Rebecca Kaplan: To Dream the Possible Dream – Fundable Projects for Economic Revitalization and Climate Protection

169 Responses to “Rebecca Kaplan: To Dream the Possible Dream – Fundable Projects for Economic Revitalization and Climate Protection”

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

1. 1
   jack b dazzle Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 8:57 am

   Can’t we make Oakland safe and financially solvent first? Why do we keep making these grandiose plans before we figure out how to run the city we currently have?

2. 2
   Mary Hollis Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 9:28 am

   Jack

   Of course.

   But put yourself in the position of being a City Councilor. Which would you prefer to do out of these 2 options:

   1) Try and solve the near intractable problems of Oakland i.e. public safety and the budgetary disaster, by making massively unpopular choices like firing thousands, increasing taxes and tearing up pensions contracts?

   Or

   2) Produce white papers on Global Climate Change and debate quota’s on yogurt stores?

   It’s really not a fair contest.

   But if I had the power, I’d tell the Council they could do nothing else until they have balanced the budget.

   Oh, and they couldn’t draw any salary until it is solved either.

3. 3
   Christian Stuart Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 9:42 am

   Even if Oakland could afford such a project, it would not be able to sustain itself after the grand opening. What we will be left with would be similar to the eastmont mall, a big shut down ghost town, and a giant debt. The interest on that debt will impact everything from police services to Schools for years to come. We should concentrate on solving are current problems both financial and Social. Then we will be positioned to make some real positive developments that will sustain themselves.

4. 4
   Lynn Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:02 am

   Jack is right. We need a mayor who will face reality.

5. 5
   MarleenLee Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:04 am

   I have to agree with the other comments. Oakland is in the middle of a fiscal crisis of unprecedented scope. In addition, from what I have seen, City officials cannot seem to manage the smallest, most mundane tasks. For example, they can’t seem to manage to organize their records or respond to public records requests within the mandatory timelines. They can’t seem to manage to comply with virtually any aspect of Measure Y, and are now at risk of losing $100 million because of it. There is no leadership. There is no accountability. There is no consensus amongst council members on what to do. Last night, they listened and debated for hours on potential budget cuts and revenue options, and as usual, couldn’t agree on anything and passed on making any real decisions. If the Council doesn’t focus on the real, pressing issues soon, there will be no need to deal with “traffic congestion” issues in Oakland because anybody who can afford a car will be long gone! Or maybe that’s the strategy?

6. 6
   livegreen Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:05 am

   Three questions about such a project:
   1. What happens if planning & development start and then all the teams leave?
   2. The land such a project is on looks to be industrial/light industrial. Will we help the displaced businesses relocate elsewhere in Oakland? What happens to the lost long-term blue collar jobs, and will it create less jobs/more unemployment in that sector? (Or worse yet, if #1 happens, a net loss of all jobs).
   3. I thought I read the City’s Redevelopment Fund is in deficit. Is this true or not, and if so do we even have the money to fund this? (Esp. during this budget crisis the City has been moving GPF expenses over to Redevelopment Budget).

7. 7
   Ralph Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:11 am

   So basically, no one thinks that our councilmembers can walk and chew gum at the same time.

8. 8
   livegreen Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:13 am

   Adding on to my question #3 above, what’s the breakdown between potential Federal Funding & local funding (assuming Redevelopment)? It’s a big difference if it’s 1/5 federal funds vs. 2/3 federal funds (for example).

9. 9
   Ralph Says:
   April 2nd, 2010 at 10:18 am

   LG,
   if those ballparks are to remain where they are then that land needs to be developed. there is money to be made by people spending their entertainment dollars and right now we are not even capturing it. Baltimore, SF, DC, Cleveland you name the city and each one of them has built a thriving residential / entertainment district near a ballpark – we are centuries behind the game

10. 10
    Marcus Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:21 am

    Ha ha. A Better Oakland tea partiers are stupid. A Councilmember lists specific funding sources for a project that would bring a substantial amount of revenue to the city, which would in turn make city operations more fiscally sustainable long term without raising taxes, all without costing oakland anything and what is the response? We can’t afford to build it and we need to think about the budget. I know reading is hard. But I advise trying it once in a while before opening your mouths.

11. 11
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:29 am

    Ralph,

    Oakland’s current situation is proof that they can’t. In the last year, can you think of anything that the city council has done that you are proud of or has “paid off” or met expectations?

    Competency is needed in Oakland now.

12. 12
    MarleenLee Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Marcus: I didn’t see anything in Kaplan’s post indicating that it would cost Oakland nothing. The post mentions possible funding sources – nothing about full or guaranteed funding. Moreover, pardon my cynicism when Oaklanders are promised they’ll never have to pay for anything, or that a project will be fully funded from non-taxpayer sources (think Chiodo sculpture…) Also, Kaplan says that the project depends on “leadership,” something the City simply does not have. The City shouldn’t try to design a spaceship when it hasn’t mastered a paper airplane.

13. 13
    R Kaplan Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Good morning, thanks for your questions about how this relates to the fiscal crisis…

    The biggest crisis facing Oakland is the economic crisis. The dramatic downturn in sales tax revenues, loss of revenue to local business, and rising unemployment are central to all of the major problems facing our city. In the city’s own budget, the lowered sales tax revenues are a huge part of the problem, and thus, are a major reason we face cuts to public services that people want.

    Oakland has a lower than average sales tax yield, not because our residents don’t spend money, but because they don’t have enough places to spend it in Oakland. Similarly, we create fewer local jobs and business opportunities here than we could, by failing to capture money and energy locally.

    Since the topic for Tuesday was exclusively on “Climate Action” (and not on public safety or other public services) I thought it important to share an example of a “climate action” activity which can simultaneously create jobs and help restore our city’s economic picture.

    Providing access to shops, restaurants, jobs, housing, and more in transit-oriented locations can happen in a variety of different spots in Oakland, and can genuinely reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while also providing economic benefit. Since there are grants being offered of outside funds to do these types of projects, we should be working to identify ways to harness these efforts in Oakland. (For example, a planning process is underway for the area around Lake Merritt BART and others).

    Lastly, many sports teams and concert promoters strongly prefer to be in locations which have these kinds of amenities….

    I’m not saying it’s quick and easy, (and we certainly also have to improve internal efficiency of city services, and make basic changes like letting businesses do the licenses and fees online) but rather, that our budget problems and service-provision problems won’t be solved without also taking action to improve our jobs and revenue situation for both now and the future.

14. 14
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:31 am

    Just because the city has other problems doesn’t mean we can’t be ambitious.

    Oakland’s most intractable problems, blight, crime, failing schools – these are problems we have to chip away at. One of the ways we chip away at them is to set up paths to create new business successes and new revenue.

    I also think all the gloom and doom I’m reading above is premature. It’s not as if zombies are roaming the streets and people are fleeing in droves. We have problems, sure, but the problems we’re facing are certainly less catastrophic than other times within the living memory of this city.

    Oh, and Livegreen, regarding issues of industrial displacement, I invite you to take a drive down coliseum way and the other through streets in the area. A huge amount of the industrial land that the council “preserved” is currently being used as truck parking, and it’s barely half occupied.

    Taking a few acres a round the coliseum and using them to create development is a far better use than unused parking lots. And the number of jobs per acre that could be supported by a thriving coliseum complex is at least ten times if not twenty times what we can get out of industrial land.

    Downtown Oakland is already rapidly becoming where the East Bay comes to play. The Coliseum is currently losing money, but if we give people to spend before and after games, we can have a second hotspot destination on the other side of the city.

    Can it work in this economy? Maybe, maybe not. But the entitlement process in california development is arduous, we might as well get started while there’s nothing else going on in the construction economy. The fact that we’re putting together this sort of initiative is also part of a comprehensive strategy to help keep our teams.

15. 15
    livegreen Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:41 am

    Ralph, I get that. I get that in the best of scenarios it might help all 3 teams stay, and possibly two. & I get that if we have only 1 team that remains (for example, the reliable Raiders) it would still be beneficial.

    But I still want back-up plans built in should the worst case happen the City can adjust to it, and not end up with empty buildings & wasted money. & I also want the City to step up on Business Retention, which Naomi in all her history and experience here advises is greatly lacking.

    Any planning for big projects has to be backed up by improving daily services, like jobs and crime & safety. If these aren’t also done new residents and businesses aren’t going to want to risk moving here anyway…

16. 16
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:51 am

    Rebecca,

    This area actually does have a lot of jobs, and generates a decent amount of tax revenue. The Golden Gate Truck center alone generates hundreds of thousands in tax revenue. If you start discussing changing the zoning to be more “friendly” you risk scaring off new industrial business from the area. Oakland needs a place for these types of gritty businesses that are loud and work off hours.

    If the area was safer, there would be more economic activity without government help.

17. 17
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:58 am

    Livegreen,

    One of the things that makes the Coliseum zone so attractive for business development is the fact that it’s very defensible.

    Because the high crime areas in East Oakland only connect to the Coliseum by a handful of streets, and because any development at the Coliseum would not include the kinds of residential space that makes violent crime likely, we can expect such a development to be a haven.

    As for business retention, business attraction IS business retention. More reasons to come here are also more reasons to stay here.

    Business retention, as envisioned by the far left of Oakland politics, seems to be all about industrial preservation. Well guess what? We set aside industrial land, and industry is still leaving. We can’t afford to subsidize it. We’re at the whim of a global trend. And more often than not, “preservation” is code for “no-growth”.

    The far left of Oakland politics is either thinking like it’s 1969, or trying to rehash and restate their position on growth and industry so it sounds new, but still means pretty much the same thing it meant in 1969. They just put “green” in front of everything and expect us to think it’s a new idea. It isn’t.

18. 18
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:04 am

    Jack,

    Name one industrial business that really wants to come to Oakland, but can’t because of a shortage of industrial space. We have a surplus of industrial space. Industry isn’t coming because it’s cheaper to be in the exurbs.

