Council Vote Unanimous On Outsourcing

Public Education To Remain At Child Center

After a five month roller coaster of a fight to protect public education at the pre-K level, pitting parents against the City Manager, the Emeryville City Council handed down their unanimous verdict Thursday night; the Child Development Center is to remain a public institution.

The council acknowledged the persistent work of the parents in letter writing, meeting attendance and contributions to the specially designated 'ECDC Task Force'. Supporters of the Child Center Friday were praising the efforts of one parent in particular, Jacqueline "Jac" Asher. Ms Asher, and her husband Brian Carver led the fight by organizing the parents into a united front of opposition to the outsourcing scheme.

One council watcher noted the unexpected unanimous vote, "I'm surprised Nora Davis voted for this" he said, adding his desire to remain anonymous. In fact several council votes have been made to weaken or degrade the Child Center over the years and Thursday was the first vote cast by Ms Davis in favor of supporting the Center.

It was a stunning loss for City Manager Pat O'Keeffe who threw the entire weight of his office behind the proposal to outsource the Center to the Berkeley/Albany YMCA. Many parents complained about Mr O'Keeffe's insolence and rudeness directed at them. "His comments about us being 'too emotional' were really offensive", one parent who asked for unanimity said.

Ms Asher tempered her victory letter to parents with descriptions of "hard cuts" to come at the Center including staffing reductions. She indicated it was time for her to take a break for a little while, after the five month ordeal, "I'm tired" she exclaimed.

Council makes parents wait

Local Baby Sitters Profit Handsomely From Mayor's Decision

The Emeryville Child Development Center budget agenda item drew scores of people to City Hall last night. But parents who showed up with their infants and toddlers at City Hall to speak on behalf of the Child Center were made to wait...and wait...and wait.

It was by design; the staff saw fit to place the Child Center discussion dead last on the night's agenda, after presentations about the Fire Department and the Police Department's budgetary concerns. Many parents with their children were observed giving up and leaving, not having been given the chance to speak after having waited for hours. Some 17 parents, many with squirming children and six childless residents managed to wait more than two and a half hours to plead with the council to not outsource the Child Center to a private concern.

Mayor Ruth Atkin was not concerned enough to change the agenda, her prerogative, to accommodate the beleaguered parents. Local babysitters however were no doubt appreciative of the mayors recalcitrance since they netted more money than anticipated, at least the ones that were able to stay up late.

The council will decide about the fate of the Child Development Center on Thursday night at 7:15 at City Hall.

How They Voted

Tattler Featurette

Bike Lanes On Horton Street For Safety?

At the Tattler, we've noticed the city council and other deliberative bodies in Emeryville make controversial votes that get forgotten by the residents over time. In deference to the general edification of public policy and to strengthen Emeryville's democratic institutions, we will publish occasional short reminders on how the Power Elite in town have voted on these controversial issues.

On November 17th, 2009, the issue before the Transportation Committee was:

Should the unanimous vote of the Bike/Pedestrian Committee to uphold the Bike Plan by installing bike lanes on (the southern part of) Horton Street be obeyed?

Nora Davis - NO

Ken Bukowski - NO

Note: The Transportation Committee is comprised of only these two council members. Bicycle advocates are still waiting for the bike lanes, since the council has not ruled on this yet.

Budget Hocus Pocus Revealed

Police Overtime Pay Drastically Cut? Oops, Not.

It seems the pencil pushers at City Hall are wanting to show some progress in the fight to reduce the budget deficit, or perhaps at least give the apearence of a reduction. An Emeryville resident has uncovered what appears to be a fiscal shell game conducted by City Hall meant to highlight a new regime of fiduciary prudence in the city's budget.

Emeryville resident and UC Professor Brian Carver revealed the budgetary legerdemain in a strongly worded May 7th letter to the council. The letter showed the police overtime pay went from $444,274 in 2007-08 to $579,675 in 2008-09. In 2009-10 the 'Estimate to Complete' is $600,000 and a 2010-11 budget (as well as a 2011-12 budget) of $174,000. He pointed out, "Instead of spending the $600,000 we spent over the last year on police overtime, we are budgeting just $174,000, a more than 70% reduction".

