The Secret News

by Marc Albert

After an unscrupulous grifter bankrupted the Emery Unified School District seven years ago, logic suggests the school board would do everything in its power not to be played like a bunch of small town rubes all over again. Well, logic is apparently in short supply.

The San Francisco Chronicle says it spent a total of $40 uncovering what the District’s $7,000 background check could not. That most of the degrees and credentials claimed by Stephen Wesley, hired in November as Superintendent of Schools in Emeryville, were made up out of whole cloth:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/03/BASK12IO7K.DTL

Within hours of the story hitting the streets, Wesley was hitting the bricks. The school board accepted his resignation: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/04/BA0O12O1UM.DTL

The current “reform” school board, elected after the former board was purged, has proven itself as incompetent as those they replaced. While Wesley didn’t have the District pick up the tab for a trip to China, leather furniture, or daytime hotel lodging, as his predecessor, J.L. Handy, is alleged to have done in published reports, (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/22/MN28570.DTL) it is inexcusable that the current board gave the District’s $150,000-a-year top job to a fraudster.

When they ran for office, the reformers said they knew better. Now they are hiding behind the California School Boards Association, an executive search firm paid $7,000 to” find” Wesley (he was an assistant superintendent for the District when he was chosen for the top post) and presumably verify his background. They said the same mistakes wouldn’t be made twice.

For those students of Shakespeare, consider this: The first time is tragedy, the second time farce. The board is expected to release a statement tomorrow. We’ll be watching.

For more background on J.L. Handy click here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/04/MN168452.DTL

Marc Albert has been a reporter at three radio stations and seven newspapers over the past 20 years. An East Bay resident since 1987, he lived in Emeryville from 1997 to 2008 and is still keenly interested in a community he considers home.

Can Emeryville Be As Tree-Friendly As Oakland Or Berkeley?

By Brian Donahue

A citizen-led drive against the incessant chopping of Emeryville’s trees led the City Council at its final August meeting to change course and strengthen the city’s tree ordinance. The Council ordered city staff to study ways to bolster the existing ordinance so it may be revised accordingly. A date for a future hearing has not been set. It seems that the Council’s declarations of arboreal love came not from their sudden realization that the city’s Urban Forestry Ordinance (UFO) failed to protect the city’s trees, but because of unrelenting public pressure.

Council member John Fricke, a vocal and longtime advocate for strengthening the tree ordinance, has stood alone among his fellow Council members in support of stronger protections for the city’s trees. After the Aug. 19 meeting, he questioned the sincerity of his colleagues:
“If the City Council actually follows through and adds broader protections to the city’s tree ordinance, the real test will come when a developer asks for a waiver.”

Fricke cited numerous violations of other city ordinances by developers with the Council’s nod.

The tree ordinance, approved several years ago in response to citizen concerns, has been touted extensively by Council members in their re-election campaign literature. The trouble is that although Council members used the existing tree ordinance to gain re-election, the ordinance fails to actually protect trees. This has long been obvious to those paying attention in Emeryville, but two recent development projects brought the point home to many city residents. When developers of the – ironically named – Oak Walk project at San Pablo Avenue and 40th Street, and the Glashaus project at 65th and Hollis streets cut down about 20 mature trees at these two sites, it was obvious that the city’s tree law was no match for the developers’ chain saw.

The biggest problem facing Emeryville’s 3,239 (street) trees is that the tree ordinance allows developers to essentially buy the trees they want to cut down – for a pittance. The law allows developers to pay a minimum “replacement cost” required by state law. For example, $600 was the price paid for a beautiful 50-foot mature cottonwood by the Oak Walk developer. At those prices, developers are cutting down trees all over town – a fate the ordinance was enacted to stop. A plan raising the “replacement cost” for street trees would honor the original intent of the ordinance and is among the points Council members will weigh at a future meeting.

Another problem is that the existing ordinance allows an unelected government bureaucrat, the Director of Public Works, to unilaterally waive fines for those who violate the law and cut down trees without permission. This is what happened with the Pulte project called Glashaus. The entire block of public trees on 65th Street fronting the development site were cut down without permission. After this was brought to the attention of City officials, Pulte, a large national home builder, was given retroactive permission to cut the trees and all fines for breaking the law were waived. This action by the city created a precedent. The message to other developers is they are welcome to do the same. Hey, if you get caught, you’ll only have to pay the amount you would have paid had you sought permission.