    There is a small subset of industry that needs to be located in an urban area. And R&D and Green Industry will be much more attracted to being here if we have world class entertainment and sports infrastructure.

    The Army Base is being redeveloped for logistical use. Move the trucking there. Done.

19. 19
    Ralph Sklar Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:08 am

    Rebecca,
    Thank you for all of your work on behalf of our city. At this time I am hoping that you will focus your attention on improving our police department and getting our finances back in order. Improving the area around the Coliseum is important, but we can’t do everything at once. Please just focus on safety and finances right now. This is an international economic crisis and we are not China. We don’t have tremendous reserves available to fund projects that may pay off in the distant future. We need to run our city like a real business concern – which it is.

20. 20
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:20 am

    Max,

    The business that I work for has been looking in Oakland for many years. There was just nothing around until now. We left Oakland 10 years ago because of crime. We are coming back because we are big enough to defend ourselves.

    If you speak to most of the commercial realtors in the area, they will tell you that there are a lot of businesses looking to move to Oakland. They don’t want the burbs because of traffic. Unfortunately, most realtors recommend against Oakland for a lot of reasons. Most related to crime, taxes or inability to work with planning.

    We don’t need a revolution in Oakland. We just need to do a better job with what we have. If we want more industrial businesses in Oakland, just lower the tax rate. You would be amazed what lowering the tax rate in this economy will do to move jobs here.

21. 21
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:21 am

    What I appreciate about Ms. Kaplan’s post is even though things suck today, they will not suck tomorrow. However, if we do not plan for tomorrow we increase the probabilty of things still being sucky.

    I agree with Max. Industry is moving, and the global economy is changing. You can preserve yesteryear all you want, but if your are trying to preserve industrial land for a service economy, I don’t see what you have done other than squander an opportunity.

    LG, as to new residents moving here, the statistics tell a different story. Despite, the poor public schools and unfair reputation, people continue to move to Oakland. I forget where I was, but the other day I met an SF couple who until they set foot in Oakland had not considered living here. Now, they don’t want to leave. These new projects allow Oakland to increase revenue and provide desperately needed services. We need to grow our middle class and preserving unused land for a job that is never going to come is not the way to do it.

22. 22
    livegreen Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    Max and Ralph, I am not from the far left, and I am not a Green Jobs solves-all-the-problems activist. There are a number of fallacies in your argument that you’re skipping over in theory that are simply not supported in practice.

    –”business attraction IS retention”: In theory, IF it happens, well yes. But if it DOESN’T work out as planned, then you’ve got problems. Buildings go vacant, and you lose jobs and businesses. All I’m saying is we should simultaneously support existing jobs & businesses we have and not lose them, even if they’re relocated.

    (I notice you just skipped over my previous point about Business Retention, and Naomi previously mentioning Oakland isn’t good at it. I guess it’s easier for you to just ignore the point or ignore the problem?)

    –Safety: Businesses aren’t crazy. They’re not going to come here in mass if they’re going to get robbed, or even if there’s a high risk this will happen. The Oakland CC isn’t doing much so far to support Chief Batts’ initiatives, and they’re talking about another property tax just to maintain the same # of Officers. How do we get to more Officers, which we really need to make Oakland safer, for both businesses and new residents? (Chief Batts tells the story about businesses that wanted to relocate here from SF but couldn’t because their employees revolted).

    Because until you address this problem it’s not going away. & it’s a REAL problem for all business (service, industrial, office OR mixed-use).

    –The cost of renting industrial & light-industrial is NOT necessarily cheaper in the Valley. My warehouse rental in SL is cheaper than in the valley, and I understand it’s the same for medium and bigger spaces in Oakland.

    –Putting more diesel trucks on the highway driving longer distances is not going to cut emissions. It’s going to replace car emissions with truck emissions. Of course if you ignore this problem you might THINK it’s going to, but it doesn’t mean it actually will.

    –Ralph, is the one couple you spoke to anecdotal or representative of broader stats? Aren’t there still a # of unfinished properties DT?

    I know some very committed Oakland residents who also have great things to say about Oakland and who are working hard to improve it and their schools. But is Oakland attracting significantly more Middle Income people, especially with the greater amount of Affordable Housing & ongoing safety problems? & aren’t there just as many leaving to safer East Bay cities? Show me the stats showing a net increase in middle income or ex-SF’s, because I haven’t seen them.

    –Manufacturing vs. Service industries: I love how you “all in”, pro-residential development types throw this out all the time, when in fact we need both.

    First, not all manufacturing has gone to China. We have a large # of food-based businesses here in Oakland which a lot of Residential Developers don’t want to support.

    Secondly, even for those manufacturing jobs that have left, businesses still need to warehouse and distribute goods to get them to market. & With it’s Port, that would be a natural fit for Oakland, but Oakland is not working in any significant way to develop or attract those businesses and jobs. So instead the businesses go elsewhere and we’re left with the unemployed and, gradually, unemployable.

    & then you want other businesses to move here? Good luck.

    I’m not arguing against this project, I’m only advocating that we should help increase safety, retain businesses and jobs simultaneously while looking at new projects like this one. Are you saying we shouldn’t? That we should put all our eggs in one basket with residential development being a panacea?

23. 23
    Mary Hollis Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    I’ll give Rebecca courage for posting here.

    Paradoxically I think many of Oakland’s problems arose precisely because it never “thought big”.

    So while San Jose was building up its tech industry, LA was building theme parks and movie studio’s, San Francisco was becoming the world’s favorite city and even humble Emeryville was making itself the retail heartland of the Bay Area, what was Oakland doing?

    We just don’t have the large-scale projects and developments that suck in the crowds and the dollars. We have never had the larger-than-life visionaries. Oakland is kinda, ordinary, you know?

    Rebecca also adroitly notes that Oaklanders do spend big – they just spend it outside of Oakland. It’s unfair to say “there is no here here” but there certainly isn’t any major attraction here.

    So on a historical basis, Oakland needs some grand scheme. Could it become the Green Capital of America, for instance? With an Environmental Epcot Center beating as a heart?

    Maybe.

    The question is more whether, having just struck an iceberg, we should re-arrange the deckchairs on the Titanic or rebuild a grand new version, preferably with a double-skinned bottom?

    Successive French Presidents have always left their mark with grandiose public projects. Maybe Rebecca will be our very own and better looking Charles de Gaulle. But first she needs to defeat a problem of Hitlerian proportions waiting at the gates of Paris.

    Rebecca, dream big, but plug the holes in the dinghy first.

24. 24
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:47 pm

    Mary,

    Oakland is not ordinary. We are extraordinary. We have a massive port, 3 major league teams, an airport, great weather, a zoo, and proximaty to major business hubs among other assets. Not only that, but we have a population of great people who care about our community. Our problem is not the lack of a long term plan. Our problem is the lack of leadership.

    It is great to dream, and we should, but those dreams have to stop getting in the way of today’s reality.

25. 25
    Mary Hollis Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:54 pm

    Jack

    I wasn’t disparaging Oakland itself and certainly not its people. I’m here, after all.

    I was disparaging the same thing as you – the lack of leadership that has left Oakland bereft of taxes because people prefer to spend elsewhere, and to an extent live and work elsewhere. And this is caused by a failure to make grand investments in the past along the lines that Rebecca proposes.

26. 26
    J.D. Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 1:14 pm

    Transit villages are not new planning ideas. But the anchor of this plan is 2 sports teams that act like they don’t want to be here and a third team which is draining public funds and would bolt in a flash if it had a better offer. Since the rail lines and port already connect to overseas commerce, why isn’t effort being made to create light industrial green jobs in West Oakland, or is industrial use too dirty to advocate for? Sometimes leadership isn’t telling people the easy plan which likely won’t happen, it’s having a plan that is best for the many even if not perfect for everyone.

27. 27
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    J.D.,

    Maybe the reason the teams are acting like they don’t want to be here is because the location they’re in doesn’t have enough growth and vitality. And maybe the way we get them to stay is to bring that growth and vitality.

    The Coliseum is losing money, but an empty coliseum will lose more money. We need to fight tooth and nail to keep our teams. This plan is a part of that fight.

    I think we also need to get on local blogs in San Jose and make sure that all the fans and politicos and activists in that town know that San Jose taxpayers will shell out substantial amounts of money to get the A’s there.

    Right now, the leadership of the A’s and of San Jose are pitching the idea as if it’s a freebie. If we want to keep our teams, we need to actively sew the seeds of dissent in any town that hints that they want to take them from us.

28. 28
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    LG, my attn span is short but as to your question regarding the couple, they are one of many. If you check with the leasing people in the new DTO bldgs, a number of the tenants are coming from SF and the burbs. They are looking to be in places that are transit friendly.

    Ms. Kaplan’s posts are always forward thinking. We like that. I wish we had more of it.

29. 29
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    LG, if you the owners of Oakland’s sport’s teams to stay in Oakland we need to help them. At the end of the day, owner’s are business people and when they decide to sell they would like to make a profit. We accomplish this by improving the facilities and the surrounding community to enhance the fan experience.

    We need upscale hotels for teams and fans (this can be an additional revenue stream for the team if they own the land). Right now visiting teams, fans and broadcasters stay in SF. And when this people come to town, we would prefer they spend their entertainment dollars in Oakland. Same holds true for concert goers. No one spends entertainment dollars in an industrial park.

    And I might counter Max’s argument on the seeds of dissent by pitching a viable proposition that improves the owner’s franchise. Because if it isn’t San Jose, then maybe the new city is Portland or SLC. We need to present a viable plan that meets the owners needs.

30. 30
    livegreen Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    Ralph, I agree with these comments and also that RK’s plans are forward thinking. I’m more inclined to vote for her for Mayor, right now, than either of her potential opponents.