"At first glance, this appears to be excellent news" he extolled but added, "The truth is something else entirely". In an entry eerily similar to George Bush's war budgeting tactics, Mr Carver reveals the same budget line shows that in 2009-10, we also budgeted just $174,000 for police overtime and nonetheless ended up over-spending that budgeted amount by more than 244%.

This problem was discussed at the April 16th Finance Committee meeting and the recommendation was made that the Chief of Police be required to return to council and request authorization for additional overtime if the budgeted amount is exceeded in the coming year. Mr Carver points out how this idea is flawed in its implementation, "In October or November when the Police Chief comes to the council and says they have exceeded the budgeted amount for overtime and requests an additional budget allocation, what will the council say? At that point it will be too late and the council will have little choice but to approve the additional overtime".

Police Department personnel have indicated much of the overtime pay can be attributed to just two sources; the Bay Street Mall and Kitty's, a cabaret on Hollis Street near the Berkeley border.

Brian Carver, a professor at the School of Information at UC, lives with his wife and two children in the Triangle neighborhood. He and his wife have long been advocates for the Child Development Center and their children attend the Center.

What Do We Really Want, Anyway?

Opinion

Don't Be Pro-Business, Be Pro-Resident

By Brian Donahue

The political decision makers in Emeryville are fond of reminding residents that businesses provide the money we need to improve the quality of life for the residents, as if the residents needs were the more important part of the equation. In practice, what we have is a 'trickle down' paradigm where the business sector is sacrosanct and residents needs become incidental. The businesses receive the lion's share of the actual government largess and the residents mostly receive the laudatory hot air.

Aware of the growing resident discontent with the multi-million dollar developer subsidies given by City Hall and the lightest business tax in the Bay Area, the council likes to extol the idea of the "win-win" scenario for developers and residents alike. But this is a common axiom in our culture, sometimes used by politicians to hide something much less egalitarian in reality than it sounds coming from the council chamber's lofty dais.

The redevelopment machine, loosed on our town is a clear example of how the residents needs have taken a backseat to the desires of developers. What was conceived to be in the interests of the residents has turned instead into a self perpetuating program of give-a-ways to favored developers by City Hall, one project funding the next. This could be construed as beneficial to the residents were it not for the fact that the development we're getting is mostly in the form of regional shopping centers. However the business proponents on the council are correct in their exclamations on the revenue raising capacity of commerce. Business revenue is how cities thrive, it's well documented that residences are usually revenue negative for cities, costing more than they bring in. But we must remember, business is here for us, not the other way around. So the charge of the decision makers is to deliver business that will enhance the public realm for residents and pay the bills.

What Are We Really Getting?

Regardless that the Redevelopment Agency hasn't been delivering the kind of built development the residents want, the council points with pride to new parks like Doyle/Hollis Park paid for by the shopping malls, as proof that redevelopment is working for the residents. Even with the new parks however, Emeryville still stands at the bottom of Bay Area cities in terms of park acreage per residence. This becomes more damning when one considers the geographic ratio of business (80%) to residences (20%), higher than almost all other Bay Area cities. With the revenue gathering capacity of this ratio, we should have MORE parks and other amenities than our neighbors, not less.

