Campbell-Washington Emails All PDF

Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Stand for Community Benefits
From: Jessamyn Sabbag [mailto:jessamyn@oaklandrising.org]

Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 5:20 PM
To: Campbell Washington, Annie
Subject: Stand for Community Benefits
Dear Councilmember Campbell-Washington,
On behalf of Oakland Rising and our collaborative partners, Im writing to urge you to include strong
community benefits and project labor agreements in all new developments in Oakland, particularly the
Coliseum City development and the E12th St development. In the face of gentrification and displacement its
critical that each development project creates benefit for our communities including affordable housing, job
training and opportunities for the re-entry population, local hire and living wage, union labor, transit access and
environmental protections.
Particularly of concern regarding the Coliseum City and E12th St projects are that they are public land,
purchased at least in part with taxpayers dollars. Public land should be used for public benefit, even in its sale
and development. While we understand that these projects bring opportunities to generate much needed
revenue for the city, we must have a longer-term vision for our city that allows residents to stay here with a high
quality of life. As new developments come into Oakland, we need you as our elected representative to lead
from a place of values that puts Oaklands residents first.
In the E12th St project, the current plan is for the parcel to be sold to a developer for $5.1 mil to build a 24 story
building that will create 300 luxury housing units that will rent for $3k/month each. Not a single affordable
housing unit is included, and thats unacceptable. Additionally, the developer has no plans to use union labor,
pay a living wage, or even use local labor. We deserve better than this.
We stand with the East Lake United for Justice neighborhood group and their demands, which are as follows:
1. We want an Eastlake neighborhood, District 2, and Oakland where long term working class residents
stay and benefit from sustainable development, and the culture, community, and character of the
neighborhood and city are respected, not displaced.
2. We demand any new housing development at the city owned property on East 12th street be 100%
affordable housing. We do not want a luxury high-rise apartment tower.
1
3. We demand the City suspend the current negotiations with UrbanCore Development LLC and put a
Request for Proposals out to bid publicly with a focus on affordable housing.
4. We demand a more extensive, truly inclusive community visioning process to discuss how this
publicly-owned parcel can benefit the community the best.
5. We want the mayor and City Council to create a real affordable housing plan that ensures sustainable
investment in our communities, not development that leads to displacement.
Similarly in the Coliseum City project, you should ensure that this development includes community benefits-everything won on the Army Base development, plus affordable housing, anti displacement, worker retention,
affordable and accessible transit, and environmental protections. Please reference the specific requests outlined
in this East Bay Express Article: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/activists-shape-oakland-coliseumarea-plan/Content?oid=4222715
I hope that we can count on you to take a stand and do the right thing for the residents of our beloved
city. Please dont hesitate to contact me if youd like to talk further about this.
Thank you.
~ Jessamyn
-Jessamyn Sabbag
Deputy Director
510-261-2600 (office)
415-424-2600 (cell)
www.OaklandRising.org
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies
of the original message.
-Jessamyn Sabbag
Deputy Director
510-261-2600 (office)
415-424-2600 (cell)
www.OaklandRising.org
2
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies
of the original message.
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: sale of 12th St parcel should go to Lake Merritt Park maintenance fund please
From: Karen Hester [mailto:karen@hesternet.net]

Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 5:53 PM
To: Gallo, Noel; Kalb, Dan; Brooks, Desley; At Large; Schaaf, Libby; Campbell Washington, Annie; Reid, Larry; Guillen,
Abel; McElhaney, Lynette
Cc: Naomi Schiff; Rick Rickard; Sandra Threlfall; Levin, Brooke A.; Tora Rocha; Wald, Zachary; Gerard, Jennie; Farmer,
Casey; Dave Campbell
Subject: sale of 12th St parcel should go to Lake Merritt Park maintenance fund please
The Measure DD Community Coalition last week voted to request that the city allocate the proceeds from sale of the
remainder parcel on 12th Street (to Urban Core developers for a 20-story residential development) to a maintenance
fund augmenting the overwhelmed and often-cut park budget. When Measure DD Community Coalition originally
came up with the idea to narrow 12th St., they realized this parcel would be created. Devote this money, created by
DD, to maintaining the lake improvements. (The bond measure can only pay for capital projects.)
It would be important to incorporate more waste receptacles (even better if they have
mosaics) around the park--especially missing at North side and more staff to clean
restrooms.
Thanks,
Karen Hester
karen@hesternet.net
510-654-6346
www.hesternet.net
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: E 12th St parcel issue for Tues CED
appraisal of 11th and Jackson.pdf
From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 5:12 PM
Cc: Simons, Adam J.
Subject: FW: E 12th St parcel issue for Tues CED
Hi Annie,
This weeks topic is the E. 12th Street parcel coming to CED on Tuesday. Im sure youve been following the discussions
at Planning Commission and the Eastlake neighborhood groups efforts to stop the deal and have the City start over by
offering this site for affordable housing.
I think they have done a good job of pointing out the flaws in the way the City set up this deal. Under State surplus
property law, the site should have been offered first for the development of affordable housing. Im not sure what
could be considered more surplus than the remainder parcel from a publicly funded project. Even if the site
somehow could be determined to not meet those requirements, the Citys own ordinance called for a transparent
process where bids are solicited publicly, rather than a deal offered to only two developers in secret.
So the Citys process was flawed from the outset by ignoring those requirements. However, we acknowledge that the
developer has acted in good faith based on the Citys representations, and it would not be pragmatic or fair to just undo
the deal. We do want to make sure, though, that the City secures a reasonable market value for the property and that
some of the proceeds from that sale are programmed for affordable housing.
We urge you to get an appraisal that accurately reflects market value for this important site.
Ive attached two appraisals: the Citys January 2015 appraisal of the E 12th parcel, and a June 2014 appraisal of a site
about a half mile away where an affordable housing project has started construction at 11th and Jackson Streets. The
Jackson appraisal is for a site about 2/3 the size of the E 12th site, and is appraised based on a similar number of units.
Yet, Jackson is appraised at $6.8 million, compared to $5.1 million for the E 12th site. If you look at page 34 of the E 12th
appraisal, and page 41 of the Jackson appraisal, you can see that they actually use two of the same comparable sales: #4
(522-532 20th St) and #5 (4700-4770 Telegraph) of the Jackson appraisal are #5 and #2 of the E 12th appraisal. But they
come to very different conclusions. The E 12th appraisal concludes that the set of comparable sales establishes a value
of $15,500/unit. The Jackson appraisal comps determine a value of $25,000/unit. If the $25,000/unit figure were applied
to the E 12th parcel, the value would be $7,450,000.
Other recent data also indicates the E 12th appraised value is very low. Weve just read about Carmel
Properties purchase of a site a mile away in Jack London Square for a reported $20 million to build 330 units in a
property very similar to the proposed E 12th building. And of course, the City secured an appraisal to support its $22
million purchase of the Brooklyn Basin parcels that might fit 400 units.
While we acknowledge that many of the deal terms for the E 12th parcel were set a while ago, the deal was always going
to be based on market value. The appraisal was just completed a few weeks ago, so there is no valid argument about
longstanding commitments that would apply to the purchase price.
A couple of weeks ago, the Council voted against our urging to upzone the Coliseum sites to the max, using its land use
regulatory authority to provide a windfall profit to a handful of private landowners. Here, you have the opportunity to
take advantage of a similar increase in value derived by City land use decisions, but in this case, one that could benefit
the Oakland community. Please dont just give away that value.
We urge you to program some proceeds from this sale for affordable housing.
The Council acknowledged in 2013 that the end of Redevelopment dictated a new approach to supporting affordable
housing development, and specifically that publicly owned land could be a tool in the absence of public dollars. In the
ordinance about boomerang funds, Council provided not only that 25% of boomerang dollars would be used for
affordable housing starting in 2015, but also 25% of the Citys receipts from land sales from the former redevelopment
agency. The E 12th St parcel bounced between the City and the Agency and we acknowledge it is not on the list of
Agency-owned property covered by the boomerang ordinance. But the principle could easily be applied here, with 25%
of the proceeds from this sale dedicated to affordable housing.
Alternatively, we understand that $4 million was the anticipated proceeds from the sale of this site that was
programmed into the current fiscal years budget. Although the timing will not work for these funds to be available in
current budget year anyways, you could choose to keep that $4 million as anticipated for the general fund and dedicate
the amount over $4 million for affordable housing. Or there could be other rationales/calculations. But however it is
calculated, we urge you to salvage some community benefit from this flawed process, and secure some revenue from
this site that serves the community.
Sorry for the lengthy email. Look forward to talking with you at 9:45am on Monday.
Thanks!
Elissa
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Meeting with Eastlake United for Justice re: Concerns about 12th Street Remainder
- confirmed (KOS)
-----Original Message----From: Simons, Adam J.

Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 7:24 AM
To: Moss, Tomiquia
Cc: Campbell Washington, Annie; Maxson, Nayeli; Ordaz Salto, Karely
Subject: Re: Meeting with Eastlake United for Justice re: Concerns about 12th Street Remainder - confirmed (KOS)
Good morning all,
CM Campbell Washington will not be able to attend this meeting today.
Best,
Adam
Typos courtesy of my iPhone
> On Mar 19, 2015, at 4:43 PM, Moss, Tomiquia <TMoss@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Nayeli,
>
> I just left you a voicemail about this. I dont know if Tomiquia would like CM Washington to be present. I will check in
with her in an hour and get back to you.
>
> In the case that she says yes, is CM Washington available to attend?
>
> Call me if you have any questions.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -----Original Appointment----> From: Ordaz Salto, Karely On Behalf Of Moss, Tomiquia
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 7:28 PM
> To: Moss, Tomiquia; Ordaz Salto, Karely; 'Michael Katz'
> Subject: Meeting with Eastlake United for Justice re: Concerns about
> 12th Street Remainder - confirmed (KOS)
> When: Friday, March 20, 2015 3:00 PM-4:00 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).
> Where: MLS Large Conference Room
>
>
> AGENDA
1
> I. Who we are

> II. Background on the proposed development III. Concerns with the
> proposed development IV. Community asks V. Mayors office response to
> community asks
>
>
> From: Ordaz Salto, Karely
> To: 'Michael Katz'
> Subject: RE: Meeting request for Mayor Schaaf
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thank you for your confirmation. The meeting will take place in the Mayors Large Conference Room (1 Frank Ogawa
Plaza, 3rd Floor).
>
> Will your group have an agenda for the meeting? If so, can you send it to me in advance?
>
> Best,
>
> Karely Ordaz Salto
> Special Assistant | Office of Mayor Libby Schaaf
> 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza 3rd Floor Oakland, CA 94612
> (510) 238-7340 | kmordazsalto@oaklandnet.com
>
> From: Michael Katz [mailto:1michaelkatz1@gmail.com]
> To: Ordaz Salto, Karely
> Subject: Re: Meeting request for Mayor Schaaf
>
> Thank you for your patience, Karely> Friday, March 20th at 3pm works for our group to meet with Ms. Moss. We will be between 7 to 10. Please advise
where we will be meeting.
> Regards,
> Michael
>
>
> Great, thank you.
>
> (510) 238-7340 | kmordazsalto@oaklandnet.com
>
> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 10:25 AM
> To: Ordaz Salto, Karely
> Cc: Campbell Washington, Annie; Moss, Tomiquia
>
> Good morning Karely-
> Thank you for the quick reply. That should work but I'm confirming with my group who can attend. I'll can get back to
you with confirmation and the number of attendees, hopefully by end of day tomorrow but more likely before then.
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Ordaz Salto, Karely <KMOrdazSalto@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
> Good morning Michael,
>
> Hows Friday, March 20th at 3pm in the Mayors Office? How many attendees should we expect?
>
> Thank you,
>
> (510) 238-7340 <tel:%28510%29%20238-7340> |
> kmordazsalto@oaklandnet.com
>
> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 9:41 AM
> To: Moss, Tomiquia
> Cc: Campbell Washington, Annie; Ordaz Salto, Karely
>
> Good morning Ms. Moss,
> I'm following up on my previous correspondence. The 19th does not work for our group. Could the afternoon of the
20th, 23rd, 25th or 27th work for you?
> Thank you,
> Michael
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Michael Katz <1michaelkatz1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ms. Moss,
> Unfortunately, the 19th doesn't work for our group. Could the afternoon of the 20th, 23rd, 25th or 27th work?
> Thank you,
> Michael
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Michael Katz <1michaelkatz1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Councilmember Washington, It was a pleasure to meet with you last week. Thank you for making this introduction to
Ms. Moss.
>
> Ms. Moss,
> As, Councilmember Washington mentioned, I am a member of Eastlake United for Justice. We are a 100+ member
group of neighbors who live in the eastlake neighborhood and are concerned with the city selling tax-payer developed
real estate to private developers for 100% market rate housing.
>
> Thank you for the offer to meet and discuss our concerns. I've reached out to our group confirm if the 19th works for
us and if not other options. Looking forward to meeting you.
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Moss, Tomiquia <TMoss@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
> Thank you Councilmember Washington. Hello Michael, Id be happy to meet with you and your representatives to
discuss your concerns regarding the 12th St Remainder. Im available on Thursday March 19th between 1-2:30pm if
thats a possibility for you. Please me know or suggest another time.
> Best,
> Tomiquia
>
> Tomiquia Moss
> Chief of Staff | Office of the Mayor
> 1 Frank. H. Ogawa Plaza, 3rd Floor, Oakland CA 94612
> Office: 510.238.3141 | Direct: 510.238.7168|Email:
> tmoss@oaklandnet.com
>
> From: Campbell Washington, Annie
> To: Moss, Tomiquia
> Cc: michael
> Subject: Meeting request for Mayor Schaaf
>
> Dear Tomiquia,
>
> Last week I met with a neighborhood group called Eastlake United for Justice. They are concerned about the
housing development on the 12st remainder parcel that Urban Core is working on. They asked if I could connect them
to you. They are interested in meeting with Mayor Schaaf to share their concerns.
>
> Thank you for reaching out to them. Michael Katz is copied on this message and is the liaison for their group.
>
> Warmest regards,
> Annie
>
>
> Annie Campbell Washington
> Oakland City Councilmember, District 4
> (510) 238-7004 <tel:%28510%29%20238-7004>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <meeting.ics>
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Proposed Lake Merritt Development, Case File PLN 14 - 266
From: Darline Mix [mailto:de.louise@att.net]

Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 8:26 PM
To: Gray, Neil D.; DL - City Council; Office of the Mayor; City Administrator's Office
Subject: Proposed Lake Merritt Development, Case File PLN 14 - 266
Mr. Gray:
As you are aware, at the April 1, 2015 planning commission meeting the above referenced development was approved by the commission.
The Development (a 24 story, 298 unit apartment tower) on a public parcel at the South West corner of Lake Merritt at 12 Street and 2nd Ave
on what is now being termed as a "Remainder Parcel" as the result of the 12th Street roadway re-configuration under the DD Lake Merritt
improvement Measure.
My inquiry is this: Is not the City prohibited from selling this parcel for private development as it was originally purchased, developed and
maintained for open space park land and by state statue must remain as such, short of an approval by a majority of the qualified City
electorate
Your report incorrectly indicates, as does the City Council ENA with Urban Core (July 2, 2013) that the parcel in question was created by the
recent realignment of the DD 12th Street project. In fact, the parcel was acquired by the City of Oakland in 1906 under the then, Mayor Mott,
by a condemnation proceeding as part of a larger (million dollar bond measure) park acquisition and park improvement project.
The parcels purchased by the bond measure along with those acquired through condemnation were subsequently developed, improved, and
dedicated as open space park land and as the greater effort to acquire a "green" swath of recreation area around Lake Merritt and the
surrounding land boarding the newly developed channel to the estuary to be known as Peralta Park. All of the land, from the estuary to the
lake, (as the City petitioned the The State Land Commission) was to be (and was) dedicated and deeded to the people in perpetuity as open
space "park land".
Clearly, the parcel in question along with the adjacent parcels was developed as a park, planted with lawn, trees, shrubs, and paved walking
paths were likewise installed. It was maintained as a park and remained as such (over 40 years) until the 12th Street reconfiguration and
expressway in 1951 which swallowed up the entire parcel. Likewise, with the OUSD Administration Building, which should have never been
erected on that "open space" parcel, but nevertheless it remains in the public domain. However, with the School District's recent RFP, that
parcel is no doubt the next battle.
Unarguably, the recent completion of 12th Street project did not create a new parcel nor create a surplus parcel - it simply removed the
roadway created in 1951 returning the parcel to its original intent, (purpose of purchase) an open space park. Without question, it must now
be graded and planted to bring it back to its original state and intent.
Unfortunately this issue is not new. I raised it several times at various DD coalition meetings in the past and with Joel Peters (DD project
director) and most recently, at the first public meeting conducted by the developer in 2013, but to no avail. The City indeed has a very bad
habit of ignoring that which it does not wish to deal with.
The question here and now (as noted above) WHY is the history of this parcel not being properly nor honestly exposed? Why have you and
the Planning Department purposely provided to the public a "false" record and account of this parcel - clearly, you and the City Council are
engaged in fraud and deceit.
David E. Mix
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
12th Street Remainder Parcel-1-22-15-rev1-27 FINAL.pdf

Cc: Simons, Adam J.
Subject: RE: E 12th St parcel issue for Tues CED

To: 'acampbell-washington@Oaklandnet.com'
Cc: asimons@oaklandnet.com
Hi Annie,
1
Thanks!
Elissa
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:52 PM
Maxson, Nayeli

Cc: Simons, Adam J.

Hi Annie,
1
Thanks!
Elissa
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:51 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 12th St Remainder Parcel -- CED
From: Flynn, Rachel

Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:16 AM
Cc: Flores, John; Lane, Patrick; Sawicki, Mark
Subject: 12th St Remainder Parcel -- CED
Hi Annie This property is being handled by Economic Development. Patrick Lane is the lead on it and can discuss with
you the points raised by Elissa Dennis. Im copying him on this e-mail. Thanks, Rachel
From: Campbell Washington, Annie [mailto:ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com]
To: Flores, John; Flynn, Rachel
Hi John and Rachel,

Elissa makes a compelling point about the appraisal of the E. 12th Street remainder parcel. Can you call me to discuss?
(510) 599-8610 cell
Thanks so much,
Annie
Annie Campbell Washington
Oakland City Councilmember, District 4
(510) 238-7004
Hi Annie,
1
Thanks!
Elissa
2
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:51 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Why I support the DDA for the 12th Street Remainder Parcel. - CED Committee
Item 3.
From: Pat Kernighan [mailto:pat.kernighan@gmail.com]

To: DL - City Council
Subject: Why I support the DDA for the 12th Street Remainder Parcel. - CED Committee Item 3.
Greetings Councilmembers and former colleagues,

This is Pat Kernighan, and I'd like to weigh in on the District 2 development issue coming to CED Committee
this Tuesday. I strongly support the staff recommendation to enter into a DDA with Urban Core to build a 24
story market rate residential building on the Twelfth Street Remainder Parcel near the Lake. Here is why:
-- Urban Core complied with all of the City's requirements in the ENA. It is only fair that the City should stick
to the deal it entered into.
-- Oakland needs more market rate housing as well as more affordable housing.
In Oakland, only 153 market rate housing units received building permits in 2014. During the five previous
years, 2009-2013, only 197 multi-family market rate units were built. This is a far cry from meeting the housing
demand due to the thousands of young adults who have been moving to Oakland in the past two years. With so
little new housing coming online, these newcomers end up competing with our longtime residents for the
existing apartments, thus driving rents up alarmingly, as has been the case for the past two years. Building more
market rate housing will ease, not exacerbate, the upward pressure on rents.
Council District 2 was blessed with the completion of several new Affordable Housing projects near the
Twelfth Street Remainder Parcel in the past four years, and one more is on the way.
One of the few silver linings of the recession was that affordable housing developers were able to get good
deals on land and were able to build many new affordable homes in the past four years. Though the need for
affordable housing will always be more than what can feasibly be produced, the good news is that the Lake area
surrounding the site in question had a substantial amount of new affordable housing built in the past four years.
These are the affordable projects:
-Two blocks north of the Remainder Parcel on Second Avenue, a new 92 unit building of affordable housing
was completed last month.
-Five blocks east of the Remainder Parcel, at 7th Ave and E. 11th, Clinton Commons, an affordable building
of 55 units was completed in 2012.
-Just west of the Lake, 70 affordable units at 6th and Oak built in 2012, and a building for seniors at 10th and
Oak in 2010.
1
-The formerly dilapidated Eldridge Gonaway Commons on E. 12th, one block east of the Remainder, was
completed renovated last year.--40 affordable units
-EBALDC is soon to start construction on 71 affordable units at 11th and Jackson, also just west of the Lake.
Given the significant amount of affordable housing recently built in the same neighborhood as the Remainder
Parcel and given that there is also a great unmet need for more market rate housing in Oakland, it would be
reasonable to sell this parcel for use as market rate housing. (The Council always has the prerogative to dedicate
some of the proceeds of the land sale to the affordable housing fund--for instance 25%, which was the set aside
amount for Redevelopment money.) Proceeding with this DDA is also the right thing to do because the City
made an agreement with this developer and should abide by the agreement it made.
I urge you to approve the staff recommendation and enter into the DDA with Urban Core and its financing
partner. Thank you for considering my perspective.
With respect and warm regards,
Pat
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Christine Cherdboonmuang <christine.apocc@gmail.com>

Tuesday, May 05, 2015 11:09 AM
McElhaney, Lynette; Kalb, Dan; Guillen, Abel; Abelforoakland@gmail.com; Campbell
Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks, Desley; Reid, Larry; Kaplan, Rebecca
DL - City Council; Wald, Zachary; Farmer, Casey; Bolotina, Olga; Gerard, Jennie; Kong,
Heidi; Simons, Adam J.; Garzon, Clara; Winston, Ashley; Merriouns, Iris; Jones, Andre;
eastlakeunited@gmail.com
Item#13- Letter re. E.12th St. Parcel from Eastlake United for Justice
EUJ letter to City Council 05.05.15.pdf; EUJ Letter to Planning Commissioners FINAL
04.01.15.pdf
Dear Councilmembers,
Please find attached a letter from Eastlake United for Justice regarding the E. 12th St. Parcel, outlining our
concerns and proposals. Also attached is a previous letter sent to the Oakland Planning Commission last month
with more background information and analysis. Please let us know if you request copies of any other letters
from our ally organizations referenced in our letter to the Council--some of which you have already received.
Thank you for your careful consideration and your commitment to Oakland. See you tonight,
Eastlake United for Justice
May 5, 2015
Oakland City Council
Oakland City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza
Oakland, CA 94612
Dear Council President Gibson McElhaney, Vice Mayor Kaplan, Council President Pro-Tem
Reid, Councilmember Brooks, Councilmember Campbell Washington, Councilmember Gallo,
Councilmember Guilln and Councilmember Kalb:
We, the members of Eastlake United for Justice (EUJ), have spoken with many of you over the
past few months about our concerns regarding the proposed development on the E. 12th St.
Remainder Parcel. The dialogue and learning that has been engendered within this time has
revealed many lessons to us, the community, and, we hope, to the City and its representatives
about the serious need for Accountability, Transparency, Enforcement and Follow-through,
and a more proactive Commitment to ensuring Real Community Benefits from our
economic development and community engagement processes. Today as you shape your
final proposals, cast your votes and provide your analysis of the events that have transpired, we
call on you to take a stand for these four principles that are necessary for truly equitable
development and cultivation of the cultural and economic diversity that makes Oakland unique.
We call on you also to set into motion today clear action steps to ensure that such a misuse
of public land and a flawed community process do not happen moving forward. Decisive
action is needed now to avoid a losing situation for both the community and the city, as you
consider the sale of a valuable public asset for a highly undervalued price, and the authorization
of a development on this public asset that requires no affordable housing in a city undergoing a
crisis of affordability and displacement.
The community has clearly outlined the direct violations of various city and state laws,
policies and codes that are already in place to protect the opportunity, especially on public
land, to develop affordable housing, and thus ensure adequate housing city-wide for all income
levels. The recent letter from Public Advocates and the Public Interest Law Project, the previous
letter from EUJ to the Planning Commission, and the series of letters to the City from East Bay
Housing Organizationscall for redress of the Citys violations of the state Surplus Lands Act,
the citys Housing Element, the Lake Merritt Station Area Plan, the citys Real Property
Acquisition and Disposition Ordinance, and other laws.
These letters and direct testimony from the community have also documented a nontransparent development process for this parcel, in which no members of the public were
notified about this development until after the approval of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
with UrbanCore, LLC; and only two community meetings were held, 15 months apart, facilitated
by the developer, exclusively in English, and for which notice was given only to landowners and
not tenants within a 300 foot radius of the development site. There was no opportunity for the
community to provide feedback before the RFP was developed and sent out or before a
developer was selected, in order to ensure that the development of this public land parcel require

and prioritize affordable housing. The RFP process was selective and private, not competitive
and open.
In addition to exposing these shortcomings, EUJ has also refuted the claims that it is not possible
to develop affordable housing on this site. We presented to CED and directly to many
councilmembers the attached budget projection for an affordable housing development that
could be built on the E. 12th St. Remainder Parcel, drawn from calculations of existing
affordable housing funding sources and the averages of real numbers from in-construction or
soon-to-be-constructed affordable housing developments in Oakland and the East Bay. Mr.
Johnson of UrbanCore, LLC himself has acknowledged the accuracy of these calculations upon
being shown them.
We commend Councilmember Guillns leadership at the CED committee in calling for
reappraisal of the E. 12th St. Remainder Parcel, developing a community benefits package for
this development, and engaging with us in dialogue several times in a true effort to be responsive
to his constituents. However, we have also shared with Councilmember Guilln and many of
you that those proposed community benefits do not reflect concerns and needs that we and
other Oakland and Eastlake representatives have expressed. In addition, they were not
developed using any sort of public or deep community engagement process, and thus are not
authentic community benefits.
Thus, Eastlake United for Justice urges you, our Councilmembers, to support the following
proposals that will win real Community Benefits for Oakland from the E. 12th St. Remainder
Parcel. These proposals reflect the recommendations made by the Oakland Planning
Commission on April 14th that City Council use the sales proceeds of the E. 12th Remainder
Parcel for community benefits and affordable housing, and encourage the City Council to
negotiate for Community Benefits to be required in the DDA for the final sale, as well as their
stated intention to examine ways to amend the Planning Code to facilitate stronger community
engagement and noticing requirements for development projects. Our proposals also reflect the
recommendations of the CED Committee to set aside a portion of the proceeds from the sales
of the E. 12th Remainder Parcel for affordable housing and Measure DD Lake improvements.
Our proposals are as follows:
E. 12th St. Project-Specific Demands
1. Any development on the E 12th parcel must include a percentage of on-site, low-income
affordable housing. Affordable housing is one of the most pressing needs in District 2 and
all of Oakland, and District 2 constituents have clearly outlined their desire to see more
affordable housing development. To pursue a housing development on publicly owned-land,
where the city has the capacity to require affordable housing to be built, is irresponsible and a
direct violation of its own laws and policies.
2. Require reappraisal of the E.12th St. Remainder Parcel development site to ensure that the
City is receiving full market value for this prime public land by the Lake. The appraised
value of this site has been set at a level far below that of comparable sites in the City. (The