    But we also need plans that are holistic and address the challenges I’ve mentioned, and the concerns of governing for today that others mentioned above.

    We need both. And it would be easier to drop the concerns about Safety, business retention and governing for today if we saw these concerns were actually being addressed, or there are coherent plans that they will be.

    How many recent solutions and decisions for the budget did the CC decide on?

31. 31
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 2:55 pm

    I’d be inclined to vote for her as Mayor, too, but despite winning over the black vote in the citywide seat, I think she may face two issues in her quest for mayor: 1) the wait your turn syndrome and 2) the lack of a professional image. As a rule of thumb, you don’t want your chief of staff outdressing you.

    If packaging didn’t matter, companies wouldn’t spend a boatload of money on it. But as the old saying goes, you can always improve packaging, but if a product sucks no amount of fancy packaging is going to make it better. Maybe voters overlook the packaging by why even let it be an issue.

32. 32
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 2:58 pm

    Ralph, Andre Jones outdresses everybody. That’s hardly a fair contrast to draw.

33. 33
    livegreen Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 3:25 pm

    I’m sure she will, but that hardly counts for a big deal. I still appreciate meeting RK after a public safety meeting a couple years ago at the beginning of her campaign.

    After we finished talking about safety, jobs, and businesses, she gave me one of her campaign cards and rode off on her bike. I thought it was pretty down to earth. There’s something to be said for that too.

    But the key is solutions, on a # of these issues. Keep em coming.

34. 34
    Born in Oakland Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    Dressing is a big deal and a professional requirement. Oakland isn’t some hip, rich Silicon Valley start up. Take a page from Willie Brown and then see if RK can get my vote. Maybe she dresses down to demonstrate she is “of the people” despite elite and impressive academic credentials. But many of “the people” want the face of Oakland to appear “smart” as well and she could offer a bone to those constituents. If RK wants the next level, she will have to show me. City Hall is an 83 million dollar showpiece, the Council Chambers are formal, politics is the religion there and, yes, you can wear jeans to church. But what message does that send?

35. 35
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    Jerry Brown used to walk into planning commission meetings in a sweaty T-Shirt, having just come in from a jog.

    And while we’re at it, one of the things that started the rumors of a possible Kaplan candidacy was the very fact that she’d started wearing suits all the time.

36. 36
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    Andre may outdress everyone, but RK isn’t walking around Comm Ave either. She is part of the leadership of a major US city. Further, there is nothing wrong with wearing age appropriate clothing and dressing in a manner appropriate for the office. Few of us professionals, if any of us, would last long if we showed up at our workplace similarly attired.

    As to the people /elitist argument…When given the choice between Clarence “Du” Burns, a grassroots of the people politician, and Kurt Schmoke, the City College, Yale educated, Rhodes Scholar, Harvard trained lawyer, the good people of Baltimore went with Schmoke. What voters want to know is do you understand their issues and can you move the city forward. Riding a bike and taking the bus may work in that crazy liberal Berkeley, but this is Oakland.

    Whether she runs or sits this election out, I would prefer she dress for the office.

37. 37
    We Fight Blight Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 4:59 pm

    Rebecca thanks for your vision to improve Oakland. However, I do have to agree with others that there are more fundamental issues to be addressed at the moment–crime and blight and management of the city’s financial resources. Please see: http://wefightblight.blogspot.com/2010/03/oakland-first-world-taxes-third-world.html

38. 38
    Ralph Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 5:07 pm

    Maybe We Fight Blight should run for Mayor.

39. 39
    Steve Lowe Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    What if the Coli had a retail infill component that was really exciting; the kind of place you’d go to even if the teams weren’t there as anchors of a sports-themed super-center?

    If Santa Clara votes down the 49ers, the likelihood of the Raiders / Niners shared stadium is quite high, better than most of us snakebit Oaklanders might ordinarily believe. If the Coli were thus all spiffed up with such a retail dynamic, then the A’s would have a devil of a time convincing MLB that they had to move to SJ, Fremont or even Portland (where the numbers apparently don’t work at all): a new, all-baseball stadium could then be built in the South Lot and
    a smart-park garage in the North Lot to make up for whatever we’d lose by the South’s secession.

    In that case, Elison could be pesuaded that this super-sports dynamic would be better for the Warriors than going through the building of an entirely new stadium in San Francisco (at which the citizens there will not throw a single dime, knowing that someone of his immense wealth doesn’t need public subsidy), then just maybe he’ll stay, especially if Rebecca is successful at getting a WBA team here to round out the count.

    Five Major League teams here in the very center of the Bay Area, each bringing in lots and lots of retailers, customers, events, excitement and enough money to finally pay off the “Curse of the Bonds from Hell,” which is right now that $10M+ sucking sound you hear flowing from the bottomline of our budget.

    I don’t care if she comes to work dressed as Napoleon if we’re finally going to see some actual improvement at the Coli coupled with something to do before and after the games other than stand in the parking lot while all the beer-bloated bladders empty their contents on your and my hubcaps

40. 40
    Freddy Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    Oakland already has a Transit Village. One that is built but nobody uses it. It’s called Downtown Oakland. It’s a ghost town.

    Rather than sinking more money in pre-stressed concrete, why don’t you fix up Downtown Oakland? If you can’t fix a Transit Village you already have, why should you build a new one?

41. 41
    Chris Kidd Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 9:36 pm

    Rather than turning our backs on planning and the future because of the budget crisis, now is the best time to prepare for the future and make certain that Oakland does not miss a single opportunity once the economy turns.

    Things like planning, zoning updates, general plan revisions, specific plans, PDAs; nobody wants to do these things during a construction boom. It’s why Jerry Brown put zoning updates on the shelf from 2002 onward(well, it was also because he’d rather secure variances from the planning commission by claiming that the zoning was too old, but I digress…). It’s why we’re wrapping up the residential and commercial zoning updates right now, even though the general plan LUTE for Oakland was completed in 1998. It’s only when there’s no new development and construction (i.e. right now) that we can really take the time to focus on these projects and make sure they are done the right way.

    When the economy turns, we need to make sure that we are prepared for it. That means we need to have zoning that wasn’t written in 1964. That means we need to have project parameters in place for the types of projects that can be developed in Oakland: namely, TOD. We need to get all our ducks lined up in a row so that it’s as easy as possible for developers to invest in Oakland once private investment returns in a few years.

    Smart Growth isn’t necessarily the future of planning and development, but it certainly is the future of planning and development in Oakland. We don’t have anywhere to build more single family homes. The city is built out. If we hope to capture new residents, new industries, and new businesses, we need to build up, we need to build smart, and we need to build green.
    What Council member Kaplan is proposing is a promising first step in this direction. We would be fools to throw it away because we doubt the capacity of our council members to handle two issues at the same time.

42. 42
    matt Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:07 pm

    Freddy, as far as I can tell for about 60 years Smart Growth policies were not involved in DTO planning and DTO is not a “transit village”. For whatever reason, epic social change, really awful regional planning and so fourth -over the past 60 years all that made DTO a livable walkable functioning community, an example of Smart Growth, were dismantlement. Freeways eradicated walkable established neighborhoods. Closure of the Key System changed established travel pattens effecting neighborhood congestion and prime business locations. Construction of BART eradicated locally owned and very successful DTO businesses (same happened on Market St in SF).

    Anywho, JB did some great things to change that (10K). The Uptown and Fox redevelopment did change the direction of the area which is influencing development all over DTO. Even in this economy I still read of investment coming to DTO in fits and starts.

    I’m 100% behind Rebecca’s vision. I’ve studied urban planning for a long time and she makes sense. People who say what about crime and all that -crime is a symptom of bad economics and can be reduced by a stronger Oakland economy.

43. 43
    len raphael Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:27 pm

    At first RK’s staking out the position of resident futurist for the CC struck me as playing to a particular constituency that might propel her up and out of Oakland. But as time passes and the other CC members are busy running around plugging up the ever growing holes in the city’s finances with spitballs, at least RK has some interesting ideas, no matter how much I disagree with her on Smart Growth.

    Don’t blame her for not taking the lead on very politically unpopular financial decisions when the very incumbents who created the problems won’t do. Heck, as LG pointed out, most of the CC members won’t even give Batts free moral support.

    Ralph, if clothes made the person, then old c-top would be the best mayor we’ve ever had. But the comments here about the importance of dressing for Oakland’s success would surely please our local business success and charitable benefactor, George Zimmer of Men’s Wearhouse. Someone should ask him to contribute a guest op piece as to why even an Oakland booster like himself located his HQ’s in Fremont and Houston. Don’t think he’ll say it was lack of TOD.

    -len raphael
    temescal

44. 44
    Navigator Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 6:16 am

    I’m astonished at some of the anti-Oakland comments. There are some people on this forum who just don’t like this city. The idea that to improve Oakland’s economy you have to first reel in all spending and completely eradicate crime is really shortsighted. Oakland needs to invest in its future and be a forward thinking city. When will the Oakland naysayers stop hitting themselves over the head and realize that crime is not unique to Oakland and the city should not be paralyzed because we have crime? Crime is a National problem. Some cities hide it better than others and some cities get better publicity than others.It’s depressing reading this blog at times. There is a whole lot of Oakland self loathing going on here.

    I think it’s a great idea to build up the Coliseum area. For those of you who have a problem with ethnic neighborhoods in Oakland and rarely leave Rockridge or Montclair, take a look at what’s happened in Fruitvale and how much that transit village has invigorated that part of the city. Fruitvale is an amazingly vibrant and colorful neighborhood with packed sidewalks, the highest percentage of leased storefronts in the city, and even new construction on International Boulevard. In my opinion, Fruitvale is even more vibrant than Rockrige or Montclair village. Let’s stop with the constant anti-Oakland negativity for a second and think of the possibilities which exist to transform parts of this city

45. 45
    len raphael Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 7:48 am

    Nav, re Fruitvale transit villiage, are you sure that it is successful because it located next to a bart station, transit node?