Emeryville has earned its reputation of being the most business friendly city in the Bay Area, and this is borne out by the facts. Our unexplained lack of resident amenities compared with our neighbors is a direct effect of a pro-business culture at City Hall. This unacknowledged culture has unacknowledged negative impacts on the residents. Businesses have different needs than residents; they need profits and we need livability. They'll ALWAYS try to increase their profits and our interests are not part of their equation. It's the council that needs to negotiate on our behalf and that's what is lacking. Instead of phony "win-win" talk, we need a "win for the residents" culture at City Hall. To give businesses sweetheart deals like our council does, in service of some ideologically driven dogma is not how a livable city for the residents is created, regardless of any pollyanna rhetoric emanating from City Hall

Open Letter

The following is a partial re-print of a letter sent by Jaquiline Asher, Emeryville parent, to parents and Emeryville residents. The City Council will decide the fate of the Child Development Center on Tuesday night. Citizens may contact the city council at the city's website at:

www.ci.emeryville.ca.us

To Emeryville residents and parents-

The City Council needs to hear from you right away. If you can't attend
the meeting on May 11th, you need to e-mail.

The future of our Center will be decided in a few days and despite all of
the work that the parents have put into the task force and the concern
they have expressed, the City Manager has said he will recommend complete
outsourcing of the Center to the Berkeley Albany YMCA (BAYMCA).

The final word on ECDC's future rests with the City Council, and they need
to hear from you over the next three days.

Decisions will be made next week. The Center needs your help before May
11th. There are several ways you can help the Center in the final days
before budget meetings:

*Come to the meeting on May 11th @ 6pm at City Hall.
This is where the parents' proposal will be presented. We need to be
visible and supportive of our teachers and Center. If you can't attend,
write an e-mail.

*Write to the Council:
Let them know that you stand behind the parents' proposal and that we have
made serious efforts to create a fiscally responsible model for this
long-standing City service. And after a single year's transition to
institute our plan we will require $0 contribution from the City's General
Fund. The councilmembers' e-mails are below for you to cut and paste.

*Tell them that you don't believe in an income-segregated model of care.
The parent's proposal does not separate kids from one another based upon
income. The City's "parallel" plan does.

*Tell them that they will be getting rid of State-subsidized spots if they
vote for outsourcing
BAYMCA's model relies upon Head Start funding. The families that use the

State subsidy @ ECDC typically earn too much to qualify for that program,

but still need subsidies and deserve reliable childcare. Families at this
income level will not be served if the City goes with outsourcing.

*Accelerated Timetable to outsource:
Patrick O'Keeffe (City Manager) has stated that he will recommend complete
outsourcing of the Center no matter if the budget gap is closed or not.
It's also clear that he favors an accelerated timetable for handover to
BAYMCA if this option is chosen--not the one year's timeline that we
received in the BAYMCA's response to the RFQ.

How They Voted

Tattler Featurette

Kill Biking On Spur Alley?

At the Tattler, we've noticed the city council and other deliberative bodies in Emeryville make controversial votes that get forgotten by the residents over time. In deference to the general edification of public policy and to strengthen Emeryville's democratic institutions, we will publish occasional short reminders on how the Power Elite in town have voted on these controversial issues.

At the July 17, 2007 council meeting, the vote was:

Should the Bike Plan be overturned and the former railroad spur east of and parallel to Hollis Street called Spur Alley, a public easement, be given away to a private developer for private parking instead of a bike path?

Nora Davis - YES

Ken Bukowski - YES

Dick Kassis - YES

Ruth Atkin - NO

John Fricke - NO

Lighting And Landscape Tax

New Tax Glossed Over In Glossy Brochure

Emeryville voters should expect an objective non biased analysis from the city of any tax proposals coming from City Hall. However, a recent city produced glossy color brochure mailer detailing a new tax scheme called the 'Landscape and Lighting Assessment District' (LLAD), seems more intent on obscuring the resident's tax burden than illuminating it.

The brochure, titled 'Your LLAD Assessment Ballot', purports that residents will pay less than "commercial properties" even though businesses in town will pay far less per square foot than the residents on average. Further, the city makes no mention in the mailer that residents will get one vote on the LLAD per unit, but most businesses will get multiple votes. While the Secretary of State is compelled to give objective analysis in the California voter guide, Emeryville apparently feels no such compunction to do likewise in the $6700 taxpayer funded LLAD brochure.