City purchased land at Brooklyn Basin for $50,000/unit, and is selling land at E. 12th St. for
$17,000/unit. The 11th and Jackson site was appraised at $25,000/unit in June 2014.)
3. Require that 50% of the sale proceeds go directly to fund new affordable housing
construction in District 2, and create a transparent tracking mechanism to ensure the funds
are used for such purposes.
4. Include in the DDA terms under Section 13, Limitations on Property Rights, language
to the following effect: If UrbanCore purchases the E 12th St. Remainder Parcel, they cannot
sell the parcel to another entity, developer or otherwise, until three years after the project is
completed and occupied. If Urban Core, LLC or UDR, Inc. and/or any holders of financial
interest in the E. 12th St. Remainder Parcel wish to sell their interest in the project, then the
City would have the Right of First Refusal to purchase back the land at the original sale
price. If UrbanCore, LLC and/or UDR, Inc. wish to sell to a different purchaser at a different
price, then Urban Core/UDR could purchase the City's right at the negotiated new sales price.
Long-Term Equitable Development Policy Solutions to Pursue
5. Create legislation that establishes a clear requirement and plan to develop affordable
housing on any public land parcels within the Citys existing public land inventory that
have been identified as suitable for residential development. Implement continuous
evaluation of this plan in its contribution towards the Regional Housing Needs Allocation
goals for local low-income housing stock.
6. Create an administrative program to implement and enforce the 2014 Tenant Protection
Ordinance. This entails an umbrella administrative office that houses within the city tenant
protections services, housing code enforcement, and the existing Housing Assistance Center
within one fully staffed office.
7. Create legislation that requires the City to provide adequate and appropriate public
notice of the intent to lease or sell land for development, residential or otherwise, and to
provide adequate community engagement opportunities to directly inform the development
of this land.
New notification and community engagement requirements should include, at a minimum:
a) written notice in all of the languages most commonly spoken in the area within 14
calendar days of notice by mail to tenants and landowners within a mile radius of the
proposed development site
b) a series of community feedback sessions throughout the development process, which are
co-facilitated by representatives of both the community and the City, and occur prior to
the RFP process, prior to ENA approval, and prior to approval of permits and DDAs
c) land use decisions regarding public land such as the intent to dispose of a public parcel or
issue an RFP for its development, must be made in public meetings and not in closed
session meetings.

We thank you for the opportunities we have had for direct dialogue with many of you about
these concerns, and appreciate your serious consideration of these recommendations for how you
can best serve the public good with our public resourcesnow, and moving forward.
Respectfully submitted,
Eastlake United for Justice and our 1,500 petition signers
cafghbdcafghbdcafghbdcafghbdcafghbd
Eastlake United for Justices call for affordable housing and real community benefits on the E.
12th Remainder Parcel is endorsed by the following organizations and institutions:
East Bay Housing Organizations (EBHO)
Causa Justa::Just Cause (CJJC)
Oakland Tenants Union (OTU)
Public Advocates
Alameda County Public Health Department, Place Matters
Urban Strategies Council
SEIU 1021
Oakland Education Association (OEA)
Classroom Struggle
Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)
Communities for a Better Environment (CBE)
East Bay Solidarity Network
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE)
Black Seed
Asians for Black Lives
Oakland Rising
Transform
Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE)
Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice (CURYJ)
TOTAL Costs
per unit
41,023,333
477015.5
733,334
1,500,000
projects
projects
Within current averages for per unit total costs.
5,100,000
27,933,333
1,333,333
1,966,667
1,423,333
233,333
800,000
projects
projects
projects
projects
projects
projects
41,023,333
average of 3 current projects with similar unit mix/financing

3,633,333
average of 3 current projects with similar unit mix/financing
3,133,333
Land purchased at full appraisal price
0
Based on recent City of Oakland HOME funding award
2,750,000
(Initial estimate of $3 million avail 2016)
1,500,000
(initial funding round of $130 million to be divided by appx 20 projects statewide)
6,000,000
not used in this budget
0
0
based on recent awards to similar size/ occupancy projects
850,000
based on recent awards to similar size/ occupancy projects
23,000,000
156,667
Completion 2019
Development Costs
Land acquisition
Appraisal price
Construction (including contingency)
average of 3 current
Architecture/engineering
Permits and fees
Construction loan fees/costs/interest
Legal/ consulting/ tax credit syndication fees
Other soft costs
(marketing, furnishings, const mgmt, security, taxes, insurance, title, etc.)
Reserves
Developer Fee
TOTAL Sources
Sources of Funds
Perm loan supported by tenant rents
Perm loan supported by Section 8
Land donation
City funds (HOME)
County (Boomerang)
State funds (AHSC)
HOPWA
Housing Authority
State/ County MHSA
FHLB AHP
Investor equity- Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program
Deferred developer fee
Affordable Family Housing at E. 12th Street Parcel

Budget for 85 unit sample project
A note from Eastlake United for Justice about affordable housing at the E. 12th St.
Remainder Parcel
In the course of our conversations with various Councilpersons we heard the mistaken idea
expressed that building affordable housing on this site was financially unfeasible. So we
consulted with experts in the field of financing affordable housing to determine if a 100%
affordable housing project could be built within the fiscal limits that the City of Oakland is
constrained by. We explored possible sources of funding for affordable housing at the E. 12th
parcel and identified some existing and some new funds for the parcel. We also analyzed the
costs of recently built and/or funded affordable housing projects in Oakland and other Alameda
County cities.
Attached you will find a simplified budget for a 100% affordable project at the E. 12th parcel.
The E. 12th site could fit a project in the vicinity of 90-100 family size apartments, in a mix of
one, two, and three bedroom units. The sources of funding listed are sources that will be
available for projects seeking funding in 2016 and beyond. The amounts included in our budget
from those sources are based on amounts awarded to projects of similar size and with similar
financing. Where a new source is listed, the anticipated award size for E. 12th Street was arrived
at according to the sources guidelines.
Similarly, the project costs are based on projects of similar size and construction type. The costs
come from an average taken of three current projects between 71 and 100 units in size.
Regulations of some of the funding sources determine some of the costs, and when there is a
maximum amount allowable we factored in the average project size of the three projects, an 86
unit project. The last number in the budget is the calculation of what this affordable housing
development would cost per unit. The number calculated fits well into the current average of
many affordable housing projects.
We acknowledge that since the demise of the Redevelopment Agencies, it has been very hard for
Oakland and other cities to honor their affordable housing needs with new units. However, there
are now a few new sources coming on line, and luckily they can be utilized well for this site,
which will score very well in the State of CA competitive rounds. This is another reason why it
is so important to build affordable housing on this public site, because it can better utilize these
competitive sources than other sites could and since the resources from the State of CA are
competitive Oakland needs every advantage it can get.
Maxson, Nayeli
Pattillo, Chris <pattillo@pgadesign.com>
Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:02 AM
DL - City Council
25% for Parks Maintenance
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mayor Schaaf and Members of the Oakland City Council,

I am writing to encourage you to support the proposal to set aside 25% of the proceeds from the sale of the 12th
Street parcel for on-going parks maintenance at Lake Merritt. This parcel of land was created as a result of the
community driven effort to reconfigure 12th Street to create the now beautiful Lake Merritt Boulevard. It did
not exist prior to this effort. It is land we did not have before because it was covered by lanes of roadway.
From the very beginning the community viewed the sale of this parcel as a way to off set the costs of the now
completed park improvements. This proposal makes perfect sense. We have invested a great deal of public
money in Lake Merritt. If we do not maintain it that investment will have been wasted.
Maintenance is essential. Please support this brilliant idea to set aside 25% of the proceeds to create a park
maintenance fund.
Chris Pattillo, FASLA
Chair, Oakland Planning Commission
Chris Pattillo
FASLA
Principal
PGAdesign
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
444 17th Street
Oakland, CA 94612
Direct | 510.550.8855
Main | 510.465.1284
PGAdesign.com
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Darline Mix <de.louise@att.net>

Tuesday, May 05, 2015 4:31 PM
Kalb, Dan; McElhaney, Lynette; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Reid, Larry;
Brooks, Desley; At Large; Kaplan, Rebecca; Guillen, Abel; Office of the Mayor; DL - City
Council; staff@ebho.org; elakeunited@gmail.com; editor@eastbayexpress.com
Urban Core Proposed Lake Merritt Development, File PLN 14 - 266
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 3:54 PM, Darline Mix <de.louise@att.net> wrote:
Dear City Council Members:

Below is a copy of my letter sent to the full council, mayor, city administrator, and planning, Neil Gray of April
7, 2015.
Mr. Gray:
As you are aware at the April 1, 2015 planning commission meeting the above
referenced development was approved by the commission. The Development (a 24
story, 298 unit apartment tower) on a public parcel at the South West corner of Lake
Merritt at 12th Street and 2nd Ave on what is now being termed as a "Remainder Parcel"
as the result of the 12th Street roadway re-configuration under the DD Lake Merritt
My inquiry is this: Is not the City prohibited from selling this parcel for private
development as it was originally purchased, developed and maintained for open space
park land and by state statue must remain as such, short of an approval by a majority of
the qualified City electorate.
Your report incorrectly indicates, as does the City Council ENA with Urban Core (July 2,
2013) that the parcel in question was created by the recent realignment of the DD 12th
Street project. In fact, the parcel was acquired by the City of Oakland in 1906 under
then, Mayor Mott, by a condemnation proceeding as part of a larger (million dollar bond
measure) park acquisition and park improvement project.
The parcels purchased by the bond measure along with those acquired through
condemnation were subsequently developed, improved, and dedicated as open space
park land and as the greater effort to acquire a "green" swath of recreation area around
Lake Merritt and the surrounding land boarding the newly developed channel to the
estuary to be known as Peralta Park. All of the land, from the estuary to the lake, (as
the City petitioned The State Land Commission) was to be (and was) dedicated and
deeded to the people in perpetuity as open space "park land".
Clearly, the parcel in question along with the adjacent parcels was to be developed as a
park, planted with lawn, trees, shrubs, and paved walking paths were likewise installed.
It was maintained as a park and remained as such (over 40 years) until the 12th Street
reconfiguration and expressway in 1951 which swallowed up,the entire parcel. Likewise,
with the OUSD Administration Building, which should have never been erected on that
"open space" parcel, but nevertheless it remains in the public domain. However, with the
School District's recent RFP, that parcel is no doubt the next battle.
Unarguably, the recent completion of the 12th Street project did not create a new parcel
nor create a surplus parcel - it simply removed the roadway created in 1951 returning
the parcel to its original intent, (purpose of purchase) an open space park. Without
question, it must now be graded and planted to bring it back to its original state and
intent.
Unfortunately this issue is not new. I raised it several times at various DD coalition
meetings in the past and with Joel Peters (DD project director) and most recently, at the
first public meeting conducted by the developer in 2013, but to no avail. The City indeed
has a very bad habit of ignoring that which it does not wish to deal with.
The question here and now (as noted above) is WHY? Why is the history of this parcel
not being properly nor honestly exposed? Why have you and the Planning Department
purposely provided to the public a "false" record and account of this parcel - clearly, you
and the City Council are engaged in fraud and deceit.
David E. Mix
Additional comments:
Unfortunately, with the exception of Mr. Gray, no one has bothered to respond to my inquiry and unfortunately
his response simply put the onus on the City surveyor.
Most Council members I spoke with claimed no knowledge of my letter nor of the claims made therein. Hence,
why it is being re-sent to you now. As an observation it is difficult to understand how you can vote on an issue
without being completely informed.
Neither was this issue (land use restriction) presented at the April 14th CEDA meeting by the Planning Dept. or
any of the Council Members on the committee.
In a short conversation with Patrick Lane yesterday he claims the City Attorney has looked into it, but has not
rendered any type of written opinion or comment. This matter clearly deserves a complete analysis and
written opinion. The City Council simply may not vote to sell this parcel without first determining
whether it has a legal right to do so and verifying a "clear title" to the land.
Lastly and most importantly, there is absolutely no reason to sell this parcel for housing. As indicated in the
Lake Merritt Station Area Plan there are several other very suitable sites for housing - market rate or low
income. There clearly is no shortage of buildable lots for this area - this begs the question, why is this developer
so fixated on this particular public parcel. Further, neither can the City show a need for the $5 million when it is
presently waisting $5.9 million for new (totally unneeded) parking meters in Montclair, replacing the recently
installed kiosks.
2
David E. Mix
Maxson, Nayeli
Karen Hester <karen@hesternet.net>
Friday, May 01, 2015 9:41 AM
DL - City Council; Office of the Mayor
Wald, Zachary; Farmer, Casey; Bolotina, Olga
supporting affordable housing at E 12th St parcel and maintenance fund for DD
improvements at Lake
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Members of the Council,

Please consider how important the issue of the E 12th St parcel is for the long term. All the studies show that we are in a
housing CRISIS and to have the council turn a deaf ear would not be wise. There are major issues with Urban Core (like
not paying back the City of SF) as exposed by the East Bay Express. Why are we in the mess we are? Lackluster rfp
process from the City in 2012-13. You have the power to undo the damage and act responsibly but agreeing to a
reasonable proposal:
1. Include affordable housing on the E 12th site and ensure that all public lands be used for affordable housing in the
future.
2. Set aside 50% of the E 12th sale proceeds for affordable housing.
3. Undergo an updated, more accurate appraisal of the land so the city doesn't get shortchanged.
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council

to approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED
Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds
be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake
Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open
space improvements around the city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital
funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake
improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and
maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through
Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park visitor enhancements, now known
as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's recommendation deserves
your support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on
the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Karen Hester
karen@hesternet.net
510-654-6346
hesternet.net
Bites at the Lake: Mobile Food and Family Fun every Sunday
Bites Off Broadway: Fridays starting May 15
1
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Justin Rausa <justin.rausa@gmail.com>