    It could be because it is in the center of a densely populated high foot traffic area and to a lesser extent the predominate latino residents prefer to buy certain things at spanish speaking retailers? ie. are less mobile because of a combo of preference for latino oriented retailers, lower mobility because of lower income, and a much higher percentage of young children and stay at home mom’s than the rest of Oakland other than say the predominantly lower income asian areas of town?

    -len raphael

46. 46
    We Fight Blight Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 8:14 am

    Navigator,

    Fruitvale was way vibrant before the TOD and was vibrant before all the trendy folks who are tweeting discovered taco trucks. That TOD did little to further enhance existing street activity except to creat a passageway lined with retail to and from BART. The TOD did not create Fruitvale. What created Fruitvale was a high a density population of hard working latinos and Mexican and Central American Immigrants looking for the American dream. While I support the concept of TOD’s and visionary planning, it’s hard to get all visionary when the City cannot even pave its streets or provide enough police to protect residents. There are some fundamental issues the City has to get a handle on if it really wants to stop the leakage Rebecca mentions–that’s crime (the reality and perception), blight and the mismanagement of our tax dollars.

    It’s like the alcoholic who can never do anything about his drinking until he admits he has a severe problem that affects himself, his family and his friends. The first step is acknowledging the problem (s). The City of Oakland has some severe problems that no City Boosters can overcome with some positive press pieces. Navigator I understand where you are coming from, I just simply do not agree.

47. 47
    Navigator Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 8:26 am

    Len,

    Fruitvale has always been a densely populated area. It’s a combination of things which have transformed Fruitvale over the years. I remember ten to fifteen years ago Fruitvale and International Blvd (East 14th back then) was a dirty, crime filled, graffiti filled area with blighted and vacant storefronts. The Spanish Speaking Unity Council, among others, spearheaded efforts to secure funding for the Fruitvale Transit Village, storefront facade improvements, litter and graffiti abatement, crime reduction efforts, senior housing, street and infrastructure improvements, etc. The Fruitvale Transit Village was a major catalyst for the transformation of the area and now serves as a gathering point for seniors, families, and all residents. It’s sort of like an old town square for the neighborhood. Festivals and other community events are also celebrated there.

    Fruitvale and the Transit Station should be held out as a great example for what is possible in lower income neighborhoods throughout the United States. Fruitvale also gets shortchanged when it comes to the broader conversation regarding Oakland because it’s not a well- to-do wealthy yuppie enclave. Oaklander’s need to come together and embrace their entire city. Get out of your immediate neighborhoods and get to know what’s happening all over town. The balkanization and the inferiority complex mentality of this town is the number one problem holding this town back. Let’s all get behind the Transit Village concept for the Coliseum. Let’s also get behind retaining businesses in Oakland including the Oakland A’s.

48. 48
    MarleenLee Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 8:45 am

    I know nothing about urban planning, but I’m sure what Chris Kidd is saying about the need to plan ahead and timing is all conventional wisdom and generally a good idea. But I can’t imagine that most cities or other government entities function the way Oakland does. I have a frame of reference, given that I represent public entities for a living and deal with them every day. In my two years of dealing with Oakland on my Measure Y issues, I have to say that the dysfunction I have witnessed in Oakland is at a level that most of you cannot possibly imagine. Most of you do not actually see what goes on inside the City, its inner workings. Trust me, if you saw how the sausage actually got made, you’d understand my perspective. So my preference would be for the entire City Council to really focus on the immediate crisis and deal with it, and not get distracted by anything else.

    The crisis is financial, but it is also organizational. Fixing those problems will ultimately help pave the way to getting projects like the one Ms. Kaplan dreams about get realized. But unless the Council addresses problems like incompetency, lack of accountability, disorganization, lack of cooperation, waste, fraud and the like, I don’t trust the City to be able to get a project like this off the ground. The crisis is also one of public safety. People are dying in the streets. People are being held up at gunpoint. People don’t feel safe. It is literally a matter of life and death. If we cannot keep our police force at an acceptable size, and support our police chief in his goals, the problems will get worse. So, Ralph, things suck now, and they may actually suck worse in the future unless the crime problem is squarely addressed now.

    This is not a matter of the council walking and chewing gum at the same time. The problems that need to be fixed are very, very complicated and difficult, and I think that is where the attention should be focused.

49. 49
    len raphael Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 10:01 am

    Would agree w ML on this. For our town to have defeated its natural advantages of climate and location and people over the last 5 decades took a lot of bad decisions and hard work.

    For a while we pinned our hopes on Jerry’s field of dreams approach to fixing Oakland. Yes planning intelligently for growth is necessary, but it is vastly insufficient to replace and offset the forces going the wrong way here.

    -len raphael

50. 50
    dto510 Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 10:29 am

    I completely agree with Rebecca Kaplan that we have to invest in jobs and growth for the future. While it’s true there needs to be great attention paid to solving the structural problems underlying the budget, tax revenues need to grow as well. In fact, one of the Oakland budget’s structural problems is that our business-related tax revenues are not growing nearly as much as they should. Ralph is right that we should expect our elected leaders to be able to handle multiple issues at once.

    This isn’t about industry vs retail. The ORA, the Coliseum Authority, and BART already own all the land needed for creating a sports-anchored development. CM Kaplan has outlined an appealing and realistic project that can create jobs where they’re needed, improve some of the bigger parts of the economy like transportation networks and major retail, and increase the tax base without gambling General Fund receipts. WFB, you are just totally wrong that Fruitvale’s success had nothing to do with visionary TOD – I certainly remember when Fruitvale was “vibrant” but I still wouldn’t want to go there. Now it’s not only vibrant but clean, safe, and appealing, thanks to public and private investment.

    Oakland has a lot of problems. Saying that our leaders should do nothing but negotiate with city employee unions is not only reductionist but self-defeating. Without vision and a plan to improve jobs and the local tax base, Oakland can’t ever balance its budget or become the city we all want it to be. I applaud CM Kaplan for taking the risky move of putting out a specific idea in this contentious forum!

51. 51
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 10:45 am

    I’m gonna second DTO’s comment with something short and sweet: Multitasking is possible, particularly for somebody like Rebecca who appears to work like 100 hours a week.

    If we want to fix this town we have to dream big about the future and simultaneously bust our asses trying to fix the mistakes of the past. It really boils down to how much sleep you’re willing to lose. That’s part of the reason I’m glad to have a young councilmember at-large who has no outside commitments.

    Only half of the council has no outside employment, Kaplan is among them. We ought to make this level of commitment mandatory.

52. 52
    MarleenLee Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 11:02 am

    I am certainly not suggesting that all the City do is negotiate with the unions! Of course, they should negotiate with me as well! ; )
    Seriously, what I am suggesting boils down to this: when the patient is lying on table waiting for you to administer CPR, you do not give him a lecture on how to reduce his cholesterol. When the patient is on the floor bleeding to death, you don’t set up a meeting with the insurance industry to discuss health care reform.

53. 53
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 11:52 am

    This city is much bigger and more complicated than that. It’s a huge system, with many subsystems which self-sustain with only subtle changes when government fails.

    Using a critical medical patient as an analogy is simply inappropriate. One of the biggest mistakes we can make in trying to understand a city is to oversimplify.

    For example, VSmoothe and I spent a day last week trying to get an understanding of the state of highway blight in Oakland. We learned a lot, we saw a lot, we saw potential ways to improve things. But more than anything, I walked away feeling utterly overwhelmed at the prospect of trying to understand the physical geography of this town in any holistic way.

    Add in the social and governmental systems on top of physical space, and it’s truly an awesome proposition to try to comprehend it all.

    So if we want to fix it, what do we do? First off, I intend to keep overwhelming myself. It’s good for the soul to try to see the whole picture and fail. And every time you look at a picture that’s too big to see, you’re likely to walk away having absorbed a new detail or two.

    Second, atomize and find little causes and little effects, and chip away at as many as possible for the greater good. But I’m never, ever, ever going to try to create an analogy that says a struggling city is like anything else, particularly anything smaller. A struggling city is like a struggling city, and nothing else.

54. 54
    Ralph Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 12:04 pm

    I really do not think that you can reduce the city to the dying man bleeding out. The city is a multiheaded organism and you simply can not focus on one issue at the expense of all others.

    I am probably the only one that would like to see the Mayor take a pay cut and re-allocate those dollars to city council. Let them dedicate their entire time to the business of the city.

    Len, that was my point. People are easily duped by fancy packaging. Why let the forward thinking of bright politician be overshadowed by wearing an Obama hat in chambers.

    Max, can you post the pictures on Flickr. I am curious to see the differences in neighborhood blight that you encountered.

55. 55
    We Fight Blight Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    DTO 5,

    I am not saying that the Fruitvale TOD had zero benefits. What I am saying is that the Fruitvale TOD is not Fruitvale and Fruitvale is not the TOD. It is totally overblown to credit the TOD with creating the vibrancy of Fruitvale. I have been eating tacos at the taco trucks along International Boulevard since the early 1990′s. Since at least that time, Fruitvale has been vibrant with lots of pedestrian activities. Clearly, there were blighted properties all along East 14th Street as it was called back then between Chinatown and the Colisuem area. That was the opportunity that Mexicans and Central Americans capitalized on to revitalize this area.Yeah sections were gritty. But it was and is the hard work of many immigrants and locals–not the TOD–that created and sustains the vibrancy of Fruitvale. To place the success of Fruitvale on the back of the TOD, which is only a very small section of Fruitvale, ignores the true architects of Fruitvale–hard working Latinos. There is no other part of Oakland–including Rockridge or Piedmont–that has the amount of pedestrian activity as Fruitvale. No matter how you slice it, the TOD was a latecomer to the party–not the party itself.

