City Hall/School District Rescinds Offer To Allow Developer To Build Lofts On Elementary School Site
The resolution was changed sometime after the Tattler reported on its earlier incarnation on Sunday. The City Attorney Mike Biddle and the council members refused to comment on the last minute change other than to acknowledge the fact that it had been changed. Mr Biddle refused to answer specifically why the resolution had been re-written. The new document makes no claim as to the fate of what had been formerly referred to as School District "surplus property".
Council member Nora Davis did not refute that the resolution had morphed, but she denied the previous language in the document that referred to the schools sell off ever existed, calling any mention of it "misinformation". Tattler readers can view the previous resolution on their own, complete with the section on selling the elementary school and the middle school off to developers for demolition, HERE (please go to page four).
The City Council and the Successor Agency are comprised of the same people.
Since the city calls it misinformation, can someone there reveal their plans or do they take joy in deceiving us?
ReplyDeleteBasically Kurt Brinkman and Nora Davis were caught red-handed in a lie. How dare they disrespect the good people of Emeryville. It's no wonder that Davis fled her official chair when caught. She left Brinkman alone to shamefully admit the truth. Of course the city attorney Michael Biddle is well accustomed to public humiliation. :-)
DeleteGood for you, Brian. Even if you are wrong, as the deny'rs say, you are stimulating disinterested constituents to think about tearing down a bought and paid for school, in order to develop an ill conceived community facility; and leaving tax payers with Millions of Dollars of Bond Debt. When Residential Emeryville was originally laid out by the planners, they properly set aside appropriate school locations. It is, also, wrong to mix 1st graders with 12th graders.
ReplyDeleteI nominate you for an Emeryville Pulitzer; keep up the good work.
Wrong? Be a skeptic...check it out for yourself. Click on the link an read the entire PDF file from City Hall for yourself. The screamers and yellers here are just angry they've been outed.
DeleteCity Hall and The School District wanted to hold out the carrot of tax increments to Sacramento to get them to accept the appeal and release the $22 million to build the community center part of the Center of CCommunity Life. I'm sure they're not happy it's entered the public realm so visibly. They were probably hoping the state would accept the deal and then they'd break it to us later on down the road. Now the cats out of the bag before the state has ruled and if they deny the appeal then City Hall has lost everything: the $22 million and the trust of the people. Still...it's hard to feel sorry for them.
Call for a county grand jury. These people are bending the rules big time and they think they could get away with it. Look at the budget process. What a sham including perversion of small ordinances like public art. It is supposed to buy art not fund non profits. And then the issue of the salaries of the managers while they cut union jobs. Six months to a year down the line people will see the effects of this, and it is terrible that they are selling off excellent community serving assets when they should be selling off redevelopment properties. Why not sell the brick building that they have next to city hall and keep the school? What a bunch of smug people.
ReplyDeleteProbably what she meant by misinformation was that Brian and out and out stated they were selling off those sites to developers, yet when you read the actual text, it was listed as a option, a possibility, NOT a done deal.
ReplyDeleteA point that Brian seems to like to ignore entirely in his desire to make political hay.
Well Mr Anonymous if that were true, then you'd have a point.
DeleteYou should run for city council...you'd fit in there nicely. Maybe you're already on the council?
What Brian also ignores in the State mandated process for disposing of surplus school property. The property must first be offered to a series of agencies for use for educational purposes, affordable housing, and recreational uses. If none of those agencies are willing/able to purchase the property, then it MUST be sold to the highest bidder.
DeleteNot germane to the story...the greater point is they signaled an intent to the State that they're willing to sell off the properties to developers. This is the part that citizens would find compelling...especially after for years publicly denying this as even a possibility.
DeleteI'm glad you are not a journalist, because you never think anything is germane to the story. I don't see how the required process for selling school property would not be germane to a story about selling school property.
DeleteDon't see how? It's a pretty elementary point. Perhaps it would be better if start your own blog. It could be accessible and understandable to everyone, including children. You could throw in some celebrity news...a police blotter...probably be very popular.
DeleteOBTW- Once you start believing in your own straw men, you know you're in trouble..or should know.
DeleteWhat do you mean "IF" that were even true?
DeleteIf you look at the language, they use words like if, and may, and could.
That's what scares me about your brand of 'journalism'. You have a tendency to ignore the actual words and meanings and draw your own conclusions about what you think is happening.
All this does is put the option on the table for this city, and why wouldn't they consider it? They would like to get that property tax revenue.
I agree that selling off public land in cramped Emeryville would be a huge mistake. But you can drop the hyperbole and still your point across. A better headline would have been:
"Emeryville considers selling public land to developers"
Would have been just as effective without being misleading.