Tuesday, May 05, 2015 1:05 AM
McElhaney, Lynette
DL - City Council; Office of the Mayor
Re: Affordable Housing for E12th
Levy.2010.EffectsFromLivingInMixedIncomeCommunitiesForLowIncomeFams.PDF;
Tach.2014.IncomeMixingAcrossScales_UrbanInstitute.pdf
Good evening Councilmember McElhaney:

As an Oakland resident in your district, I believe our city should use public lands on E 12th for affordable
housing. There are multiple local groups, like Causa Justa::Just Cause and Urban Habitat, who consistently put
the issue of housing affordability front and center, and I also wanted to highlight a recent paper from the Urban
Institute that stresses the need for mixed income housing to be considered a priority at a district scale, not only
at a building level.
E 12th could be the first step in a longer-term city-owned land strategy that would give Oakland residents the
opportunity to compete in a market driven by the explosion of incomes in Silicon Valley. In addition, as a
public health commissioner participating in the Alameda County Public Health Department's accreditation
process, the issue of affordability has come up for Oakland's small businesses and residents alike. Thus, I
respectfully urge the City Council to:
1. Include affordable housing on the E 12th site and ensure that all public lands be used for affordable
housing in the future.
These requests are also personal. My wife and I had no choice but to leave our last apartment, and now in our
new complex that does not fall under rent control, our rents were raised 16% last year. We both work in social
justice nonprofits and are committed to this city but intention in the face of this affordability crisis is wishful
thinking.
Folks with higher incomes have no trouble moving into the city at market rate -- it's the people who are
committed to the sustainable future of Oakland and its history that are at risk and need your support.
Thank you,
Justin
-Justin Rausa
justin.rausa@gmail.com
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:51 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
From: Pat Kernighan [mailto:pat.kernighan@gmail.com]

Subject: Re: FW: E 12th St parcel issue for Tues CED
Hi Annie!
Thanks for the note back. Yes, I'll take a look and get back to you this afternoon.
Pat
On Apr 13, 2015 9:07 AM, "Campbell Washington, Annie" <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
Hi Pat,
I so appreciate you writing to me about this project. I really value your input. Will you take a look at this email
from Elissa Dennis and let me know what you think about the appraisal of this property?
Thank you,
Annie

(510) 238-7004

Cc: Simons, Adam J.

Hi Annie,
This weeks topic is the E. 12th Street parcel coming to CED on Tuesday. Im sure youve been following the
discussions at Planning Commission and the Eastlake neighborhood groups efforts to stop the deal and have
the City start over by offering this site for affordable housing.
I think they have done a good job of pointing out the flaws in the way the City set up this deal. Under State
surplus property law, the site should have been offered first for the development of affordable housing. Im
not sure what could be considered more surplus than the remainder parcel from a publicly funded project.
Even if the site somehow could be determined to not meet those requirements, the Citys own ordinance called
for a transparent process where bids are solicited publicly, rather than a deal offered to only two developers in
secret.
So the Citys process was flawed from the outset by ignoring those requirements. However, we acknowledge
that the developer has acted in good faith based on the Citys representations, and it would not be pragmatic or
fair to just undo the deal. We do want to make sure, though, that the City secures a reasonable market
value for the property and that some of the proceeds from that sale are programmed for affordable
housing.
Ive attached two appraisals: the Citys January 2015 appraisal of the E 12th parcel, and a June 2014 appraisal of
a site about a half mile away where an affordable housing project has started construction at 11th and Jackson
Streets. The Jackson appraisal is for a site about 2/3 the size of the E 12th site, and is appraised based on a
similar number of units. Yet, Jackson is appraised at $6.8 million, compared to $5.1 million for the E 12th site.
If you look at page 34 of the E 12th appraisal, and page 41 of the Jackson appraisal, you can see that they
actually use two of the same comparable sales: #4 (522-532 20th St) and #5 (4700-4770 Telegraph) of the
Jackson appraisal are #5 and #2 of the E 12th appraisal. But they come to very different conclusions. The E 12th
appraisal concludes that the set of comparable sales establishes a value of $15,500/unit. The Jackson appraisal
comps determine a value of $25,000/unit. If the $25,000/unit figure were applied to the E 12th parcel, the value
would be $7,450,000.
Properties purchase of a site a mile away in Jack London Square for a reported $20 million to build 330 units in
a property very similar to the proposed E 12th building. And of course, the City secured an appraisal to support
its $22 million purchase of the Brooklyn Basin parcels that might fit 400 units.
While we acknowledge that many of the deal terms for the E 12th parcel were set a while ago, the deal was
always going to be based on market value. The appraisal was just completed a few weeks ago, so there is no
valid argument about longstanding commitments that would apply to the purchase price.
A couple of weeks ago, the Council voted against our urging to upzone the Coliseum sites to the max, using its
land use regulatory authority to provide a windfall profit to a handful of private landowners. Here, you have the
opportunity to take advantage of a similar increase in value derived by City land use decisions, but in this case,
one that could benefit the Oakland community. Please dont just give away that value.
The Council acknowledged in 2013 that the end of Redevelopment dictated a new approach to supporting
affordable housing development, and specifically that publicly owned land could be a tool in the absence of
public dollars. In the ordinance about boomerang funds, Council provided not only that 25% of boomerang
dollars would be used for affordable housing starting in 2015, but also 25% of the Citys receipts from land
sales from the former redevelopment agency. The E 12th St parcel bounced between the City and the Agency
and we acknowledge it is not on the list of Agency-owned property covered by the boomerang ordinance. But
the principle could easily be applied here, with 25% of the proceeds from this sale dedicated to affordable
housing.
programmed into the current fiscal years budget. Although the timing will not work for these funds to be
available in current budget year anyways, you could choose to keep that $4 million as anticipated for the
3
general fund and dedicate the amount over $4 million for affordable housing. Or there could be other
rationales/calculations. But however it is calculated, we urge you to salvage some community benefit from this
flawed process, and secure some revenue from this site that serves the community.
Thanks!
Elissa
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:50 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: East 12th Street Remainder Parcel
EBHO Letter to Oakland CED re 12th St Remainder Parcel.pdf; Oakland Housing
production 1999-2014.pdf
From: Jeffrey Levin [mailto:jeff@ebho.org]

Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:50 AM
To: Reid, Larry; McElhaney, Lynette; Campbell Washington, Annie; Kaplan, Rebecca; Brooks, Desley; Gallo, Noel; Guillen,
Abel; Kalb, Dan
Cc: Gloria Bruce
Subject: East 12th Street Remainder Parcel
Dear Councilmembers:
Attached please find a letter from East Bay Housing Organizations regarding the sale of the City-owned East
12th Street Remainder Parcel. This item is on the Community and Economic Development Committee agenda
for this afternoon (April 14), and will be heard by the full Council on April 21.
Please feel free to contact me or Gloria Bruce if you have any questions.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jeffrey P. Levin
Policy Director
East Bay Housing Organizations
538 9th Street, Suite 200 | Oakland, CA 94607
510-663-3830 x316
jeff@ebho.org
NOTE: I am generally in the office only on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, so I may not be able to reply to your e-mail right away.
Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.
Visit us at www.EBHO.org and follow us on Facebook and Twitter!

Celebrate affordable homes: May 8-17th is EBHO's Affordable Housing Week! Click here for a full calendar of events and join us for
our Kick-Off Celebration on May 8th. Sponsor or buy tickets today!
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:50 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Measure DD Remainder Parcel: Item 3 on CED agenda
dd_coalition_CED_ April 14 2015.pdf; ATT2969289.htm
From: Naomi Schiff [mailto:Naomi@17th.com]

Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:46 AM
To: Campbell Washington, Annie; McElhaney, Lynette; Kaplan, Rebecca; Reid, Larry
Subject: Measure DD Remainder Parcel: Item 3 on CED agenda
Attached please find a brief letter from the Measure DD Coalition, rearding proceeds from the potential sale of
the 12th Street remainder parcel.
------------------------------Naomi Schiff
Seventeenth Street Studios
410 12th Street, Suite 300
Oakland, CA 94607
510-835-1717
www.17th.com
Just a few steps from the 12th Street BART station
Oakland Measure DD
Community Coalition
April 13, 2015
Members of the Community and Economic Development Committee
City of Oakland
1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza
Oakland, CA 94612
Dear Council Members:
Oaklands Measure DD Community Coalition voted on January 19, 2015 to advocate budget
allocations to protect the substantial investment in Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Enormous excitement, increased visitation, and media attention have focused on the popular Lake
Merritt and Channel improvements, and have spurred interest in nearby development. However,
these enhancements require upkeep that by law cannot be funded by Measure DD bond proceeds,
which are restricted to capital projects. The taxpayers long-term investment requires maintaining
landscaping and providing attractive, clean, park facilities to enhance recreation, tourism, and
commerce. Yet, existing maintenance budgets have been cut, and are now totally insufficient.
The DD Coalition therefore requests that the CED Committee recommend devoting at least
50% of the proceeds from sale of the Measure DD remainder parcel to preserve and
maintain the new Lake Merritt and channel improvements, which represent a public
investment of more than $100 million from the bond and nearly $40 million from matching
grants.*
At the outset of the ambitious project to reconceive 12th Street/Lake Merritt Boulevard, the
Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt (CALM) realized that this remainder parcel would result.
We envisioned that its sale could help support the continued improvement of the Lake Merritt
environment. Now, we respectfully request that funds from the sale be devoted to the
longterm maintenance and repair of the Measure DD improvements.
Almost 80% of Oakland citizens voted for the DD bond measure. We must ensure that these wellloved improvements are not threatened with neglect. We should strongly support the publics
investment and faith in its city government by funding maintenance at a sustainable level.
The Measure DD Community Coalition was formed in 2003 and sanctioned by the Oakland City
Council to provide public input concerning projects and expenditures designated in the 2002
Oakland Trust for Clean Water and Safe Parks Measure DD Bond. DD is an inclusive coalition
with active participation by numerous community members and Oakland organizations and
agencies.
Sincerely,
Naomi Schiff
Committee on Funding for Measure DD Improvements
Oakland Measure DD Community Coalition
*Of $60 million in grants so far, $40 was for Lake Merritt and Lake Merritt Channel. Of $100 million allocated by the
bond measure to Lake Merritt and channel openings, about $85 million has been spent to date.
Oakland Measure DD Community Coalition: www.waterfrontaction.org/dd
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:50 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Alameda County Public Health Department - Comments on East 12th St Remainder
Parcel
From: Levitt, Zoe, Public Health, OOD [mailto:Zoe.Levitt@acgov.org]

To: Reid, Larry
Cc: McElhaney, Lynette; At Large; Campbell Washington, Annie; City Clerk; Kahn, Kelley; Davis M.D., Muntu, Public
Health, OOD; Watkins-Tartt, Kimi, Public Health, OOD
Subject: Re: Alameda County Public Health Department - Comments on East 12th St Remainder Parcel
Dear Chair Reid and Councilmembers,

Please accept the attached comment letter on the East 12th Street Remainder Parcel (Item #3 on todays CED meeting
agenda) on behalf of Dr. Muntu Davis, County Health Officer for Alameda County.
All the best,
Zo Levitt
Local Policy Associate | Place Matters
Health Equity Policy and Planning | Office of the Director (OOD)
Alameda County Public Health Department
P: 510-268-4290 | F: 510-268-7012
1000 Broadway, 5th Floor | Oakland, CA 94607
zoe.levitt@acgov.org | www.acphd.org | www.facebook.com/PlaceMattersAC
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:49 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Protest - BFO1
From: Parlette, Nancy

To: DL - OPD Executive Notifications
Subject: FW: Protest - BFO1
Sorry.I meant..1200 block of Lakeshore.

From: Parlette, Nancy
To: DL - OPD Executive Notifications
Subject: Protest - BFO1
Good Morning,
At 0803 hrs. the Oakland Police Communications Section received notification of a small protest in the 1200 bulk of
Lakeshore Av. Currently there are approximately 50 protestors in the street blocking traffic. They have stated that they
are protesting the East 12th Parcel Building.
Officers are enroute to monitor the group.
Thank you,
Nancy S. Parlette
Police Communications Supervisor
Oakland Police Department
Communications Section
(510) 777-8801
nparlette@oaklandnet.com
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:49 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Land Sale Proceeds of the 12th Street "remainder parcel"
Maintenance-Measure DD Lake Merritt.docx
From: Oakland Heritage Alliance [mailto:info@oaklandheritage.org]

Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 5:40 PM
To: Office of the Mayor; Kalb, Dan; McElhaney, Lynette; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks, Desley; Reid,
Larry; At Large; Guillen, Abel
Subject: Land Sale Proceeds of the 12th Street "remainder parcel"
Please see attached letter.

Joann Pavlinec & Chrisna Herd
Administrave Directors
Oakland Heritage Alliance
446 17th Street, #301
Oakland, CA 94612
510-763-9218
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
Wednesday, June 17, 2015 11:35 AM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 12th Street Remainder Parcel
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office of Councilmember Annie Campbell Washington
City of Oakland, District 4
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 3:49 PM
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: 12th Street Remainder Parcel
From: Dennis Rothhaar [mailto:dkrothhaar@gmail.com]

Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 9:38 AM
Subject: 12th Street Remainder Parcel
Dear Councilmembers The refashioning of the area where 12th Street runs by the lake is a tremendous success. The way Oaklanders
have embraced it far exceeds my optimistic expectations. Every time I'm there I see flocks of people having a
wonderful time doing a wide variety of things - walking, skateboarding, bike-riding, picnicing, and talking to
people they've just met. We need to sustain this treasure and make it even better.
The CED Committee has recommended that 25% f the proceeds from the sale of the "remainder parcel" created
by the realignment of 12th Street be dedicated to maintenance of the Measure DD improvements to Lake
Merritt. Please adopt their recommendation when you take action on the remainder parcel. This area is a big
part of what's making Oakland better. Don't turn back.
Dennis Rothhaar
555 - 10th St. #119
Oakland, CA 94607
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
Wednesday, June 17, 2015 11:38 AM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Please support the CED Committee's recommendation
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office of Councilmember Annie Campbell Washington City of Oakland, District 4
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
-----Original Message----From: Campbell Washington, Annie [mailto:ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com]

To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Please support the CED Committee's recommendation
-----Original Message----From: Jeff Norman [mailto:jeffnorman@sharedground.org]

Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 10:42 AM
Subject: Please support the CED Committee's recommendation
As a 30-year resident of Oakland, I am writing you to urge the City Council to approve the April 14, 2015
recommendation of the CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted
to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant open space improvements around the city in decades. However, as you
know, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake improvements. With its
greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
It was only through the Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt
Boulevard, that the "remainder parcel" was created. I urge you to include the CED Committee's recommendation in your
action on the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Jeff Norman
jeffnorman@sharedground.org
www.sharedground.org
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:48 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt Needed
From: Christopher P. Hadley [mailto:cphadley@pacbell.net]

Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 1:54 PM
Cc: Oakland Heritage Alliance
Subject: Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt Needed
Dear Councilmember,
We are writing you as members of the Oakland Heritage Alliance (OHA) and urge the Council to
approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the
12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for needed maintenance of
Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space improvements
around the city in decades, including accessible walking and bike paths. However, Measure DD's
capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake improvements. With its
greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the current park staff
can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through Measure DD's
pedestrian, bicycle, and park visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The
CED Committee's recommendation deserves your support. We urge you to include this
recommendation in your action on the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Christopher Hadley
Helen Bersie
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:48 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: approve the recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the
12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance
of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt
-----Original Message----From: Claire Castell [mailto:clairecastell@pacbell.net]

To: Campbell Washington, Annie; At Large
Subject: approve the recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel"
land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing you as a Board member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the April 14, 2015
recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be
devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space improvements around the city in
decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake
improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the current park staff
can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park
visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your
support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Best regards,
Claire Castell
clairecastell@pacbell.net
As a computer professional, I find your faith in technology amusing.
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:48 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Please set aside funds for maintenance
-----Original Message----From: Tamara Nicoloff [mailto:tamara_nicoloff@sbcglobal.net]

To: At Large; Reid, Larry; Gallo, Noel; Campbell Washington, Annie; McElhaney, Lynette; Guillen, Abel; Kalb, Dan; Office
of the Mayor
Subject: Please set aside funds for maintenance
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the the April 14, 2015
recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be
devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space improvements around the city in
decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake
improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the current park staff
can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park
visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your
support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Tamara Nicoloff
Maxson, Nayeli
Friday, May 29, 2015 3:47 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: $$$ for Lake Merritt Maintenance
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
From: Chris Pattillo [mailto:pattillo@pgadesign.com]

Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2015 4:46 PM
Subject: $$$ for Lake Merritt Maintenance
Dear Council Member Campbell-Washington,

I write as a member of CALM (Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt). CALM is the organization
that envisioned Lake Merritt Boulevard and related improvements at the south end of the Lake, and
whose proposal was selected by the City Council in 2001, leading to the $198 million Meas DD bond,
and the 56 improvement projects around the city that are now completed or nearing final stages of
implementation
I urge the Council to approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED
Committee that 25%
proceeds from sale of
the 12th Street "remainder parcel" be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD
improvements at Lake Merritt.
around the city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance
and protection of the various improvements. With its greatly increased usage, Lake Merritt and its
new parks need more care and maintenance than the current one-&-one-half park staff can
provide.
The "remainder parcel," created by
Measure DD, resulted from
realignment of the former confused roadway system into new pedestrian, bicycle, parks, and visitor
enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard.
The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your support. We urge the Council to give
enthusiastic approval to CED's recommendation, thereby to protect and safeguard the huge
investment Oakland voters made to successfully transform the Lake's traffic ways as well as
beautifying the now popular Lake Merritt, its environs and parks well into the future.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Chris Pattillo
FASLA
Principal
PGAdesign
444 17th Street
Oakland, CA 94612
Direct | 510.550.8855
Main | 510.465.1284
PGAdesign.com
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:47 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: May 5 Council Item -- 25% of 12th St "Remainder Parcel" for Maintenance of Meas
DD Improvements
From: jamesevann@aol.com [mailto:jamesevann@aol.com]

To: jamesevann@aol.com
Subject: May 5 Council Item -- 25% of 12th St "Remainder Parcel" for Maintenance of Meas DD Improvements
To: Mayor Schaaf:

To: City Councilmembers:
As a member of CALM (Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt), I write regarding the
E 12th Street "remainder parcel," scheduled for action of City Council, 5 May 2015.
CALM is the organization that envisioned Lake Merritt Boulevard and related improvements at the
south end of the Lake, and whose proposal was selected by the City Council in 2001, leading to the
$198 million Measure DD bond -- approved by over 80% of Oakland voters -- and the 56
improvement projects around the city that are now completed or nearing final stages of
implementation
CALM strongly urges the Council to approve the 14 April 2015 unanimous recommendation of the
Council's CED Committee that 25% of
the 12th Street "remainder parcel" be devoted to a dedicated fund for maintenance of Measure DD
improvements at the Lake Merritt area.
new parks must be carefully maintained -- which is presently impossible with the reduced budget of
the Parks & Recreation Agency that has currently been reduced to only one-&-one-half park staff for
the entire Lake Merritt area.
realignment of the former impenetrable roadway system into new pedestrian, bicycle, parks,
and visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard.
The CED Committee's recommendation deserves the
Council's enthusiastic support.
Accordingly, CALM urges the Council to give strong approval to CED's
recommendation. The City owes it to Oakland voters
1
to protect and safeguard the huge investment made to successfully transform the Lake's trafficways,
as well as beautifying the now popular Lake Merritt, its environs and parks well into the future.
Thank you !
Sincerely,
James E Vann
Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt
and Measure DD Community Coalition
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:47 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Yes on 25% of of "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds for Measure DD
maintenance
From: William Threlfall [mailto:wthrelfall@pacbell.net]

Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 1:17 PM
To: Kalb, Dan; Guillen, Abel; McElhaney, Lynette; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks, Desley; Reid, Larry;
At Large; Office of the Mayor
Subject: Yes on 25% of of "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds for Measure DD maintenance
This is a brief note from an Oakland citizen urging the Council and Mayor to support the CED
Committee recommendation to dedicate 25% of the "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds to a
fund devoted to maintenance of Measure DD improvements around Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has markedly improved Lake Merritt, and with it, our city's image. But as a capital bond, it
has no provision for maintenance of the improvements, many of which are at risk of embarrassing decline
as the assets are turned over to the City by the contractors.
The sale of the "remainder parcel" offers a long-envisioned means to provide support for
maintenance. The "remainder parcel" is a project of Measure DD's signature 12th Street project and was
included in CALM's 2001 proposal selected in response to the City's RFP, in the section titled: "Creation of
New Marketable Parcel and Approximate Value". That section specifically mentioned that the sale of the
development parcel could be put back into the Measure DD project.
Please support the CED Committee recommendation.
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:47 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: MEASURE DD - FUND LAKE MERRITT MAINTENANCE COSTS
From: Gregjurin@aol.com [mailto:Gregjurin@aol.com]

Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 4:21 PM
Subject: MEASURE DD - FUND LAKE MERRITT MAINTENANCE COSTS
950 Grosvenor Place

Oakland, CA 94610-1019
April 27, 2015
Ann Campbell-Washington - District 4

City Councilmember, Oakland CA
Oakland CA City Hall
Oakland, CA 94612
FUND LAKE MERRITT MAINTENANCE
Dear Ann Campbell-Washington:
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the April 14, 2015
recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale
proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space improvements around the
city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the
lake improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the
current park staff can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle,
and park visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's
recommendation deserves your support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the
remainder parcel.
Should you have any questions, I can be reached at (510) 428-2055.
Thank you!
1
Sincerely,
Gregory Jurin
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
Wednesday, June 17, 2015 12:32 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Lake Merritt improvements
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Lake Merritt improvements
From: Edith Yhuel [mailto:edith.yhuel@gmail.com]

To: McElhaney, Lynette
Cc: Campbell Washington, Annie
Subject: Lake Merritt improvements
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the the
April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street
"remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD
and protection of the lake improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more
care and maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
Thank you!
Edith Yhuel
1
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Maintenance of Lake Merritt
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451

To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Maintenance of Lake Merritt
-----Original Message----From: John Vallerga [mailto:jvv@ssl.berkeley.edu]

Subject: Maintenance of Lake Merritt
Dear Councilperson Campbell-Washington,
I urge the Council to approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the
12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements
at Lake Merritt.
I live in your district and supported you in your last campaign.
Sincerely,
John Vallerga
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Measure DD maintenance funds
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Measure DD maintenance funds
From: Rebecca deVille [mailto:deville@hawaii.rr.com]

Subject: Measure DD maintenance funds
Dear Coucilwoman Campbell,

I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the the
April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street
"remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD
and protection of the lake improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more
care and maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Rebecca deVille
1
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:45 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Please authorize at least 50% of property sale proceeds to maintain Measure DD
improvements at Lake Merritt
From: Aileen Frankel [mailto:ami009@hotmail.com]

At Large
Cc: Naomi Schiff; Flores, John; Kate Dobbins
Subject: Please authorize at least 50% of property sale proceeds to maintain Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt
Dear Oakland City Council members,

As a member of CALM (Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt) and an Oakland native
who looks at an Oakland park every day, I invite you to pay attention to one at the heart of Oakland. CALM is
the organization that envisioned Lake Merritt Boulevard and related improvements at the south end of the Lake,
and whose proposal was selected by the City Council in 2001, leading to the $198 million Measure DD bond
program, and the 56 improvement projects around Oakland that are now completed or nearing final stages of
implementation. The foremost project was the expansion and enhancement of the greenbelt around Lake
Merritt, and the enchanting Lakeside Park.
I urge the Council to approve that at least 50% of the proceeds from sale of the 12th Street
"remainder parcel" be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at
Lake Merritt.
Bond funds from the passage of Measure DD were approved to make the most significant and broadlyrecognized open space improvements around the city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot
be used for maintenance. Care and protection of the various improvements must be increased to match the
greatly increased usage. Lake Merritt and its adjacent parks need more service and maintenance than the
current one-&-one-half park employee positions can provide.
The "remainder parcel," created by Measure DD, resulted from realignment of the former mini-freeway into
attractive lanes, new pedestrian and bicycle paths, and landscaping and visitor enhancements, now known as
Lake Merritt Boulevard.
This recommendation deserves your support. Please take the long-term view of guardian of these prominent
Oakland assets. Please protect and safeguard the huge investment Oakland voters made to successfully
transform the Lake's environment for the 21st century.
Thank you!
Aileen Frankel
1
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:46 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Perpetual Funding for Maintenance of Lake Merritt DD Improvements
From: Patricia Durham [mailto:pdurham444@gmail.com]

To: Office of the Mayor; Kalb, Dan; Guillen, Abel; imcelhaney@oaklandnet.com; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo,
Noel; Brooks, Desley; Reid, Larry; At Large
Subject: Perpetual Funding for Maintenance of Lake Merritt DD Improvements
Dear Mayor Schaaf and Councilmembers Kalb, Guillen, McElhaney, Campbell-Washington,Gallo,

Brooks, Reid, and Kaplan:
I write as a member of CALM (Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt). CALM is the organization that
envisioned Lake Merritt Boulevard and related improvements at the south end of the Lake, and
whose proposal was selected by the City Council in 2001, leading to the $198 million Meas DD bond,
and the 56 improvement projects around the city that are now completed or nearing final stages of
implementation. I also write as a 30+year resident of Oakland, who weekly enjoys Lake Merritt up
close and personal on foot, and from my automobile most days.
I urge the Council to approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED
Committee that 25%
the 12th Street "remainder parcel" be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD
new parks need more care and maintenance than the current one-&-one-half park staff can
provide.
realignment of the former confused roadway system into new pedestrian, bicycle, parks, and visitor
enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard.
The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your support. We urge the Council to give
enthusiastic approval to CED's recommendation, thereby to protect and safeguard the huge
investment Oakland voters made to successfully transform the Lake's trafficways as well as
beautifying the now popular Lake Merritt, its environs and parks well into the future.
Thank you!
1
Sincerely,
Patricia Durham
Oakland Community Advocate
Maxson, Nayeli
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Support of Measure DD improvements and land sale to fund them
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Support of Measure DD improvements and land sale to fund them
From: Terry Boom [mailto:terryboom@sbcglobal.net]

At Large; Office of the Mayor
Subject: Support of Measure DD improvements and land sale to fund them
I strongly support the CED Committee recommendation to dedicate 25% of the "remainder parcel" land sale
proceeds to to a fund devoted to maintenance of Measure DD improvements around Lake Merritt.
I have been volunteering with the Lake Merritt Weed Warriors for about three years now. We are a stalwart
group, but there is far too much for us to keep up with on a once-a-month basis. This will be even more true
when the remainder of the improvements near 12th Street will no longer be under the care of the contractors
who installed it.
The Lake is vital and beautiful and has become the focal point of recreation for many in the city. To spend
millions of dollars on bond improvements and provide scant funding for maintenance is just wrong. If the Lake
falls into disrepair and blight, voters will remember when you propose another bond measure to fund similar
projects. I know I will vote no on any future bond improvements to the city if we cannot commit to ongoing
maintenance of these improvements.
As for the sale of land to fund these improvements, just vote yes. It's sound development that met every criteria
of the Planning Commission. Don't send the message to potential developers that Oakland is unwelcoming to
housing projects. Affordable housing is desirable, but ALL levels of housing are in great demand at this time.
Don't stifle it.
Thank you.
Terry Boom
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:44 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: the lake
From: Barbara Cohen [mailto:barbaracohen56@gmail.com]

Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 6:37 AM
Cc: Kaplan, Rebecca
Subject: the lake
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council to approve the the April 14,
2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land
sale proceeds be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space improvements around the city
in decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake
improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the current
park staff can provide.
The "remainder parcel" was created by the realignment of roadway through Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle,
and park visitor enhancements, now known as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's
recommendation deserves your support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the
remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Barbara Cohen
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:44 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Lake Merritt
From: Elaine Macey [mailto:jemacey@sbcglobal.net]

Subject: Lake Merritt
I am writing you as a concerned citizen from your district. I urge the Council to
approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee
that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds be devoted to a
fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open space
improvements around the city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital funds
cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake improvements. With
its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and maintenance than the
current park staff can provide.
Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park visitor enhancements, now known as
Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your
support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the
remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
J Elaine Macey
Sent from Elaine's iPad
Maxson, Nayeli
Friday, May 29, 2015 3:44 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: supporting affordable housing at E 12th St parcel and maintenance fund for DD
improvements at Lake
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
From: Karen Hester [mailto:karen@hesternet.net]

To: DL - City Council; Office of the Mayor
Cc: Wald, Zachary; Farmer, Casey; Bolotina, Olga
Subject: supporting affordable housing at E 12th St parcel and maintenance fund for DD improvements at Lake
Dear Members of the Council,
Please consider how important the issue of the E 12th St parcel is for the long term. All the studies show that we are in a
housing CRISIS and to have the council turn a deaf ear would not be wise. There are major issues with Urban Core (like
not paying back the City of SF) as exposed by the East Bay Express. Why are we in the mess we are? Lackluster rfp
process from the City in 2012-13. You have the power to undo the damage and act responsibly but agreeing to a
reasonable proposal:
1. Include affordable housing on the E 12th site and ensure that all public lands be used for affordable housing in the
future.
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council

to approve the the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED
Committee that 25% of the 12th Street "remainder parcel" land sale proceeds
be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake
Merritt.
Measure DD has created the most significant and broadly-recognized open
space improvements around the city in decades. However, Measure DD's capital
funds cannot be used for maintenance and protection of the lake
improvements. With its greatly increased usage, the park needs more care and
maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
Measure DD's pedestrian, bicycle, and park visitor enhancements, now known
as Lake Merritt Boulevard. The CED Committee's recommendation deserves
your support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on
the remainder parcel.
Thank you!
1
Karen Hester
karen@hesternet.net
510-654-6346
hesternet.net
Bites at the Lake: Mobile Food and Family Fun every Sunday
Bites Off Broadway: Fridays starting May 15
Maxson, Nayeli
To:
Subject:
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Funding for Lake Merritt maintenance
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Funding for Lake Merritt maintenance
From: Elizabeth Callaway [mailto:elizcall@sonic.net]

Subject: Funding for Lake Merritt maintenance
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance, and a resident in your District who often walks at the Lake. What
delightful spaces the Lake and its lakeside park have become! Funds must be allocated for the necessary upkeep.
I support approval of the April 14, 2015 recommendation of the Council's CED Committee: 25% of the 12th Street "remainder
parcel" land sale proceeds should be devoted to a fund for maintenance of Measure DD improvements at Lake Merritt.
With its greatly increased usage, the Lakeside area needs more care and maintenance than the current park staff can provide.
The CED Committee's recommendation deserves your support. We urge you to include this recommendation in your action on the
remainder parcel.
Thank you!
Elizabeth
PS AND I support sale of that parcel for affordable housing, so the Eastlake area remains a diverse part of Oakland where working
people can afford to live. A luxury apartment building will inflate rents in that very special section of our City.
Elizabeth Callaway
Maxson, Nayeli
Subject:
Attachments:
FW: East 12th Street Parcel Legal Requirements (Enclosures)

Agenda Report for Laws for Real Property Acquisition and Disposition 10 13 14.pdf; City
Council Agenda Report 2 27 15.pdf; EUJ PA PILP Letter to Oakland City Council re East
12th St 5-4-15.pdf
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451

To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: East 12th Street Parcel Legal Requirements (Enclosures)
-----Original Message----From: David Zisser [mailto:dzisser@publicadvocates.org]

Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 1:24 PM
Kaplan, Rebecca
Cc: amyvander@gmail.com; Sam Tepperman-Gelfant; mrawson@pilpca.org; jsmith@oaklandcityattorney.org; City
Administrator's Office; City Clerk; bparker@oaklandcityattorney.org; Sawicki, Mark
Subject: East 12th Street Parcel Legal Requirements (Enclosures)
Dear President McElhaney and Members of the Oakland City Council:
Please find attached a letter from Public Advocates and the Public Interest Law Project on behalf of Eastlake United for
Justice (EUJ) outlining our concerns about the City's compliance with legal requirements regarding disposition of the East
12th Street Parcel. We urge you to remove the item from tomorrow's City Council meeting agenda until the City has
publicly demonstrated that it has complied with all legal requirements.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,
David Zisser
Staff Attorney, Metropolitan Equity Team Public Advocates, Inc.
dzisser@publicadvocates.org
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Draft e-mail to City Councilmembers re: 12th Street
EBHO Letter to Oakland City Council re 12th St Remainder Parcel.pdf

To: McElhaney, Lynette; Kalb, Dan; Abelforoakland@gmail.com; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks,
Desley; Reid, Larry; Kaplan, Rebecca
Cc: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Draft e-mail to City Councilmembers re: 12th Street
Dear City Councilmembers:

Attached please find a copy of a letter sent by EBHO last month to the CED Committee regarding the
proposed sale and development of the "Remainder Parcel" at East 12th and 2nd Avenue.
We support the CED Committee recommendation to allocate 25% of the proceeds from this sale to the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund. We also believe the appraisal severely underestimates the value of the property, and we support
Councilmember Guillens request at CED Committee for the City to commission a new appraisal to more accurately
determine the price the City should receive for the land.
However, as noted in the letter, we continue to have a number of serious concerns about the
proposal itself, the failure to comply with State law, and the lack of a transparent and public process:
1. We believe that balanced residential development across the income spectrum is crucial for
Oakland's diversity and prosperity. In the last 15 years, Oakland saw the development of over
7,700 new market-rate units and just 2,800 affordable units. Nearly all of the market-rate units
were developed on privately owned land, and we fully expect that trend to
continue. However, we believe that publicly owned land should be used for the public good; it
is too valuable a resource to be used to develop projects that are exclusively market rate and
will rent at levels that require 3 - 4 times the median income of current Oakland renters,
especially with no strong community benefits or fee requirement. This is of particular
importance in the City's Specific Plan areas, where the City is providing considerable
incentives for development of market-rate housing but has no strategy for ensuring inclusion of
affordable housing. The encouragement of high income enclaves close to transit is not
consistent with the City's stated values of diversity and housing for all economic segments, nor
is it consistent with Plan Bay Area (the region's Sustainable Communities Strategy) and
ABAG's Priority Development Areas program. In fact, promotion of luxury housing close to
transit without adequate safeguards against displacement of existing lower income households
in the neighborhood will increase rather than decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Since we
are still waiting for the city to pass a citywide framework for funding affordable housing in the
form of an impact fee, it is imperative that we value our public land as a leveraging resource for
affordable housing development.
1
2. As noted in our letter, we believe the City has not complied with the requirements of the State's
Surplus Property statute. State law requires that first consideration for disposition of surplus
property go to developers proposing to provide at least 25% affordable housing - not only did
the City not invite any affordable housing developers to submit proposals, we know of at least
one affordable housing developer who was actively discouraged by City staff from submitting a
proposal. Moreover, the decision to make the parcel available only for market rate housing
was apparently made by City staff with no public consideration by the City Council. The
statute also requires that if the City does not reach an agreement with an affordable housing
developer, and the land is subsequently conveyed for residential development of more than 10
units, then 15% of the units in that development must be affordable to lower income
households.
3. We continue to have concerns about the proposed sales price. The City's appraisal at
$17,000 per unit is far out of line with recent sales. The property at 11th and Jackson - where
an affordable housing development is about to begin construction - was appraised at $25,000
per unit. Two of the comparable properties used for the 11th and Jackson appraisal were
also used for the 12th Street appraisal, but the latter appraisal assigned much lower values to
those comparable sales. In addition, the City itself paid $50,000 per unit for the affordable
housing parcels in the Brooklyn Basin development - based on an appraisal prepared for the
City over a year ago that found property values to be in the range of $30,000 to $70,000 per
unit. These discrepancies are too great to be explained by differences in location or
entitlement status (and the Brooklyn Basin site is in many respects and inferior site, located
adjacent to a freeway and not easily accessible by public transit).
4. The City should prepare a more accurate appraisal that takes these factors into account. We
understand that City staff have already completed solicitations for a new appraisal contract. It
would therefore be possible to select one of the responding firms for a single appraisal
contract, which could be approved by the City Administrator. Under these circumstances, a
new appraisal could be prepared in far less than the 8 weeks that was stated at last week's
CED Committee meeting.
5. Finally, we are concerned that the entire decision-making process around this parcel has been
made outside of the public eye. Not only was the decision to limit the parcel to market rate
housing made without public discussion, but the "community meetings" around the proposed
project were limited to presentations about the design of the property and were coordinated by
the developer, not by City staff. Disposition of scarce and valuable public land should be
subject to broad community input.
We ask that the City both respond publicly to these concerns and adopt new policies that will ensure
that future disposition of public land complies with both State law and City ordinance requirements,
and that the process be open and transparent and afford ample opportunity for community input.
Jeffrey P. Levin
Policy Director
510-663-3830 x316
jeff@ebho.org
2
Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.

Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Draft e-mail to City Councilmembers re: 12th Street
EBHO Letter to Oakland City Council re 12th St Remainder Parcel.pdf

To: McElhaney, Lynette; Kalb, Dan; Abelforoakland@gmail.com; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks,
Desley; Reid, Larry; Kaplan, Rebecca
Cc: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Draft e-mail to City Councilmembers re: 12th Street
Dear City Councilmembers:

Attached please find a copy of a letter sent by EBHO last month to the CED Committee regarding the
proposed sale and development of the "Remainder Parcel" at East 12th and 2nd Avenue.
We support the CED Committee recommendation to allocate 25% of the proceeds from this sale to the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund. We also believe the appraisal severely underestimates the value of the property, and we support
Councilmember Guillens request at CED Committee for the City to commission a new appraisal to more accurately
determine the price the City should receive for the land.
However, as noted in the letter, we continue to have a number of serious concerns about the
proposal itself, the failure to comply with State law, and the lack of a transparent and public process:
1. We believe that balanced residential development across the income spectrum is crucial for
Oakland's diversity and prosperity. In the last 15 years, Oakland saw the development of over
7,700 new market-rate units and just 2,800 affordable units. Nearly all of the market-rate units
were developed on privately owned land, and we fully expect that trend to
continue. However, we believe that publicly owned land should be used for the public good; it
is too valuable a resource to be used to develop projects that are exclusively market rate and
will rent at levels that require 3 - 4 times the median income of current Oakland renters,
especially with no strong community benefits or fee requirement. This is of particular
importance in the City's Specific Plan areas, where the City is providing considerable
incentives for development of market-rate housing but has no strategy for ensuring inclusion of
affordable housing. The encouragement of high income enclaves close to transit is not
consistent with the City's stated values of diversity and housing for all economic segments, nor
is it consistent with Plan Bay Area (the region's Sustainable Communities Strategy) and
ABAG's Priority Development Areas program. In fact, promotion of luxury housing close to
transit without adequate safeguards against displacement of existing lower income households
in the neighborhood will increase rather than decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Since we
are still waiting for the city to pass a citywide framework for funding affordable housing in the
form of an impact fee, it is imperative that we value our public land as a leveraging resource for
affordable housing development.
1
2. As noted in our letter, we believe the City has not complied with the requirements of the State's
Surplus Property statute. State law requires that first consideration for disposition of surplus
property go to developers proposing to provide at least 25% affordable housing - not only did
the City not invite any affordable housing developers to submit proposals, we know of at least
one affordable housing developer who was actively discouraged by City staff from submitting a
proposal. Moreover, the decision to make the parcel available only for market rate housing
was apparently made by City staff with no public consideration by the City Council. The
statute also requires that if the City does not reach an agreement with an affordable housing
developer, and the land is subsequently conveyed for residential development of more than 10
units, then 15% of the units in that development must be affordable to lower income
households.
3. We continue to have concerns about the proposed sales price. The City's appraisal at
$17,000 per unit is far out of line with recent sales. The property at 11th and Jackson - where
an affordable housing development is about to begin construction - was appraised at $25,000
per unit. Two of the comparable properties used for the 11th and Jackson appraisal were
also used for the 12th Street appraisal, but the latter appraisal assigned much lower values to
those comparable sales. In addition, the City itself paid $50,000 per unit for the affordable
housing parcels in the Brooklyn Basin development - based on an appraisal prepared for the
City over a year ago that found property values to be in the range of $30,000 to $70,000 per
unit. These discrepancies are too great to be explained by differences in location or
entitlement status (and the Brooklyn Basin site is in many respects and inferior site, located
adjacent to a freeway and not easily accessible by public transit).
4. The City should prepare a more accurate appraisal that takes these factors into account. We
understand that City staff have already completed solicitations for a new appraisal contract. It
would therefore be possible to select one of the responding firms for a single appraisal
contract, which could be approved by the City Administrator. Under these circumstances, a
new appraisal could be prepared in far less than the 8 weeks that was stated at last week's
CED Committee meeting.
5. Finally, we are concerned that the entire decision-making process around this parcel has been
made outside of the public eye. Not only was the decision to limit the parcel to market rate
housing made without public discussion, but the "community meetings" around the proposed
project were limited to presentations about the design of the property and were coordinated by
the developer, not by City staff. Disposition of scarce and valuable public land should be
subject to broad community input.
We ask that the City both respond publicly to these concerns and adopt new policies that will ensure
that future disposition of public land complies with both State law and City ordinance requirements,
and that the process be open and transparent and afford ample opportunity for community input.
Jeffrey P. Levin
Policy Director
510-663-3830 x316
jeff@ebho.org
2
Right-click
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
y our priv acy ,
Outlo ok
prev ented
auto matic
download of
this pictu re
from the
In ternet.

Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: East 12th Street Project
From: David Jaeger [mailto:dmjaeger@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 8:29 AM
Subject: East 12th Street Project
Dear Council Member Campbell Washington:

I'm writing to express my support for approval of the ordinance authorizing the city attorney to execute a DDA
for the 12th Street remainder parcel. This ordinance is on the agenda for tonight's City Council meeting.
This project is good for Oakland. Oakland needs market rate housing to accommodate the influx of residents
who can afford, and demand, "luxury" housing. Further, the anticipated annual tax revenue from this project
will be an important part of the solution to our impending budget crisis. We need tax revenue from additional
housing and this project squarely meets that need.
Council Member, I encourage you to support the recommendation of the Community and Economic
Development Committee that 25% of the proceeds of the sale be put into affordable housing and that 25% go
toward the maintenance of the lake. I also support a robust community benefits package to bring additional
benefits to the community. Lastly, I support the requirement of an additional property value assessment ONLY
if it does not substantially delay the progress of the project.
I agree with many opponents of this project that initial solicitation for bids could have been handled with more
transparency. I encourage you to support measures which would ensure that projects on public land are handled
in a less secretive manner in the future.
Thank you for your service and for your hard work on this and other important issues.
Sincerely,
David Jaeger
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: East 12th Street
From: Noah Kravitz [mailto:noah.kravitz@gmail.com]

Subject: East 12th Street
Dear Council Member Campbell Washington:
As a resident of your district, I'm writing to express my support for approval of the ordinance authorizing the city attorney to execute a
DDA for the 12th Street remainder parcel. This ordinance is on the agenda for tonight's City Council meeting.
This project is good for Oakland. Oakland needs market rate housing to accommodate the influx of residents who can afford, and
demand, "luxury" housing. Further, the anticipated annual tax revenue from this project will be an important part of the solution to our
impending budget crisis. We need tax revenue from additional housing and this project squarely meets that need.
Council Member Campbell Washington, I encourage you to support the recommendation of the Community and Economic
Development Committee that 25% of the proceeds of the sale be put into affordable housing and that 25% go toward the maintenance
of the lake. I also support a robust community benefits package to bring additional benefits to the community. Lastly, I support the
requirement of an additional property value assessment ONLY if it does not substantially delay the progress of the project.
I agree with many opponents of this project that initial solicitation for bids could have been handled with more transparency. I
encourage you to support measures which would ensure that projects on public land are handled in a less secretive manner in the
future.
Thank you for your service and for your hard work on this and other important issues.
Sincerely,
Noah Kravitz
Leimert Blvd, Oakland 94602
Go Dubs!
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation Letter in Support of Agenda Item 13:
DDA for 12th Street Remainder Parcel
Measure DD Maintenance Letter 050515.pdf
From: Ken Lupoff [mailto:oaklandparks@sbcglobal.net]

At Large
Cc: Paul Vidican
Subject: Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation Letter in Support of Agenda Item 13: DDA for 12th Street Remainder
Parcel

Please see the attached letter in support of tonight's City Council meeting agenda item # 13.
Best regards,
Ken & Paul
-Ken Lupoff
Paul Vidican
Executive Director
President of the Board
Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation (Friends of Oakland Parks and Recreation)
p: 510.465.1850
www.oaklandparks.org
Providing Financial and Volunteer Resources and Advocacy for Recreation Programs and Parks in Oakland.
May 5, 2015
Agenda Item 13: DDA for 12th Street Remainder Parcel
Esteemed Council Members:

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Officers
Paul Vidican
President
John Bliss
Vice President
Detra Paige
Secretary
Ken Solomon
Treasurer
Board Members
Steve Birndorf
Michael Hammock
Judith Johnson
Karen Krolewski
Erik Ludwig
Ken Maxey
Lori McKee
Susan Montauk
Emily Rosenberg
Daniel Swafford
Barry Weiss
Liz Westbrook
Non-Voting Members
Audree Jones-Taylor
Director, Oakland Parks &
Recreation
Brooke Levin
Director, Oakland Public
Works Agency
Barry Miller
Chair, Parks & Recreation
Advisory Commission
STAFF
Ken Lupoff
Executive Director
PO Box 13267
Oakland, CA 94661
Tel 510.465.1850
Fax 510.465.1852
www.oaklandparks.org
We are writing to you today to express our support for the CED Committees
recommendation to set aside 50% of the proceeds from the sale of land located at the
12th Street Remainder parcel for the support of affordable housing and the
maintenance of the improvements made to the Lake Merritt area as a result of the
Measure DD Bond.
We are particularly concerned about the 25% portion of proceeds that the CED
Committee recommended for DD-related maintenance.
Lake Merritt and Lakeside Park are truly Oaklands Central Park, drawing visitors from
all neighborhoods in our great city, as well as surrounding communities in California,
other states, and even other countries. The DD-related improvements show Oakland
as the magnificent city it was meant to be. But these improvements need to be
maintained so that future generations can enjoy the fruit of our labors.
Research has shown that well maintained parks increase the viability of businesses,
help to attract new residents, improve the value of homes and other properties in
surrounding areas, and reduce crime, all of which lead to increased property tax and
sales tax revenues.
We hope that you will support the CED Committees recommendation at the City
Council meeting on Tuesday, May 5.
Sincerely,
-Ken Lupoff
Executive Director
Paul Vidican
President of the Board
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Urban Core Proposed Lake Merritt Development, File PLN 14 - 266
From: Darline Mix [mailto:de.louise@att.net]

Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 4:31 PM
To: Kalb, Dan; McElhaney, Lynette; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Reid, Larry; Brooks, Desley; At Large;
Kaplan, Rebecca; Guillen, Abel; Office of the Mayor; DL - City Council; staff@ebho.org; elakeunited@gmail.com;
editor@eastbayexpress.com
Subject: Urban Core Proposed Lake Merritt Development, File PLN 14 - 266
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 3:54 PM, Darline Mix <de.louise@att.net> wrote:

Below is a copy of my letter sent to the full council, mayor, city administrator, and planning, Neil Gray of April
7, 2015.
Mr. Gray:
As you are aware at the April 1, 2015 planning commission meeting the above
referenced development was approved by the commission. The Development (a 24
story, 298 unit apartment tower) on a public parcel at the South West corner of Lake
Merritt at 12th Street and 2nd Ave on what is now being termed as a "Remainder Parcel"
as the result of the 12th Street roadway re-configuration under the DD Lake Merritt
My inquiry is this: Is not the City prohibited from selling this parcel for private
development as it was originally purchased, developed and maintained for open space
park land and by state statue must remain as such, short of an approval by a majority of
the qualified City electorate.
Your report incorrectly indicates, as does the City Council ENA with Urban Core (July 2,
2013) that the parcel in question was created by the recent realignment of the DD 12th
Street project. In fact, the parcel was acquired by the City of Oakland in 1906 under
then, Mayor Mott, by a condemnation proceeding as part of a larger (million dollar bond
measure) park acquisition and park improvement project.
The parcels purchased by the bond measure along with those acquired through
condemnation were subsequently developed, improved, and dedicated as open space
park land and as the greater effort to acquire a "green" swath of recreation area around
1
Lake Merritt and the surrounding land boarding the newly developed channel to the
estuary to be known as Peralta Park. All of the land, from the estuary to the lake, (as
the City petitioned The State Land Commission) was to be (and was) dedicated and
deeded to the people in perpetuity as open space "park land".
Clearly, the parcel in question along with the adjacent parcels was to be developed as a
park, planted with lawn, trees, shrubs, and paved walking paths were likewise installed.
It was maintained as a park and remained as such (over 40 years) until the 12th Street
reconfiguration and expressway in 1951 which swallowed up,the entire parcel. Likewise,
with the OUSD Administration Building, which should have never been erected on that
"open space" parcel, but nevertheless it remains in the public domain. However, with the
School District's recent RFP, that parcel is no doubt the next battle.
Unarguably, the recent completion of the 12th Street project did not create a new parcel
nor create a surplus parcel - it simply removed the roadway created in 1951 returning
the parcel to its original intent, (purpose of purchase) an open space park. Without
question, it must now be graded and planted to bring it back to its original state and
intent.
Unfortunately this issue is not new. I raised it several times at various DD coalition
meetings in the past and with Joel Peters (DD project director) and most recently, at the
first public meeting conducted by the developer in 2013, but to no avail. The City indeed
has a very bad habit of ignoring that which it does not wish to deal with.
The question here and now (as noted above) is WHY? Why is the history of this parcel
not being properly nor honestly exposed? Why have you and the Planning Department
purposely provided to the public a "false" record and account of this parcel - clearly, you
and the City Council are engaged in fraud and deceit.
David E. Mix
Additional comments:
Unfortunately, with the exception of Mr. Gray, no one has bothered to respond to my inquiry and unfortunately
his response simply put the onus on the City surveyor.
Most Council members I spoke with claimed no knowledge of my letter nor of the claims made therein. Hence,
why it is being re-sent to you now. As an observation it is difficult to understand how you can vote on an issue
without being completely informed.
Neither was this issue (land use restriction) presented at the April 14th CEDA meeting by the Planning Dept. or
any of the Council Members on the committee.
In a short conversation with Patrick Lane yesterday he claims the City Attorney has looked into it, but has not
rendered any type of written opinion or comment. This matter clearly deserves a complete analysis and
written opinion. The City Council simply may not vote to sell this parcel without first determining
whether it has a legal right to do so and verifying a "clear title" to the land.
2
Lastly and most importantly, there is absolutely no reason to sell this parcel for housing. As indicated in the
Lake Merritt Station Area Plan there are several other very suitable sites for housing - market rate or low
income. There clearly is no shortage of buildable lots for this area - this begs the question, why is this developer
so fixated on this particular public parcel. Further, neither can the City show a need for the $5 million when it is
presently waisting $5.9 million for new (totally unneeded) parking meters in Montclair, replacing the recently
installed kiosks.
David E. Mix
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:41 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Alameda County Public Health Dept Comments on East 12th St Remainder Parcel
(Item #13)
ACPHD Comments on E 12th Lake Merritt Blvd Apartments_Letter for 4 5 City Council
mtgV2 (2).pdf
From: Levitt, Zoe, Public Health, OOD [mailto:Zoe.Levitt@acgov.org]

To: McElhaney, Lynette; Kalb, Dan; Guillen, Abel; Campbell Washington, Annie; Gallo, Noel; Brooks, Desley; Reid, Larry;
Kaplan, Rebecca
Cc: Davis M.D., Muntu, Public Health, OOD; City Clerk; Watkins-Tartt, Kimi, Public Health, OOD
Subject: Alameda County Public Health Dept Comments on East 12th St Remainder Parcel (Item #13)
Dear Councilmembers,
Please accept the attached comments on behalf of Dr. Muntu Davis, Health Officer and Director for the Alameda County
Public Health Department, regarding the Development and Disposition Agreement for the East 12th Street Remainder
Parcel (Item #13 on tonights City Council meeting agenda).
Thank you for your consideration.
Zo Levitt
Local Policy Associate | Place Matters
Health Equity Policy and Planning | Office of the Director (OOD)
Alameda County Public Health Department
P: 510-268-4290 | F: 510-268-7012
1000 Broadway, 5th Floor | Oakland, CA 94607
zoe.levitt@acgov.org | www.acphd.org | www.facebook.com/PlaceMattersAC
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:41 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: S.E.E.C. Home | Everyday brilliance for disaster resilience
From: Kimberly King [mailto:kimgerly@kimgerly.com]

