City Council Grants Rich Developer $2.5 Million in Taxpayer Money, Angrily Dismisses Residents’ Complaints

by Juanita Carroll Young and Tracy Schroth

The City Council Tuesday approved the $2.5 million taxpayer subsidy to Wareham Development to build a 58-foot office building on the corner of Hollis and Powell streets, next to the Elevation 22 residential complex. Council member John Fricke voted against. Vice Mayor Ken Bukowski abstained from the discussion and the vote.

Here is a recap of the public comments:

The residents of Elevation 22 are requesting noise abatement in exchange for the approval of the project. They also want a contact person at Wareham who they can call with complaints.

Several (8) Emeryville residents complained about the Council consistently giving huge taxpayer subsidies to rich developers, and asked “why?” This project has also been granted a height variance to exceed the maximum height allowed – again, residents asked, “Why?”

Several residents disagreed with the Council’s characterization of the existing building on the site – which housed a law office and an architecture firm – as “blight.” In fact, resident Brian Donahue pointed out that the building meets the city’s definition of “architecturally significant.” Many residents see the proposed new building as yet another big, bland, contemporary office building with no aesthetic value. One speaker suggested that the Council get some design advice from architects who work in Emeryville.

In addition to the residents who often attend Council meetings to make public comment, there were some new members of RULE (Residents United for a Livable Emeryville) who voiced concern about the Wareham project, among them a Pacific Park Plaza resident.

Council member Nora Davis and Mayor Dick Kassis were openly hostile in their response to public comment, suggesting that these subsidies are necessary to lure development, which will generate big tax revenue in return. They dismissed residents’ request that developers be required to provide some community benefits in return for the millions of dollars in subsidies they receive. Not only is Wareham Development excused from providing any city amenities, it got the green light to exceed the allowable height limit – allowing the building to cast an even larger shadow on the Doyle Street Greenway, a bike and pedestrian path that runs from Powell Street to the Berkeley border.

John Fricke argued that Emeryville is a desirable location to do businesses; the City no longer needs to attract developers with big subsidies. He noted that 20 years ago, when Emeryville began doling out taxpayer money to developers, the Council urged residents to be patient, that these projects would return the favor in spades (in the form of tax revenue and city amenities).

“We’re still waiting,” Fricke said.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to City Council Grants Rich Developer $2.5 Million in Taxpayer Money, Angrily Dismisses Residents’ Complaints

  1. Anonymous says:

    I believe this blog entry is incorrect in saying, “Not only is Wareham Development excused from providing any city amenities…” I believe the project includes improvement of a significant portion of the Emeryville Greenway. That is an important amenity for the community. Also, we get benefits in the Disposition and Development Agreement which may nit be readily tangible (I’m not familiar with the conditions of the DDA,) but are present nonetheless. Since the project requires redevelopment funds, any amenities above and beyond what are already provided would require additional funds. I’m not necessarily opposed to that, but it is something that needs to be balanced. Those funds could be spent on public amenities in this location or elsewhere in the Redevelopment Area. Also, we are not still waiting increased tax revenues. These projects are already providing that and will continue to do so for years to come 🙂

  2. Anonymous says:

    “…any amenities above and beyond what are alrerady provided would require additional funds”

    Isn’t it amazing how our city council has extracted exactly the upper most limit on this devevelopers project budget? Wow, they sure do a great job! They’re really looking out for us!

    There is NO WAY POSSIBLE we could have gotten ANY Greenway improvements without granting Rich Robbins and Wareham Development this property by hostile Eminent Domain and then giving him $2.5 million.

    We should all praise Rich Robbins for his generosity and write letters to our crack city council, thanking them for such great work on our behalf!

  3. Laura says:

    How can I join RULE? I’m an Emeryville resident.

  4. Anonymous says:

    This makes me sick.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Dick Kassis and Nora Davis’ argument, put forth about still needing to attract developers, is ridculous. There is no way to prove their argument or the opposing one; that developers will come. And yet they refuse to even contemplate trying to see if developers will invest in the city and its citizens without massive subsidies. Let’s put the citizens’ needs first and negotiate community benefits in return for redevelopment benefits/subsidies. We must remember that redevelop agency funds are debt incurred for the citizens of Emeryville and not the developers.
    Also, the council’s new approach to berating the citizens for inordinate lengths of time is troubling, especially since they have cut the comment time to 3 minutes per remark; 3 minutes for the citizens and as long as the city council likes for a rebuttal.