Brochure Is Silent: Business Is Favored

The problem from the tax plan's inception has been how to equitably divide up the assessment among property owners. A very Byzantine scheme has emerged and is now being voted on by Emeryville property owners by ballot. Residents will pay $93.25 per unit. Businesses are broken up into three categories; commercial, office and industrial and are charged about $139, $82 and $37 (per 1000 square feet) respectively. Additionally, businesses rates will be adjusted based on the number of employees they have. This is further complicated by the fact that while both businesses and residents will pay for street lighting and landscape "services" at the ratio, park lighting and landscape services will be born almost exclusively by residents.

The assessment has been concocted to assure that ballots are weighted in favor of the businesses; tallying the vote will consist of adding up all the value that is voted one way or another. So for instance 100 residents voting in favor would equal $9,325 of "YES" value. Looking at three large businesses in town, Wareham Development, Pixar and Novartis shows how the assessment favors business. Wareham will be voting a combined value of $78,260; Pixar will vote at a value of $16,660 and Novartis will equal $39,210. So to think about it another way, it would take 839 resident votes to equal the Wareham vote ($78,260 divided by $93.25).

The complicated assessment scheme results show a disparity between businesses and residents as one compares geography versus LLAD payments. This is revealed starkly when one considers that Emeryville is about 80% business and 20% residential in terms of land use, but when it comes to LLAD collections, business pays about 56% while residents pay 44%.

The City Gives Misleading Information

The brochure mailer makes claim to a level of objectivity; "to help you make an informed decision, the City of Emeryville would like to provide property owners with additional background" but also states that commercial property (with increased traffic) pays "slightly more than an average residential property" failing to mention the other two business categories, office and industrial that pays far less.

City Manager and LLAD brochure author, Pat O'Keeffe declined to comment for this story.

Ballots are due by May 18th and a public hearing on this assessment will happen on the 18th at City Hall, 1333 Park Avenue at 7:15 PM.

Court Rules Against Redevelopment Agency

Emeryville's hope to stop the State from forcing redevelopment funds to a school fund known as the Supplemental Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (SERAF) today were dashed when Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly ruled that the state can take more than $2 billion statewide from local redevelopment funds and transfer the money to school operations.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jjiTR2ZqYOCNMZGPlV3Tr4Y3e1EwD9FG7KDO1

Budget Shenanigans

Budget Spiral: Stealing From Peter To Pay Paul

The City of Emeryville is robbing the piggy bank again, and it's the 'Low to Moderate Income' housing fund that's taking the hit this time. After years of lavish gifts in the form of massive multi-million dollar subsidies to wealthy developers all over town, it appears our budget is in dire straights now.

The Redevelopment Agency is required to make a payment to a state mandated school fund called the Supplemental Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (SERAF). Proposition 98, passed by California voters in 2008 mandates the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency meet its SERAF obligation of $11,291,592 in Fiscal Year 2009-10. The first payment is due on May 10.

Since the Redevelopment Agency has no unencumbered funds left to make the first required payment, Helen Bean, Emeryville's Directer of Economic Development and Housing has recommended taking the money from the housing fund.

In a May 4th dated memo to the city council, Ms Bean acknowledged "The appropriation of $11.3 million from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund will significantly deplete the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to pursue and fund affordable housing projects".

Three impending housing projects are now endangered according to the memo:

• The Avalon project, called by city officials a "family friendly" housing development at the Golden Gate Key site on San Pablo.
• 3900 Adeline, a controversial condo proposal the council recently approved for Madison Park Corporation that involved the demolition of an "architecturally significant" and "historically significant" brick building.
• The recently completed Oak Walk project at San Pablo Avenue and 40th Street, slated to be converted to low and moderate housing after the developer, BayRock Development pulled the plug on their initial condo development agreement with the city. After the market tanked, BayRock convinced the city to pony up $3 million for the conversion from market rate housing to low and moderate. This developer stated the project would become "blight" if the city didn't pay $3 million for the conversion.

The city council will decide this issue on Tuesday May 4th at 7:15 PM at City Hall.