Lastly, the Council is to explore the idea of protecting certain privately owned ‘heritage’ trees. Perhaps Emeryville should follow the example of its neighbors, Oakland and Berkeley, which already have such laws in place.

Brian Donahue has lived and worked in Emeryville for 28 years. He and his wife, and young daughter, live in the Emeryville Artists’ Cooperative. Brian has been a longtime activist, working for transparent government and better of quality of life for the residents; he’s not very popular with the City Council majority.

by Brian Donahue

There has been a lot of talk in Emeryville lately about all the new development, and whether or not the community has benefited. Mindful of growing public concern, the City Council is moving to head off public disapproval — not with a change in direction, but with a pricey public relations campaign aimed at convincing voters that the Council’s development-at-any-cost strategy is paying huge dividends to residents.

The campaign, by the way, is being paid for with your tax dollars . At a Council meeting June 17th, the Council voted (4-0) to spend $15,500 on a PowerPoint presentation extolling the virtues of all the new development and, perhaps more ominously, to smooth the way for increasing the pace of development to come. Helen Bean, the city’s Director of Economic Development and Housing, urged the Council to craft the presentation to “hone in on certain messages”.

City Council Member Ruth Atkin stressed that residents need to know how they have benefited, and characterized the PowerPoint as an educational tool. The comment came just moments after Mayor Ken Bukowski and City Council Member Dick Kassis debated whether the proposed presentation should include any mention of the negative impacts recent development has had on the city. Kassis wondered aloud whether the public should receive a more balanced report for their money. However, Bukowski was unequivocal:

“The purpose of this is to put out the positive. What are we going to do, start criticizing ourselves?”
Mayor Ken Bukowski

Siding with Bukowski, Council Member Nora Davis took umbrage at the idea of producing an objective ‘product’ for the taxpayers money: “EBASE (the local community benefits/labor alliance group) will be glad to provide the criticism. We don’t have to do that ourselves,” she said.

Once again, disinformation won the day at City Hall. Educational outreach efforts by EBASE were cited by City Council members as justifying their decision to omit any negative impacts of development in the presentation. During deliberations, this reporter asked council members: If all this development is so great, why would the Council need to spend taxpayer money to convince the taxpayer of something that should be readily apparent? Kassis complained that “EBASE has been running around all over town” telling people they should expect more community benefits from development than they’ve been getting.

City staff recommended hiring the Oakland-based public relations firm, The Place Making Group, to produce the ‘product’, citing their expertise in effective ‘branding’ and advertising. The PowerPoint presentation will be played repeatedly on ETV Channel 27 in lieu of other programming, and will be presented at various civic events the City Council is planning to further this pro-development campaign.

Brian Donahue has lived and worked in Emeryville for 28 years. He and his wife, and young daughter, live in the Emeryville Artists’ Cooperative. Brian has been a longtime activist, working for transparent government and better of quality of life for the residents; he’s not very popular with the City Council majority.

Developer To Get $10 Million and Street Widening

Residents Might Get a Park – in 20 Years

by Reem Assil

One of Emeryville’s biggest development proposals received a green light last month, when the City Council gave its approval to a major overhaul of the Emeryville Public Market site. The plan is for a sprawling mall and office at the city’s heart. Voting 4-1, the City Council approved a 25-year development plan that will add hundreds of housing units, additional commercial space, and a park to the existing site. The site now has a food court, an office building, and movie theater.

Known officially as the Emeryville Marketplace, the current site is bounded by Shellmound Way, the railroad tracks, 64^th Street, and Christie Avenue. The proposed expansion would add additional office space, 52,000 square feet of retail, and up to 340 new housing units on what are now large parking lots.