  6. Anonymous says:

    FYI The City Council doen’t berate all speakers, only those that have the temerity to question their judgement. Those with praise for the Council get the royal treatment including time beyond the “maximum” they dictated. I see this commonly (on TV).

  7. Only Work Here says:

    There’s not that many residents in Emeryville. Why not vote the pro-developement faction out of office?

  8. Anonymous says:

    “Why not vote the pro-developer faction out of office”

    Why not indeed. It’s amazing how ideologue politicians can engage in obsfucation and get people to vote against their own interests isn’t it? This is the M.O. from the Republican Party from 1980 to now. Why did average middle class voters vote for George W? It’s pretty astounding.

    I think we can safely say the Republicans and the Emeryville City Council are very good at politics.

  9. Anonymous says:

    I don’t think most of us are against development, what we want are sustainable social market economies. A move from the greed is good ethos to a framework that has the involvement of stakeholders as well as shareholders. A commitment to a social minimum for all citizens and a strong moral ethos among those involved in business(TG Ash). As we are building for the green economy, let’s build better than green. Redevelopment money being used to subsidize additional green and social supports in new development–solar panels, rain and grey water reprocessing, child care facilities…, rather than giving monies constantly to developers, who often leave the inhabitants of their buildings with a different sort of green.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Is the “different sort of green” you’re referring to of the Cladosporium or Fusarium varieties as so brought to us by Mr Robbins?

  11. Anonymous says:

    How much money do you suppose Rich Robbins has given to the City Council politicians for their re-election campaigns? The answer I’d guess is: just enough.

    But remember, this developer doesn’t expect a thing for his investment. Not a damn thing! He just donates because he loves our town so much (he lives in Marin County). He wants to make sure these awesome council members keep getting re-elected. God forbid one of ’em lose re-election…the whole town might go to pot.

    There is no connection at all to the money he gives them and the votes they give him…keep repeating this line over and over.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the City doling out taxpayer money to developers for desirable development…even ‘wealthy’ developers. The personal wealth of a specific developer is immaterial to the greater goal. The idea, of course is that it is legitimate that the government be an active partner to drive the town’s development.

    This should not be done for ideological reasons as has been charged by some, instead it should be done with an eye toward livability for all the residents; this being the goal.

    I think councilman Fricke’s position that this sort of subsidy is no longer needed, is correct. The City Council’s unchanging response in the face of a changed development environment in Emeryville is starting to look like ideology is informing the decisions. The Council needs to do some reasessments, they are starting to sound shrill.

  13. Anonymous says:

    I do think there's something wrong with the council doling out millions of dollars to private developers. Our money should be spent on directly visable and tangible public benefits. It's a slippery slope to give public money to private developers in hopes of garnering more tax dollars (and then in turn giving that away too?). If nothing else, it at least brings with it the perception that political favors are being curried, especially if the developer has donated to the campaigns of the council people. Given Emeryville's "colorful" past, I don't think this sort of thing is prudent.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Wareham already owns so much property. Why so they get another 2.5 million? Aren't there other developers?

  15. Anonymous says:

    The last idea presented here is great. There ARE other developers. All the points being made about how this is wrong to be subsidizing private development with public money are good ones but CAN'T WE AT LEAST SELECT FROM A DIVERSITY OF DEVELOPERS? All of Rich Robbins' Wareham buildings look like the last one: corporate, slick, sterile and anywhere USA. There goes the Emeryville "uniqueness" and "funky character"" so proudly proclaimed by the council members at every election cycle.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Rich Robbins has already been given millions in taxpayer subsidies. Before, he used to at least offer some lame reason why he should get a pot of money. Now, he's just telling the Council how much he 'needs' with no real justification. If Rich Robbins now gets ANOTHER $2.5 million, what message are we sending him? What message are we sending other developers?

  17. Anonymous says:

    The message has already been sent! Look and see what developers donated to who's campaign. Remember, this is public record and can be found at city hall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *