery foisting a millstone around the neck of our future, a "mortgaging of the next generation". Another resident told the Tattler the total payments Emeryville will have to make will be more than a quarter billion dollars, and the cost per student will be more than $150,000.

Emeryville it seems is prepared to use up it's money generating capacity and then some. This is analogous to a 'payday loan' on a grand scale, one attendee at the meeting later said.

School District Propaganda Mailer Barrage

Measure J marches forward

Center of Community Life Goes Unmentioned In City-Wide Mailer

The latest postal barrage from the Emery Unified School District advocating for the Center of Community Life hit resident's mailboxes over the weekend in a splashy, upbeat brochure. Yet mention of the 800 pound Center of Community Life gorilla is remarkably absent from the full color glossy flyer.

Readers of the taxpayer funded mailer will find nothing at all about the Center of Community Life, and this is by design. The missing information is in keeping with the recommendations from the election consultancy firm, The Lew Edwards Group. Last spring the School District and the City retained the Oakland based consultancy firm to help assure a successful 'Measure J' vote November 2nd and to build momentum to build the community center, the penultimate goal.

Measure J, ostensibly a school bond initiative, is in actuality a vote for the Center of Community Life, a controversial $125 million school and community center construction project, according to the Lew Edwards Group. The Group recommended to City Council and School Board members to not reveal to voters the real purpose of Measure J since their research indicated weak public support for the expensive Center of Community Life project. Lew Edwards Group CEO Catherine Lew instead told Emeryville's elected officials the November election should be cast as a school bond vote, something residents would be much more likely to support.

Also missing from the School District's upbeat flyer is any mention that the Measure J bond will cost residents $95 million or that there will be no senior exemption.

The brochure, entitled 'EUSD'S School Needs & Measure J' was mailed out to all registered voters in town in anticipation of the $95 million Measure J school bond vote on November 2. School Board member Josh Simon stated he didn't know the total cost to the District for the three fold 11"x 17" mailer but he hastened to add the function is to inform Emeryville residents and the District's duty to do its level best to provide an objective analysis for voters.

This latest city-wide flyer is part of a $1.8 million push by the City of Emeryville and the School District and paid for by the taxpayers to move the Center of Community Life to approval.

Community Leaders Won't Cross Council Member Nora Davis

News Analysis/Opinion

She Who Must Be Obeyed

The rapidly approaching November $95 million bond initiative, characterized by proponents as a 'school bond' but is really a bond for the $125 million Emeryville Center of Community Life, has become a sort of litmus test for the independence of Emeryville community leaders. In coming weeks, Emeryville citizens will see this litmus test manifest in the Alameda County official voter guide, mailed to all voter's homes; arguments in favor of the controversial bond initiative will go unanswered by any arguments against.

And it's all because council member Nora Davis would not be amused if anyone had the temerity to offer a rebuttal of any kind. Debate about the Center of Community Life has been shuttered. All have fallen in line, none have dared step out of line.

Council member Davis, darling of conservative voters and arguably the most powerful person in town, has championed the Center of Community Life and this fact has so far kept all normally outspoken community leader would be critics of the Center silent. But it's not for lack of critics. East, west, north and south; Emeryville residents have almost universally expressed dismay at the $125 million dollar project. Citizen critics have far outnumbered proponents, especially by those on the fiscally conservative side owing to the costly nature of the construction project. Yet displeasure at the prospect of the $125 million construction project has only risen to the level of furtive murmurings from community leaders.

Fear Of Reprisals

This silence from fiscal budget hawks has caused some to wonder; where are those who would mind the ledger? The Tattler has learned they're out there, they're simply too frightened to make any disparaging comments against the Center of Community Life or the Bond Initiative for fear of reprisals from Ms Davis. Several community leaders have privately told the Tattler the reprisals they fear would take the form of shunning by Ms Davis when it comes time for appointment or reappointment to various city commissions, committees and task forces.

The fears of these people are not without merit. Council watchers over the last two decades have all noted how the process works; the rise to political power for would be leaders, especially conservatives, comes through the good graces of Council member Davis. First one must seek a committee or task force appointment, and that requires the support of Ms Davis. This is how one garners "experience", an absolute requirement for elective office if one believes Council member Davis and her conservative cohorts. This paradigm has been very effective in ensuring a conservative majority on the council over the years and keeping Ms Davis at the pinnacle of power in Emeryville.

Some may see a disconnect between this blind allegiance to a leader and the oft claimed conservative tradition of the sanctity of individualism but it should be noted that (party) discipline has often been the stronger tradition in conservative circles. In Emeryville, it's become very clear which tradition is stronger.