Council Member John Fricke, the lone dissenter, voiced three major concerns:

• TMG Partners, the project’s developer, requested and received approvals locking in zoning approval of any combination of residential/commercial/retail for 25 years. Fricke strongly objected to the fact that under the proposal, construction of the future park isn’t required before the year 2028, 20 years from now.
• The plan involves extensive street-widening that will exacerbate the city’s traffic woes and conflicts with the city’s stated goal of encouraging more walking and bicycling.
• TMG Partners is requesting $10 million from the city. The money will likely pay for a parking garage. TMG claims that the return on the city’s investment over the next 25 years will be $60 million. But, the city has yet to recoup any of the millions it gave to Madison Marquette for construction of the Bay Street mall’s parking garage, although similar repayment promises were made. The $10 million for the Marketplace garage will be taken from the city’s fund for capital improvements, like public parks and recreational areas.

Many residents spoke on Tuesday night with similar concerns, particularly the seeming unwillingness of the city to take a stand and ask developers for more community benefits. People also said that street widening would result in more traffic, further compromising quality of life for city residents.

Juanita Carrol Young, a Terraces resident, spoke of “real tangible returns” on investment.
“I expect things like bicycle and pedestrian safety, funding for the schools so that my daughter Larissa can have the best education and opportunities possible, and family-sustaining jobs,” she said.

Reem Assil is a community organizer for EBASE. Reem is inspired by both her love for community and her understanding of the importance of building power in the labor movement. Her formative experience with coalition building and community organizing comes out of organizing in the Arab American community, in which her heart lies.

by Juanita Carroll Young

My activism was born out of personal experience. You see, my 11-year-old daughter and I were evicted from the Woodfin Suites Hotel in Emeryville last year. We resided there for close to three years while waiting for our Emeryville condo to be repaired of a construction defect. In that time, we became friends with many Woodfin employees, and I voted for Measure C, Emeryville’s Living Wage Law, because I saw firsthand the hotel’s difficult working conditions. Measure C passed, but the Woodfin refused to comply. When the workers took to the streets in protest, they were fired. The whole time, my daughter and I stood in solidarity with the workers, joining them in protest marches, at community or city council meetings, in delegations, and at the big “Let My People Work” march, the largest march in Emeryville’s history.

Since we didn’t work there, the Woodfin couldn’t fire us. Instead, they threw us out — they evicted a mother and daughter because Mommy had spoken out in support of the workers. Woodfin General Manager Hugh MacIntosh gave us one month’s notice, and no explanation, but he told the media, “We can’t afford to have her here any longer” because, he said, my actions hurt the Woodfin’s business. Mr. MacIntosh was not concerned that my actions were peaceful, lawful and protected free speech under the First Amendment. My family’s treatment appears to support the popular belief that Woodfin’s management is retaliatory in nature.

The Woodfin is the only hotel in Emeryville that has not complied with the law. Perhaps as a privately-owned hotel group, led by Samuel Hardage, a major player in San Diego’s Republican circles, the Woodfin feels it moves to the beat of a different (more conservative) drummer.

What inspired me to keep going every day through that dark period was the bravery of the 12 hotel workers at the Woodfin (many of them single moms) who lost their jobs after a protracted battle. Like me, they saw their children cry because of the actions of Woodfin management. These workers then held their heads high and continued to talk to the Emeryville City Council and the media, despite many threats from the Woodfin. I feel compelled to continue to do the same.

UPI story (filed under “Odd News”) about our eviction:
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2007/04/23/Family_evicted_from_hotel_it_protested/UPI-90881177361524/

The pertinent eviction law:
If the tenant can show that the landlord is trying to evict him, raise his rent, or otherwise increase his burdens of tenancy in retaliation for his exercise of a legal or constitutional right, then the landlord cannot recover possession from him, or enforce the rent increase or other action. Where the tenant has acted in the exercise of his rights within the past180 days, the landlord is presumed to be acting in retaliation, and the landlord has the burden of proof of a reason for the eviction or other action. Where the eviction is for non-payment of rent, or the notice of termination of tenancy, or rent increase, specifiessatisfactory cause for the action, then the tenant may still raise a defense of retaliation, but the tenant has the burden of proof of retaliation {Civil. Code Sec. 1942.5}.

Juanita Carroll Young was born in a naval hospital in Norfolk, VA to a boilermaker and a registered nurse. She was taught at a young age never to cross a picket line. She works raising funds and writing grants for a local nonprofit and lives in Emeryville with her 13-year-old daughter, her husband, and a little red dog.