    Having said that, I do believe TODs have a role in economic development. My problem is that Oakland tries to be all things to all people. That’s what got us into the budget morass. There is no focus on core local government services. Just as there is no focus on core development strategies. A shotgun approach spreads resources and attention too thin so that very little actually gets done. Nice ideas, but is the timing right? Why not capitalize on all that has occured in Downtown Oakland and the Uptown Area and focus on bringing more housing, shopping and dining opportunities there first? We still have way too many surface parking lots for a vibrant Downtown. Why not focus on making Downtown Oakland a safe, clean, attractive place to eat, recreate, live and shop? The Downtown Area has transportation, infrastructure, beautiful historic buildings, the lake, the waterfront, etc. The framework for success is already there.

    Can the City Council and Government Bureaucrats chew gum and walk at the same time–not so sure. They can’t seem to balance the budget and pave the streets at the same time. Core responsibilities, but ultimately elusive.

56. 56
    len raphael Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 2:01 pm

    MA, mid size cities are certainly complex systems. no doubt there are people at mit and ucb who could give us some useful info on how the city govt could be reorganized to run more effectively, if the political forces allowed it to happen.

    that is not the same as saying a zoning, transportation, oriented methodology or for that matter strictly a crime reduction approach will be sufficient.

    i am not impressed by standard city planning methods of solving our major interconnected problems.

    on a much smaller, simpler level, the NPR piece today on why GM failed to learn from the early successes of NUMI is a good example of why it is so hard to change dysfurtional organizations.

57. 57
    len raphael Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    MA, mid size cities are certainly complex systems. no doubt there are people at mit and ucb who could give us some useful info on how the city govt could be reorganized to run more effectively, if the political forces allowed it to happen.

    that is not the same as saying a zoning, transportation, oriented methodology or for that matter strictly a crime reduction approach will be sufficient.

    i am not impressed by standard city planning methods of solving our major interconnected problems.

    on a much smaller, simpler level, the NPR piece today on why GM failed to learn from the early successes of NUMI is a good example of why it is so hard to change dysfuntional organizations.

58. 58
    Patrick M. Mitchell Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    I hold no enmity against Ms. Kaplan for this post. Like others, I applaud her willingness to engage and to offer hope for the future. I do not know her personally. But, based on posts such as this one, what I’ve read in other media and the expressed opinions of people I admire, I believe Ms. Kaplan to be intelligent, forthright and goal-oriented. At this point, she would have my vote for Mayor should she run (amongst current stated candidates).

    But, there’s a problem. See, I’m worried. No, actually, I’m petrified. I hear gunshots frequently (though distant). Several of my neighbors are making plans to “get the hell out of Oakland”. My single largest financial investment (my house) is at risk of exacerbated reduction in value with each and every dollar the CC tries to tack on to my property tax, especially in view of the complete and utter lack of services we receive for the highest ad valorem tax rate in all of California (see We Fight Blight, above). Oakland is crumbling, literally. Just look down at what’s below you when you’re on nearly any city sidewalk. Assuming you can see the sidewalk beneath the filth.

    I have no problem with multi-tasking. The Council is doing a great job of it: worrying about climate change goals 10 years hence that we’ll never achieve; Transit Oriented Developments for which funding is specious at best and the overwhelming preponderance of nail shops that have besieged our fair city. Call me old school, but I think that the imminent specter of insolvency is more important. And on that we’ve heard nothing of any substance.

    Thanks for listening. I’m a property-owning, taxpaying voter in the City of Oakland and I want someone to actually care about my concerns. To date, that has not happened.

59. 59
    Mary Hollis Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 2:57 pm

    Marleen and others,

    In the 2nd response to this article, I argued that the CC should focus on the deficit and public safety, and ignore most everything else until that is fixed.

    Various others have echoed the idea that the CC should focus on the hemorrhaging now before doing a heart transplant or inserting an artificial heart (analogies for RK’s grand scheme).

    But listening to some of the comments above, from people who know far more about the City and its workings than I do, I realize that it is entirely possible that the Mayor and CC could spend 24 hours a day focusing on this and still not solve it, because they quite simply lack the insight and courage to do what is painfully necessary. Their effort could simply be futile.

    Which leads me to the tragic and ironic conclusion that what actually needs to happen is the crisis needs to get far worse. Like a person with a bad drug habit, we need to hit a cataclysmic bottom and only then can we rise again.

    And this would happen because in such a scenario (Bankruptcy, State or Federal takeover) the entire City Administration would be rendered moot, and outsiders could come in and make the tough calls that elected representatives won’t make.

    In other words, we need a dictatorship and some tough love. For a while anyway.

    Rebecca appears to me to be easily the most capable candidate for Mayor, and is the least tainted by the past errors.

    But I think maybe I should vote for Jean Quan since she is easily the most myopic and deluded candidate, and therefore most likely to bring this City quickly to its knees, whereupon the real, necessary change can finally happen.

    And then Rebecca can take over a renewed Oakland and implement these grand plans, which I believe Oakland does need to become great again.

    I think that is what is often called a paradox.

60. 60
    Ralph Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Thank you MH, I haven’t laughed so hard in ages.

61. 61
    len raphael Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 6:36 pm

    if were king of oakland, i would bet that i could just balance the budget for one more fill fiscal year with a combo of parcel taxes, fees, additional furloughs, modest layoffs, and shifting more costs to RDA. At the same time i would convince myself that there are enough cities, counties, and states in the same dire financial straits that collectively we are too big for Congress to let fail.

    Whether that be a change in muni bankruptcy and ERISA rules to make it easier to reduce retirement plan obligations combined with more direct grants for cops and maintenance.

    I don’t think that’s as unlikely as it seems. If you were a politician whe believed it might play out that way, why commit certain political suicide coming forth as the first to push now for massive cutbacks and changes? meanwhile you are able to do what you can to help your constituents while your own city retirement benefits are accruing …

    in the NPR NUMI discussion, the point was made that unlike NUMI it was extremely hard to change the attitudes of management and workers at the GM Van Nuys plant because those groups simply didn’t believe that their plant would close down if they didn’t make major changes.

    -len

62. 62
    Izzy Ort Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 2:07 am

    The improvement of the Fruitvale District preceded the Transit Village. More plausibley it was the prior improvement through the efforts of the Unity Council and others that enabled the Unity Council and its allies to “make the sale” to bring the Fruitvale Transit Village to reality – they had the pre-existing record of success to back them up.

    Not to knock the project, which I would characterize as a “qualified success”, If the Transit Village has been a catalst to anything else in the Fruitvale District, other than Phase II of the Transit Village, it is not apparent to me what that would be. It is not a destination on its own, nor is it well integrated into the rest of the district.

    The original (and as-built) conception of the retail element of the Transit Village had two serious flaws regarding foot traffic. One anticipated source of foot traffic – commuters to the Fruitvale Bart station – did not pan out, for reasons that should have been obvious from the start. The commuters who drove to BART went straight from the garage to the station, and never ventured into the Village itself. Those who arrived by bus – well, the spiffy new bus loading/unloading zone was on the other side of the tracks from the Transit Village.

    The other anticipated source of foot traffic – people coming down from International – where the “vibrant foot traffic” was, also did not work. Between E. 14th and E. 12th was an empty plaza with two blank walls, and benches that probably looked nice in the architect’s drawings but drew the homeless. You had to cross this block, and then E. 12th, before you got to the Village. About the only reason to do this would be if you were already heading to BART.

    Retail business struggled mightily the first several years. Stores, including some that seemed to take forever to open up, died quickly The original Mexican restaurant closed almost immediately. A succession of pizza/burger joints and Louisiana Fried Chicken came and went in another unit. Fruitvale veteran Acapulco Records opened a second location there, and then gave it up.

    The retail situation seems to have stabilized, but still has plenty of room for improvement. The Fruitvale Public Market behind the pharmacy has helped somewhat to bridge the gap between International (E. 14th) and E 12th.. Other efforts have been made to draw in foot traffic including a farmers’ markets on Sundays and a similar one on Thursdays where you can also get your spine adjusted and pick up a copy of the Socialist Worker. I don’t know what sort of traffic is there during a typical weekday.

    While the Transit Village may be the showplace of the Fruitvale District, it was the beneficiary, not the source, of the strength of the district, and there are still some bugs to be worked out. It may be that Phase II will shift the center of gravity in the district closer to BART, but for now the center of gravity is where it’s always been, on International.

    FWIW, regarding Len’s speculation that the success of the Village may be due to Latinos patronizing Latino businesses, two of the longest lasting retail businesses in the Transit Village are Vietnamese owned or Vietnamese themed – Powderface and Saigon Wraps. The gold shop which has been there for several years now appears to be Vietnamese owned as well.

63. 63
    len raphael Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 7:52 am

    IO, so basically, Bart users bypass the retail stores other than the delicious beignet place, and even the residents of the Village continue to shop on the Blvd? Then I gotta ask whether many of the Village residents use Bart, reducing greenhouse gases by living so close

    -len raphael
    temescal

64. 64
    Born in Oakland Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 8:54 am

    IO…great analysis of the problems with Fruitvale Transit Village and Civic Center Plaza. I always intuitively saw a disconnect but could not quite understand it until you posted. Jack London Square is similar and suffers from a separation from the rest of downtown. The price of convenience at these sites, making it easy for auto parking and quick in and out access is a problem in our town. Oakland traffic engineers and planners have always viewed our City as a good place to get in and out of……to the detriment of commercial and neighborhood development.

65. 65
    len raphael Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 9:25 am

    remembrance of beignets past, motivated me to go Powderface this sunday morning to research on the ground. (and no, i didn’t take Bart) The proprietors were there and there were 6 or so customers, some local latino looking, rest oakland mix on the older side.

    bottom line: Powderface is the exception that raises more questions then it answers re evaluating the Village as a TOD. Without the Bart customers, PF would not have succeeded. About 50% of their sales are to Bart customers. But the owners observation and their conversations with other retailers over the years is that Bart customers seldom venture past Powderface to try the other retailers.

    Several factors: The biggest: 1. the commuters are afraid of crime, 2. the retailers were not experienced/saavy enough to figure out what appealed to Bart commuters and produce it with consistent high quality; and I would add 3. the retailers didn’t have the capital to stick it for say two years until they developed a clientel.

    Security and the appearance of lack of security is a big problem. Powderface deals with by having their employees encourage homeless and loitering kids to move away from the store where they scare away customers. The cops are helpful.

    So the owners of PF believe that higher end retail chain operators (PF is not worried about national chains) such as Chipotle would do fine there and draw a bunch of Bart commuter business if the crime issue were addressed so well that it was obvious to those same national operators.

    PF had the impression that most of the residential tennants were paying high market rate rents comparable DTO and Temescal. Web site for the project says 10 out of 47 (that’s high density??) units are below market rent. PF impression is that quite a few of the residents commute on Bart.

    Saigon Wraps closed down last week.

    -len raphael
    temescal

66. 66
    len raphael Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 11:29 am

    TOD footnote. Powderface owners mentioned that they had turned down the offer of opening a branch in a suburban Bart stop that wouldn’t have any crime considerations and would have excellent street and Bart exposure. They decided against that location because it would be totally dependent on Bart commuters, with 0 car parking avail. Not sure which Bart that was, but i don’t think it had residential units.

    the overall conclusion about Fruitvale is that it hasn’t succeeded as TDO but that it could under the right conditions.

67. 67
    dto510 Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 8:41 pm

    I don’t know how one can assert Fruitvale Village is not a successful Transit-Oriented Development. Who are you going to believe, haters or your own eyes?

68. 68
    Steve Lowe Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 9:09 pm

    Fruitvale is okay DTO, but the program and tenant mix that I saw last time I was there a couple of years ago needs adjustment if it is ever going to be the regional destination it could be. My enthusiasm for making a return trip is pretty low right now.

    Meanwhile, Patrick Mitchell’s concerns for the investment he’s made in his home will never be adequately addressed by any single thing – or concentration on any specific group of things – that this City has as its main challenge; instead, we all have to nerf our imperfect leaders into improving performance on every level so the supplemental funding that this underfunded hub city should be getting from MTC, the Port and other regional agencies for infrastructure upgrades helps out with the ability of the Project Area Committees to identify and erase blight, and that in turn gives Rebecca or anyone else on Council the basis on which to approach a WBA team and get it here as a Coliseum tenant or, for that matter, approach any business and get a commitment to come here to Oakland because the comprehensive plan we ought to be able to throw down on the table shows the whole of the City as a blueprint to success. It’s more than just multi-tasking; it’s also mega-gardening with the most holistic vision we can assemble to enable a complete City, one that isn’t divided up into fiefdoms and known nationwide for its turf wars and political dissension.

    So, no matter what negativists like Chip think, Dellums has to be correct in saying that he would prefer to have that vision come directly from the people via the Task Force process, or am I missing something: that we need a strongman who may or may not have a clear-eyed vision for this town, but who has strength and enough votes on a political bloc, enough to get something done? We could opt for a midseason trade and maybe get Hugo Chavez, and I guess that’d satisfy some folks I know who ascribe to the notion that follow-the-leader is the traditional path that brings results. I’d rather go with the person who thinks that democracy is difficult but essential, and if that means more public input and less backroom arm-twisting, then the result, unfortunately, simply has to resonate with more hoi polloi, and less elites, insiders and bloc-heads.

    Here’s a test: let’s see how much desire there is on the part of the Council to get the Transportation Commission up and running right away – the best means of getting MTC to free up real dollars for Oakland. I know it means that some on the Council may feel threatened – just as they did with IRV – but it’s too important to Oakland’s future to be given over to some ego trip. If we start there, the framework for the comprehensive plan can be overlaid on our densest-of-all-Bay-Area-cities transportation grid and the major part of Patrick’s concern will be on its way to resolution.

69. 69
    len raphael Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    DTO, haters? PF are the success retail success story of that development and they happy to be there. They’re not haters, (nor were the rest of us who commented here) just hard headed business people who say that it has not realized its potential as a TOD. When was the last time you shopped there?

    -len raphael
    temescal

70. 70
    len raphael Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 10:51 pm

    SL, agree w you that looking for a single strong leader who will somehow make the troops march in synch is neither desirable nor likely to happen. the closest we came was JB, and his cult of personality left us nothing but the residential developments and a decimated city budget. The residents are no more trained in civic participation and self governance, and the bureaucracy is as inefficient as ever.

    (I don’t know a thing about Whitman, but the idea of JB running California the way he ran Oakland is scary)

    Wasn’t it the same looking for a savior voting behavior that led residents to vote Dellums in? Dellums sold the voters hope.

    And like Brown, Dellums doesn’t bother with details and doesn’t delegate all that well either.

    Nothing wrong with appointing task forces, and wb a good thing if they really were broadly selected and not self serving selection of people who agree with Dellums. The problem was that Dellums (and Brown except for development approvals) rarely followed thru and made sure policy was implemented.

71. 71
    Ralph Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 10:51 pm

    Steve, or anyone, do you know where to obtain the workproducts from cottontop’s Task Forces.

    I saw a preliminary report for education and it appears to be the work of a group of braindead 3rd graders. I would like to know what problems are being addressed, the programs implemented to address these problems, expected outcomes, and actual outcomes.

72. 72
    We Fight Blight Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 1:07 am

    This whole stream reminds me of how Oakland has gotten so waylaid with little or no focus.

    So remind here…we are talking about a TOD at the Coliseum. Why? We have the Oakland A’s looking to leave town if the South Bay can ever get their shit together. Al Davis, the perennial vagabond, is always looking for the next best deal out of town, and the Warriors are up for sale and possibly looking to relocate across the Bay with a highly capitalized, new owner.

    For all of these franchises, Oakland just cannot pony up the corporate sponsorhips nor can it support guaranteed season ticket sales. Ever wonder why? First of all the Coliseum is ancient. Second we are not that deep in healthy corporations with enough advertising money to toss around. And third we have a real and perceived crime problem.

    So we are going to spend planning staff time and energy and political capital trying to develop a TOD at a dying white elephant?

    Is this TOD expected to save the Coliseum? Is it expected to attract a WNBA franchise or just have the occasional heavy metal concert, tractor pull, and BMX race.

    Yes, TODs are good in concept and in the right place can drive economic development and address greenhouse gas emmissions. But are we really interested in spending limited resources and limited capital on resuscitating the Coliseum with a TOD plopped right in the middle of ground zero–yes the traditional killing fields of Oakland. Nice idea when you are flush with seed money and flush with staff. Sounds like a Measure Y program.

    Visionary planning is important, but there has to be a focus and there have to be priorities. Is a Coliseum TOD really where we should be spending our time and efforts? Can anyone tell me what Oakland’s economic development priorities really are?

73. 73
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 6:56 am

    This whole stream of negativity reminds me of how Oakland’s most dedicated activists have become factionalized and competitive.

    The fact that someone is discussing something other than one’s own greatest concern doesn’t mean that one’s concern is going to fall by the wayside.

    Oh, and WFB, the Coliseum is, again, well isolated from the “killing fields”. The troubled neighborhoods of Brookfield, Elmhurst, and Sobrante Park, to the East of the Coliseum, not a threat to Coliseum development.

    You don’t have to walk or drive through any of those areas to get to the Coliseum, and in fact, one of the reasons those neighborhoods are in so much trouble is because Brookfield and Sobrante Park in particular are isolated because they’re surrounded by highways, railways and a creek.

    The 880 and BART are by far the most common modes of access to the Coliseum, and the notion that any new development will somehow become overrun by crime is wildly pessimistic, if not preposterous. Oh and did anybody notice that crime is taking a major nose dive?

    The PR problem that East Oakland has could be helped enormously by building beautiful new buildings near the Coliseum. Simply envisioning them helps too. I’ll say it again: to save this city, we have to dream big and work on small neighborhood problems – and we have to do both at the same time!

74. 74
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 7:03 am

    Thank you WFB. I think you are saying what a lot of Oakland is thinking.

    MH, I agree with your thoughts, but Bankruptcy is the worst possible option. While the problems in Oakland appear to be financial, they really are not. Our financial problems are only a symptom of our lack of leadership. Oakland’s Assets (weather, port, airport, people) far exceed our debt. We have so much opportunity!

    Ralph, I am glad that you got a laugh out of Mary’s comments, but whether you agree with her thoughts or not, many business people agree with her, and it hurts our ability to attract the businesses and people that we need.

75. 75
    Solace Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 9:06 am

    @M.H: I couldn’t agree more with your assessment. Strangely, with all the shaking up and down the coast and everywhere…but here, you would think they get some kind of message about what we are definitely not worred about.

    this is Southern Style thinking. When the Hurricanes hit, the oil companies have to hire like crazy, leaving vacant the few jobs available to the disenfranchised and primarily white, middle-class population. The crush to fill those jobs results in a spate of job-hopping and importation of well, lower-paid and usually NOT indigenous people.

    The only difference is that we do it with Schools and Transit Agencies…et al.

    I agree, we need somebody like Fidel Castro today, but it is looking like we won’t have much longer to wait.

    I’d like to think of it this way: Turn over a rock, a pile of multch, put a spade into the earth and see all the life that emerges. Do this gently and consciously because you do disturb an entire world when you do something as simple as that.
    When you spot an ant or a snail, roach or misquito, or anything detestable to you or which threatens your abode, your garden…just remember, we are in someone else’s garden.

    We have to learn compassion and own up to the disease all this human waste is spreading.

    We totally depend on these minions beneath our feet, and they deserve our respect.

    Money, deficits, guaranteed pension plans? What a joke. It can all end, like that.

    Let’s just hope there are not others we share this place with who regard us as an infestation.

    See the analogy?

    The system breeds two-legged maggots.

    They’d better move a lot faster than they are now and stop this pestilence.

76. 76
    len raphael Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 9:34 am

    Max, valid point that the Coliseum area could be easily secured from the high crime areas of East O. In time with lots of good expensive pr, consumers and sports fans could be persuaded of that, but you can’t expect them to know the micro geography of East O.

    The flip side of that isolation, is that revitalizing the Coliseum area will have reduced impact outside of it’s borders.

    We don’t have to theorize completely here. I went to the new Toyota dealership on Friday to buy a fossil fuel mobile. Guessing most of you are not car dealership aficionados, but this one is stunning. Maybe the best looking one in the Bay Area. It’s now run by an experienced team from AZ with the young owner on the premises, with normal looking Oaklanders staffing sales and technical positions. They have a pricing model of one discounted no haggle price that will appeal to consumers ( i prefer haggling). And they ran big ads touting the 0 percent 5 year financing ending today.

    Anywhere but Oakland, that place would have been crammed. But not here, not yet.

    In time they’ll probably do fine. Yes, a revitalized Coliseum would greatly help them. If they were located at Eastmont Mall, don’t think so.

    -len

77. 77
    Solace Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 9:56 am

    one more tid-bit and I will drop this moniker, for now.

    If you have not ever familiarized yourself with the USGS on-line data-base, now would be a great time to start, just to steele one’s self, and to appreciate the fragility of this life-style everyone has become conditioned by.

    Briefly, the faults now clearly delineated were not readily available until about a year ago; you had to click at least one more time to see them.

    They know, the media knows, that many of us around the world are on this all the time. So immediately after the “trigger” quakes around the geysers, following the jolt down South, we get an update stating there is no connection….etc.

    It’s a lie, probably. California IS an orogenous zone, dotted with ancient volcanic vents. It may very well be that the recent deluge we have experienced here in the Northern Latitudes is the saving grace. Those volcanic beds stretch from Shasta all the way down to Mammoth Lakes, with steaming vents here and there.

    Who can say what a bullet we have just narrowly missed due to the sheer mass of water bouying the strata all around us. Note that we ARE NOT going to be drilliing off the coast HERE. THAT is prudent.

    we are on the precipice, money is the least of our perils, and our leaders are not being honest about anything. Maybe, just maybe…somebody knows.

78. 78
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 10:20 am

    Well, that settles it. The world’s gonna end. I guess I’ll just roll up a joint, start a bonfire with all the letters from my debtors, fill my pockets with shotgun shells and MREs and head for the hills…

79. 79
    annoyed Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 12:27 pm

    So let’s see if I have this right. We can’t plan for future development until we have solved the crime and blight problem, ooo, and the pot hole problem. Sure, that makes pefect sense. Then you all can bitch about why everything went to Emeryville or anywhere but here. Oh wait, you have already been bitching about that.

    I used to think that it was the elected officials who had backward vision but it turns out to be the locals. Who knew. Oakland truly has the government it deserves.

    A big chunk of this funding is going to SF where there is a neighborhood plan or area development plan completed or underway for just about every square inch of the city.

    I’m giving myself a whiplash from shaking my head. Unbelievable.

80. 80
    jack b dazzle Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    annoyed,

    It is not that we can’t plan for the future without solving blight and crime first. We can and should. We can’t plan the future until we have the gov’t that can execute these types of plans.

    If we had someone like Robert Bobb running the city, I would be much more open to these types of plans.

81. 81
    annoyed Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 3:23 pm

    Oh, my gawd. This is really worse. We can’t plan the city”s future until Jesus comes to town. Got it.

82. 82
    livegreen Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    Ralph, Continuing the comparison to Baltimore, is the Coliseum more like Camden Yards or Memorial Stadium?

    If they’d built BART or similar rail to Memorial Stadium, & put a TOD there, would it have become Camden Yards? For that matter, does Campden Yards have rail access that brings any significant number of fans to it, and is that what makes it a destination?

83. 83
    Al Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 4:22 pm

    I have it! Domes. Able to withstand Hurricane force winds and 10.0 on the Richter.
    Designed by Danes, built in China, and fully-funded using Bloom-box technology to grow hypronic marijuana. Ginourmous potential.

84. 84
    Max Allstadt Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 4:28 pm

    annoyed,

    What you and I are seeing here is exactly what Chief Batts is going around town making speeches about. The first thing we need to do if we want things to get better is stop accepting that “this is just how it is” in Oakland.

    Optimism doesn’t win by itself, but without it, we can’t win at all.

85. 85
    Al Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 6:24 pm

    Whoa, hold on there partner. Don’t hate, after all, Davis is like…Elvis to Raiders image…like Hell’s Angels and Sportsters. We should just pass a resolution to have him bronzed, in his car, and mounted atop Mt. Davis.

    Is nothing sacred?

86. 86
    Patrick M. Mitchell Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    I’m optimistic that Oakland’s city government will screw the citizenry over AGAIN to ensure re-election via public union support. Mary Hollis, bless her funny black heart, is absolutely correct. Go ahead Max – roll that joint. Perhaps it will take the sting out of the continued, city government sponsored devaluation of your West Oakland properties. Well, assuming one can devalue something that is virtually unsaleable. Wanna buy the Kaiser Center? I can get you a great deal. Perhaps you can trade your home for a box of Nadel chocolates? I don’t enjoy them – the blood, money and incompetence they ooze is just not tasty to me. Same for Quan Dim Sum.

87. 87
    len raphael Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    Not to be negative, but is there a negative effect on the RDA ability to redevelop areas such as the Coliseum if we keep selling city buildings to it and drain it’s cash? or is RDA money really “found” money that would have just sat there?

88. 88
    dto510 Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 8:16 pm

    Redevelopment makes its own money. Development leads to higher tax revenues. City properties aren’t worth anything to the City unless they’re being used, and they’re worth more the City if someone’s paying taxes on them.

89. 89
    Livegreen Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    I have to agree with Len’s comments above. The Coliseum is isolated to money spending, walkable areas. The only areas near it are industrial or high crime. Who’s going to want to move there to live?

    The Fruitvale TOD has had enormous challenges and it’s in a busy, if poor, area. And still there is limited interaction between the TOD, the parking lot, and the neighborhood (with commuters fleeing after they hop in their cars–is that he purpose of a TOD?).

    The advantage of the Coliseum’s location compared to Fruitvale is it’s proximity to the highway for auto access. So IF the project were big enough to include lots of living and an Emeryville-Bay Street style mall to keep people there after hours + make it big enough for people to live there, then it might attract the high #’s to work.
    Then it’s a big project (maybe bigger than those two little arrows look) and private financing & the RRE market become key questions.

    Note the importance of autos to this TOD, though I guess that’s beside the point. Also note the project would have to b big enough to significantly help out the surrounding community with sustainable jobs. Otherwise it becomes just another hulk of empty concrete that is empty and undesirable esp. at night.

    I still think crime will have to continue declining to make such a project attractive to businesses, residents and customers. And although the City Council SHOULD b able to walk and chew gum at the same time, they haven’t yet show (to me at least) that they can. I would b put much more at ease if & when they are able to demonstrate this…

90. 90
    Ralph Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 8:33 pm

    LG, my last post got wiped out, so here is the Sparks note version.

    Memorial Stadium was built into an existing residential hood; it would not have been possible to do the TOD you envision.

    Camden Yards or OPACY as it is officially called and M&T Stadium were part of a long term plan to revitalize the IH. The Harbor had fallen into disrepair. Some teardowns were sold for a $1, other were turned into parks, MD Science Center found a home, the pavilions went up, new hotels (that actually host visiting teams), restaurants (ESPNZone, Phillips, McCormicks, Rusty Scupper etc), outdoor bars, Cross St Market, shopping

    The area is accessible via subway, MARC (commuter rail), I-83, I-95. With the new development there is definitely more of a connectedness from the IH, to Little Italy to Fells Point.

    Baltimore is in the 21st century while Oakland looks like Mayberry.

91. 91
    Ralph Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 8:35 pm

    While I am in favor of development at the Coliseum. I think we would be better served if we moved the ballparks downtown. The owner of the Phillies regrets not building his new ballpark closer to downtown.

92. 92
    Livegreen Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 8:51 pm

    Ralph, That’s exactly what I was thinking. In all your other examples the stadiums are DT. The Colisium is from the 60′s and reminds me more of the older stadiums of that era. Even if the A’s stay all of Oakland’s proposals are for closer to DT.

    A project around it like what RK is proposing has to b significant enough to attract shops, customers, apartment dwellers, etc. A small project won’t do that. Only one that has size will…

93. 93
    Ralph Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 9:03 pm

    I could be wrong but I thought the Coliseum TOD plans were grand. To be honest though I don’t think you can make TOD at the Coliseum work. Admittedly, I do not spend a lot of time at the Coliseum, but I don’t foresee the residential plan coming together. I think it comes to better in some of the other plans being discussed. I think it is important to remember that any plan will need to substantially improve the value of the franchise.

94. 94
    We Fight Blight Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 9:03 pm

    Annoyed.

    Thanks for your insightful critique. I certainly am not saying that we cannot plan and cannot implement until we solve all problems of crime, blight and crumbling infrastructure. Nevertheless, crime, blight and crumbling infrastructure are fundamental problems both real and perceived and create significant disincentives for growing our tax base. It becomes very hard to attract businesses, shoppers and residents if we have these albatrosses around our neck.

    As an avid and somewhat nuerotic planner, I had to laugh at being labeled as an anti-planner of sorts. Rather than chasing federal dollars using limited staff resources for a development strategy at a somewhat isolated location that relies on three professional franchises that are planning or have been thinking about relocating to more lucrative markets, I prefer smart planning for the City based on core priorities and well thought out strategies. TODs for some are sexy and hip and should be pursued at all costs. For me, they are but one development strategy that can be implemented at the right locations at the right time. We should not pursue planning for planning sake because we have to do something and it might as well be a TOD at the Coliseum because doing nothing is just a bunch of negative nellies being naysayers with no vision.