I don't think you need to comment anonymously. I don't think the Emery Unified School District would punish any employees for comment on the Tattler. It could be argued that this defending of the School District management is part of your job description....it might show up as a credit in your employee file.
DeleteThe statement was put in there apparently by the overzealous Mr. Biddle, The misinformation included detailed descriptions of the amount of square footage per dwelling, the number of dwellings per school site torn down along with the value of each property and dwelling, details about the amount of commercial space available etc. Are we to believe that Mr. Biddle did all of this research on his own? Seriously?
ReplyDeleteThe scenarios given where what is allowed by the existing zoning. It's very objective. The zoning of Anna Yates and Ralph Hawley is R-M (Medium Desity Residential.) The zoning allows a certain number of units on the sites. Those units would have to be a certain size to fit on the sites. The value of the units was assumed. It seems a conservative estimate. This is all very objective information which would be avaliable for any property. If you read the original resolution this is clear. What isn't clear is how Brian read concise, objective infomation and came to an unsuported assertion. It's just irrational.
Delete"Irrational"...very interesting.... There must be a lot of irrational people in Emeryville then since City Hall deleted the whole section on selling off the surplus properties in the resolution. You'd think they'd leave that part in since clearly any rational person can tell that when they offer to sell off the surplus property, they don't really mean it.
DeleteAs I've said, they must have some evidence that Emeryville residents, en masse, are irrational. Maybe they see evidence of this wholesale irrationality in the fact that the people elected Nora Davis and Kurt Brinkman...now THAT"S a rational conclusion.
How could any developer be able to put condo's on land Zoned "Public". This is in the City's General Plan and is not zoned "Medum Density Residential" stated on Chapter 2, page 11 and 13. It makes me think that the 11:13 poster works for the city where they get to make up the rules as they see fit. How about they use Anna Yates as a needed sport center for Soccer, Baseball, Football, Track, Basketball, Tennis and Volleyball. That way they could make a much nicer grade school at the ECCL site. For Ralph Hawley, they could make State subsidized housing for the new poor the City and the State are creating through their policies and corruption.
DeleteBrian:
ReplyDeleteTwo items I don't think you have reported on:
First, the scathing report on ECDC prepared by the City Manager's office;
Second, Karen Reid's departure.
And is Brian Carver, or are you, going to apply for Cheryl Webb's vacant spot on the school board?
I am not seeking appointment to the School Board. I can't speak for anyone else.
DeleteI think it would be worthwhile for you and for Brian Carver to throw your hats in the ring. It would provide a forum for discussing the problems with the school district, and since both of you are qualified it would be interesting if the District ignored you both and selected someone innocuous who won't rock the boat.
DeleteBrian Donahue: Michael Webber directed his question to Brian Carver, not you.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous 8:59 p.m. if Mr Biddle did not have the time to calculate square footage and property tax revenue of the potential "surplus property," perhaps he had former Assistant City Attorney Michael Guina do the research. I heard a rumor that although Mr. Guina left the employ of the City of Emeryville, he started "his own practice" to provide outside legal work for Emeryville. Can someone confirm this?
Some savings this is.
Mr. Biddle's work is directed by the City Council. One can then surmise that the Council, or the Council majority, WANTS to provide funding for the ECCL and has directed Mr. Biddle to make the best argument he can make for saving the funding. I read the resolutions, there was nothing definitive in it. It is simply an attorney doing what an attorney is trained to do, created a reasonable argument based on the available information. Mr. Biddle has repeatedly said that he has not been involved nor invited to the numerous discussions between the City and EUSD concerning the ECCL. Also, the City has no authority over the school district nor the school district's property. Mr. Biddle was simply doing his job as directed by his client and that was to make an argument that could save the funding for the ECCL. No conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteThe blogger and the posters that appear to not want the ECCL to move forward need to focus their attention on the puppet masters not the puppet. Go after the Council. Better yet, if you know the Council is going to take their case to various representatives in Sacramento, chew their ear. Gather the troops and tell your representatives how much you dislike the project. Stop going after the smallest, most ineffectual fish (Biddle) in the stream. Really people, learn to organize and play the game the Council is playing. They are lobbying to have the funding saved, get together and lobby against funding.
So, I presume you're disregarding anyone that wants to see ECCL move forward but also wants an open and honest Emeryville City Hall? I suppose it's 'for us or against us' and those in the 'for us' camp, sign on to any means necessary tactics? You might want to rethink your Procrustean box you've placed your fellow residents in. People might be more complex than your formula allows.
DeletePrecisely Brian!
Delete