    My solution isn’t no planning at all–rather my solution and “plan” involves actively eliminating the disincentives for people to locate, recreate, dine and shop in Oakland–the major disincentive being crime or the perception of crime. Once we address the disincentives it becomes easier to grow the tax base by volume rather than increasing the overall tax rate on the dwindling middle class. Increasing the tax base by volume allows us to have more resources for planning and visioning.

    At this point though, the City is on life support and the City Council is trying to figure out which programs and which staff get slashed. Rather than spreading City resources too thin in a time of diminishing resources to accomplish just anything, I would rather focus on maintaining and building the momentum in Downtown/Uptown/Broadway Corridor/Temescal.

    Annoyed, you can go on being annoyed or hopefully you can tell us why a TOD at the Coliseum makes market sense, makes planning sense, and from the long-term perspective adds value to the Coliseum area in a way that would actually keep the A’s, the Raiders or the Warriors from moving. Why should a TOD at the Coliseum be a development priority for the City?

95. 95
    Steve Lowe Says:
    April 5th, 2010 at 10:11 pm

    Lemme see, Jerry, Ron, Bobb and Al Davis all in one fell swoop: Jerry did not want to save the Produce District (or the A’s) and agreed with Ignacio that it was time to kick butt in the preservationist community, putting him, along with Bobb and Davis into the Castro / Chavez camp of “strong leader” – or is that, more correctly, isolated egomaniacal elitist? Having been on Jerry’s Jacques-maintained “enemies’ list” for a time (at least until Jacques was reluctantly let go for pushing his wife down the stairs at the Compound), I have to say that, though I’ve never met Al and have had only one chance to hiss at him from afar, this idolatry of the strongman dates back in human history to Attila and earlier when the good old days allowed you to get away with just about anything so long as your fearless leader appeared to know what he (and sometime she) knew what what they were doing, even when they didn’t or had some sort of bible to thump before leading their troops on to the next massacre: my personal favorite being El Cid who was deader than even Francisco Franco when they tied him to his horse to lead the charge against the Moops back in the day.

    You know what, I’m sick of these guys who run such a tight ship that everybody thinks they must be descendants of Wotan or something. Give a break, please: these are the same quail-like lemmings who are willing to give over the country to the Sara Palins and Dan Quales and George Bushes who, as actors, can at best only mouth the pre-prepared platitudes and palliatives that the Karl Roves and/or James Carvilles crank out for them as part of the colossal game of My-Ego’s-Bigger-Than-Yours that they’re all playing. Bobb ran such a tight ship and terrified staff so much with threats of job loss that any creativity in CEDA was stifled almost entirely. Think back and remember what got done on the Army Base during his entire tenure here – zilch.

    So, during Ron’s infinitely less autocratic reign, the Army Base was finally put out to bid, a new Chief of Police has been found, strikes were averted at the Port, City Administrator replaced, twenty times the amount of funding from Washington secured than in previous administrations, a Transportation Commission established (soon to be announced), real community people on the Port Board, etc. Okay, I know most of the people on this blog really hate Ron because he didn’t pay his taxes and so forth, but I really hate Chip with equal vigor because he’s just out to get Ron and, like a lot of you, NEVER copped to anything good that Ron has done for Oakland, including all of the above. And I’ve yet to meet anyone who hasn’t gone light on his or her taxes when they knew they just couldn’t afford to pay them and stay solvent, especially when they knew there was a bigger payday down the road somewhere – a refi or something. So let’s get down to the nitty gritty and start thinking about what we can get from this American icon before he leaves and somebody new comes in to manifest their own personality disorder and imperfections on wee the people.

    For me, it’s the person with the ideas, ideals and energy to see it through. including getting the WBA here – immediately after Trish Vanderveer enters the Valhalla of Fame tomorrow night. It is tomorrow night, right?

    As to WFB’s question, you just have to do both at the same time, sorta like when you’re upstairs paying the bills and a fight breaks out among your kids in the back yard. You get both things done because both are equally important on different levels.

96. 96
    Ralph Says:
    April 6th, 2010 at 7:56 am

    Steve, just for the record I disliked Ron long before his tax problems surfaced. He did not want to run. He has opted to avoid making the tough decisions – M2O comes to mind. He is a flat out joke. I’d rather have Luther Mahoney running the city. At least, we knew Luther cared. Ron cares about one person – himself. Heck, it was Ron who had the Army based closed but had no plans for its future. Ron was far from present when a 10 year old boy at a piano lesson was shot by a stray bullet. A real mayor would have been out in front. A real mayor would be present. Personally, I wish he would simply disappear. And like all sphincters before him, he will not be missed.

97. 97
    annoyed Says:
    April 6th, 2010 at 8:05 am

    Thank you, Steve. I am terrified that WFB is a planner in Oakland. If you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, you should be working on an assembly line, not trying to bring a city into the 21st century.

    Steve is right. That’s how we got stuck with a two-faced like Jerry Brown who one day was all down with the people and the next, day wearing designer clothes and trying to eradicate CEQA in order to further his 10,000 units in downtown Oakland.. That’s how we got a Governator who’s unbending style helped to pound the state into sand. You bitch about what a financial mess Oakland is, maybe because the state took money from cities to plug it’s own leaky budget? Where’s the hate for Arnold? That’s how we ended up with an actor who hated free speech on college campuses, went on to invent the Evil Empire, had more of his administration end up in prison than any other, regularly slept through White House briefings and probably suffered from dementia while in office. But the people love his rusty behind even now. People love rock stars, never mind whether or not they know what the hell they are doing. I almost want Don Perata to win so that you can truly have the government you so richly deserve.

    And the only problem with redeveloping the Coliseum area is that it is too brown, too many poor,folks live nearby and most of you are afraid to go there. The Coiseum is adjacent to a BART and Amtrak stop. It’s a hop skip and jump from the airport. Yeah, what a dumb idea to develop that bit of real estate. It’s to laugh. SF spent $650M on a rail extension through one of the poorest sections of town and look at the 3rd St. corridor today. Look at the ballpark that is not in downtown. Look at Mission Bay that took DECADES to plan and buld. That could never happen in Oakalnd. Look at Emeryville. Do we give out awards to the most bilndly short sighted in this town?

98. 98
    Born in Oakland Says:
    April 6th, 2010 at 8:11 am

    Anyone want to play SimCity? Or is that what Oakland leaders have been doing the last 20 plus years? The game model allowed you to build a city, build infrastructure, grow business and residential, but you had to be careful to maintain a balance or the tipping point would come if there was a disaster or fiscal shortfall. Then people would leave the City, streets would crumble, revenue would fall and well, it would kind of become like Oakland is today. Can’t believe (Yes I Can!) SimCity was not required study for those working or representing our fair City! Even my 10 year olds learned how to manage a City.

99. 99
    annoyed Says:
    April 6th, 2010 at 8:38 am

    Then let your 10-year old run for mayor. The people on the CIty Council and the Mayor did not elect themselves. If you want to know what”s wrong with Oakland, look in the mirror. You bitch about too many nail salons, or yougurt shops. Better closed up store fronts than a functioning business.

    You killed the parking fee increases and extended enforcement because it was going to kill you to pay a few extra quarters.

    Any effort to raise revenues is met with a big fat no. Efforts to bring business is met with oppostion. What is it exactly that you people want? I get that you hate Ron Dellums. I don’t think that is reason enough to torpedo revenues because you are still pouting that Ignacio did not win.

100. 100
     Steve Lowe Says:
     April 6th, 2010 at 11:27 am

     With respect to the Army Base (which was originally supposed to revert entirely to the Port upon its surrender by the Army and Navy, as per the terms of their takeover in WWII), you’d have been delighted a couple of weeks ago to hear everyone at the Mega Regional Conference down at the Marriott going on and on about what a great gift the Army Base is to the future if Northern California trade – and all the other goodies that come in and out of the Bay Area bound for Chicago and the rest of the midwest. That gift from Ron, at completion, will be a lasting legacy to the health of Bay Area commerce. The dollars that will be coming from Obama – who clearly admires Ron and probably has since he first began thinking about a career in politics – earmarked specifically for the Base are as important as anything Oakland has ever done, including the institution of the Port itself back in the late 20′s.

     Lots of military folk lost jobs they’d had for quite awhile, and the local economy took a dip accordingly, but the land there was hardly being used to its highest and best, especially when viewed from the global perspective of the Bay Area as a city-state like, say, ancient Athens or some other classical example. The port is the fundamental reason for the city, right? San Francisco didn’t grow were it was because a bunch of cowherds got together one day and said, “Let’s build us a city right where we’re a-standing!” A deep water port was there, and we all grew up around it, building warehouses and docks and stuff until that side of the Bay could no longer handle the overload of cargoes, especially those that required offloading by fifty zillion longshore guys for each barrel on each ship. With Oakland converting over to container-only shipping, SF allowed its waterfront to transition to housing and other commercial real estate, in effect ceding the nexus of port trade to Oakland, even then radically constricted by the amount of available land for container stacking, warehousing, trucking and ancillary support.

     Having the Army Base to expand our port activities onto means less pollution for those trucks that otherwise have to drive all the way up to their yards in Richmond, Tracey or wherever else they might be located, usually due to the cheaper cost of land there. It means a better, more efficient, more economic utilization of the Bay Area’s most primary function, and I think the bad rap on Ron for closing the Bases (which he certainly didn’t do all by himself) needs to be seen in that context: the Army was okay to have here – kinda, sorta – but what we can do with that land to improve the lot of everyone around here, from Mill Valley to Milpitas to Millbrae and maybe even as far away as Missoula, Montana is all too obviously a huge improvement we should all salute.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All