To: Dan Kalb
Cc: Cook, Brigitte; Wald, Zachary; Campbell Washington, Annie; Maxson, Nayeli; Gallo, Noel; At Large; Reid, Larry;
Brooks, Desley
Subject: S.E.E.C. Home | Everyday brilliance for disaster resilience
Dan,
As always, good seeing you again and at tonight's City Council Meeting.
I was formally signed up to comment on item #13 DDA for 12th Street Remainder Parcel on tonight's docket.
Ironic that this was the item that drew the protestors' ire. I had no prior knowledge of this protest. I'm all for
protest. #OaklandUprising. The disruption was to be expected.
I came because I needed to offer an empathetic voice to the protesters. I, however, needed to do this with your
colleagues in the room when I offered up my S.E.E.C. Home solution offering--which is only one component of
my REST in Urban Ag schema I have been working on these past 5 years.
My 2 minute comment is below my signature line that I was going share with you, your colleagues and the
gallery. I, however, was appreciative the protesters let me use their bullhorn to dispense my empathy, and offer
what I think is an attainable solution to the gallery audience; a solution to the homelessness problem.
I understand from my brief chat with Rebecca Kaplan, she was going to propose a motion regarding affordable
housing. I'd like to hear more what this constitutes.
I have also been in contact with Lynette McElhaney's staff since last year, and more recently to talk more
about S.E.E.C. Home [my recent Thin Film Solar Hack-a-thon Contest Entry and my first permutation for
the SMUD Tiny House Competition as part of the Laney College Tiny House Team] and REST in Urban Ag.
I hope this idea can come to fruition, because I don't want Oakland to end up like my beloved Baltimore.
Best,
__________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
kimberlyking | out think the box | kimgerly@kimgerly.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimgerly | m: +1
415 832 9084 | skype: kimgerly
This electronic message transmission contains information which may be confidential or privileged.
The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the
1
intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of
this information is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by
reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments. This communication may be monitored and
collected without consent, in secret, by the NSA. Thank you.
My name is Kimberly King. I'm a student in Laney's Industrial Maintenance Certificate program. I am also
renewable energy engineer.
I have been homeless since 31 Oct 2013 when my unemployment ran out. I've been couch surfing, housesitting
and camping out on the concrete to survive. I hope I won't have to camp out on the concrete again on June 1st.
As of this past Sunday, I have moved 50 times in 87 weeks; essentially, on average I have been moving every 12
days these past 18+ months. I am vanquished.
Addressing diminishing returns is PARAMOUNT more than ever now. The system is BROKEN. NO ONE IS
IMMUNE. WE ARE ALL VULNERABLE. We need leadership to be proactive not reactive to PREPARE.
RESPOND. ADAPT. to disasters, be they natural or financial.
I have a viable, sustainable solution.
Part of my solution is a net zero agile, mobile 172 sq ft tiny house. This house has thin film solar as the
main renewable energy system technology feature. The building envelope can be comprised of repurposed
materials from the waste stream. I call it S.E.E.C. Home, the Sustainable Energy Efficient Comfortable Home
which is everyday brilliance for disaster resilience. This way one can PREPARE. to RESPOND. and ADAPT.
to disasters, be they financial or due to the indifference of Mother Nature--because climate instability is only
going to escalate, and will likely to render more citizenry homeless.
I need your assistance to make S.E.E.C. Homes a reality. This type of housing can meet one of the basic needs
of safe, secure shelter for a decent quality of life on a daily basis, and during disasters. I would hope the City of
Oakland could find a way to help me make a livable wage to bring this vision to fruition, so I and others never
have to camp out on the concrete again.
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:41 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: In Support of the 12th Street Development Project
From: J Fong [mailto:pmjf66@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 8:30 AM
Subject: In Support of the 12th Street Development Project
Dear Council Member Washington,

I live quite close to the proposed development project on 12th and had hoped to speak on the matter
during last nights council meeting. For obvious reasons, I didnt have the opportunity to express my
views.
Unlike the more vocal attendees at yesterdays meeting, Im in favor of the project. The parcel is currently
unused so its a net addition to the housing stock. Further, we already have significant greenspace around
the lake, so its questionable how valuable an extra acre of parkland would be when it could house
hundreds of residents. And finally, its quite close to the Lake Merritt Bart Station makes it perfect for
encouraging public transit.
Some opponents of the project call it luxury housing that no one can afford. The fact of the matter is that
there are plenty of people who can afford $3,000 a month rents. And theyre moving to Oakland whether
we like it or not. What the project represents is the ability to house hundreds of those residents on less
than one acre of land instead of spread across the existing housing stock where theyll displace lower
income residents.
There are many of us that both care deeply about the changes that the city is going through and
recognize the necessity of building more housing. It is my hope that you will also recognize that necessity
and support this project.
Best Regards,
Jeff Fong
Resident of District 2
Maxson, Nayeli
Subject:
Attachments:
FW: Remainder Parcel

adjacent parcels 1.pdf
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
To: Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: FW: Remainder Parcel
From: Guillen, Abel

Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 1:26 PM
Subject: FW: Remainder Parcel
Hi Annie,
Take a look.
AG
From: Mike Pyatok [mailto:mpyatok@pyatok.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 12:09 PM
To: Guillen, Abel
Cc: Cappio, Claudia; Flynn, Rachel
Subject: Remainder Parcel
Dear Councilman Guillen,

I have been a resident of your District for 37 years and have had my business in downtown Oakland for 31 years. I am
the architect for the tower proposed for the remainder parcel in your district that has caused some controversy in
recent weeks. I am writing this note not as a member of that development team but as a resident of Oakland and
member of the community in which it is proposed.
During my tenure in Oakland I have designed more than four dozen affordable housing developments for lower income
households, all of which have won awards. My clients have been non-profit developers, the Oakland Housing Authority
and private developers associated with both. The primary mission of our firm has been, and still is, to serve the interests
of lower income communities and very rarely have we served for-profit developers providing market-rate housing. In
fact, I had vociferously opposed Jerry Browns 10K effort because he refused to consider the inclusion of affordable
housing, claiming that too few new units had been built in Oakland to serve those who can pay their own way. I have
1
since come to see the benefit of that policy on the life of downtown Oakland and understand the critical need to provide
housing for all levels of income.
But those who argue that the tower will escalate rents in the adjacent neighborhood are absolutely correct. They may
not realize that immediately nearby are several affordable housing developments serving lower income families (one of
which I designed more than 3 decades ago). But many more residents are not living in these rent-protected settings and
are vulnerable to the forces of the market. For this reason I think mitigating actions must be taken to relieve the
pressure on the Eastlake Neighborhood that will result from the introduction of 300 higher paying households in the
tower. Including affordable housing with the market-rate housing on the remainder parcel would require a subsidy
(perhaps a lowered land price) but it would be a poor use of taxpayers dollars since that construction type (concrete)
would yield far fewer units than if built with wood-frame construction nearby. I have a few suggestions for how this
might be accomplished:
1. While 25% of the land sale proceeds should be earmarked toward the maintenance of the new lakeside park areas,
the remaining 75% should be dedicated to the creation of affordable housing in the Eastlake neighborhood.
2. There are three parcels nearby that are promising locations for such housing (see attached aerial plan):
a) State-Owned Land. One block away from the remainder parcel, the State owns an entire city block bounded by
3rd and 4th Avenues, between East 12th Street and International Boulevard. It is occupied by a one-story building of
back offices, where staff process unemployment benefits. There is no public interaction with this facility. It is an
activity that can easily take place in an office park or office building and not be occupying valuable inner-city
residential land within 2 blocks of Lake Merritt. The parcel, at almost 2 acres or twice the size of the remainder
parcel, could easily support approximately 200 households of varying sizes and incomes (all within 4 stories of
wood-frame construction above a concrete garage), with some retail along International Boulevard. This could place
lower income families within a two-block walk of Lake Merritt and all of its assets for children. Why couldnt the City
negotiate a deal with the State to sell that land at a below market price to facilitate the development of affordable
housing? The City could sponsor a competitive RFP process to find a competent development team. The
respondents could be a public-private partnership providing both market- and below-market housing. We are the
architects for Phase 2 of the Fruitvale BART Village whose design was approved last night by the Planning
Commission. It will have 275 units, 80 of which will be affordable for households below 50% AMI, the rest being
market-rate. This is a joint venture between the Unity Council and L&M developers from NYC.
b) Motel Site (Americas Best Value Inn). Immediately across the street from the remainder parcel is an aging
motel with a large parking lot. In its recent past it had a nefarious reputation. Now under new management, it
seems to have improved, but it is still a very poor use of such a valuable residential location. Perhaps the funds from
the sale of the remainder parcel tower could be dedicated to purchasing this site. Approximately an acre in size, it
could easily support about 80 families and seniors in 4 stories of wood construction above a concrete garage.
c) Oakland Unified School District. This parcel is presently in negotiations with developers. Much larger in size than
the remainder parcel (about 3 acres vs slightly less than 1), it could more easily support a market-rate component
and an affordable one. Including an office building for the school district, the site could absorb about another 400+
units, many of them in wood frame construction which would be less expensive to build and more appropriate for
affordable housing.
I offer these ideas as a resident of Oakland and your district, concerned about retaining its rich cultural and income
diversity, as an advocate of affordable housing, and as a realistic architect trying to find a constructive way to achieve
the goals of all concerned parties, while avoiding another unproductive City Council non-meeting like this past Tuesday.
I look forward to hearing from you and would like to thank you for all your constructive efforts to satisfy all who want
whats best for all Oakland. I have ccd Claudia Cappio and Rachel Flynn, both of whom may assist in this effort to find
a workable solution.
Sincerely,
Michael Pyatok, FAIA
Michael Pyatok, FAIA

510-465-7010 ext 118
510-410-0260 Mobile
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:41 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 12th Street project
-----Original Message----From: Hood, Heather [mailto:hhood@enterprisecommunity.org]

To: Campbell Washington, Annie; Simons, Adam J.
Cc: Amanda Brown-Stevens
Subject: 12th Street project
HI Annie and Adam.
Thank you for working on this incredibly knotty problem of what to do now with the 12th Street project! I appreciate
the chance to lend some thinking. Heres a little more thinking Rick (Jacobus) and I worked on:
In a perfect world, the City would have never let this site go to a private developer because its a really good site for
affordable housing. I am not one to think every site -public or not- should be affordable housing. But this one is
pretty precious. It would score very well for the tax credits to finance an affordable project and in our new world with
CA cap and trade funds, it would be very competitive for these funds (which also can pay for public works needs in the
area). So its really regretable this happened from my view -a very short sighted move. The developers reps'
misrepresentation to the local community about what the project was is really gross. Nonetheless, like we discussed
yesterday, I recognize that its important to preserve the Citys reputation with the private sector and its not a good
time to signal the City is fickle. The developers want certainty so going back now on the deal after UrbanCore has spent
$100,000s exploring the site (and their posse of lawyers, investors, architects, etc.), would be bad.
Since we arent in a perfect world where we can turn back time, we tried to come up with some compromises. I noted a
bunch of quantitative assumptions* below, but wanted to suggest that since these were done quickly, that Claudia or
someone like Matt Schwartz from CHPC -who is suppose to be getting on contract to work with the Housing Dept and
Tomiquia- run some less squishy numbers and participate in any negations. We didnt play out what the cost to develop
300 units is (not including the land costs) b/c that would take a LOT of time. But the numbers were helpful to develop
perspective.
option 1 - Do not sell the property because of misrepresentation. Council folks could signal, "doors open for
development in Oakland but developers cannot knowingly manipulate our citizens with lies about the proposed
project. That is simply acting in bad faith and unacceptable." So a) it takes a stand for community members vulnerable
to manipulation and b) keeps the spotlight off the parcel and on the developers behavior in this instance.
option 2 - Smoke him out -as my grandfather would say. Do not sell the property to the developer by delaying decision
making.
a) Delay the council decision and
b) Meanwhile, work with back channels to the advocacy community to create bad press, demonstrations, etc. so its the
advocates that run him out, not the City leadership. The main thing that I believe makes this all so much worse for the
affordable housing community is that the City is naked without an affordable housing strategy -for
renters protections, preserving existing and funding new affordable housing. Use that ire for now while a strategy is put
in place that leads to certainty for private developers.
option 3 - Reappraise the value of the property with another appraisal company. Its almost half a year after the last
one, and likely the land value has gone up. Have UrbanCore pay the full price of the land and:
a) Provide some community benefits in the surrounds (to be worked out over time. Almost everything but housing itself
is comparatively cheap for developers).
b) Put 60-75% in the general fund and 25-40% of it in a fund for affordable housing. (REMEMBER these are rough
numbers) This would get you about $1.5m-2.6m for an affordable housing fund. Note that with todays costs,
that wouldnt get you more than 3-8 affordable units -depending on other financial tools. Not exactly something to have
a party about. But might strike a balance in such a way that allows everyone to move towards the aforementioned
affordable housing strategy.
option 4 - Reappraise .. start negotiating for a lot of affordable homes to be included on the site -like you did requiring
25% affordable units. Keep negotiating and it can probably realistically get to 10% or 30 units. Since UrbanCore wants
the units to start as rentals and move to condos, he likely wont be open to depths of affordability under 80% AMI
(electricians, teachers, architects, cafe owners, nurses). Note, this 30 units is better than the 3-8 homes in option 3.
OK, I am done for today. But would be glad to talk anything through tomorrow. My cell is 510-910-4328. May the force
be with you! ~Heather
*assumptions:
- the area median family income (AMI) in Oakland MSA is $92.9k (this is a HUD figure and includes a bunch of Alameda
and CC Counties so high for Oakland since oakland and Richmond would be much lower than the rest of their
counties) Its the best number we can find.
- rent on a 1BR unit for 80% AMI is about $1500 given this, the income group UrbanCore is targetting is ($3000/month)
earns about 160% Oaklands median income
- at $3000/month, a unit would be worth about $600k
- SOonto the property: 300 units total, 20% affordable would be 60 units the capitalized value difference for the rent
lost to the developer for him to create an affordable rather than a market rate unit is about $333k/unit less
- so 60 of the units were affordable, UrbanCore would translate that into the property being worth $20m less in total
value
Heather Hood
Deputy Director, Northern California
Enterprise Community Partners
101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1350
San Francisco, CA 94104
hhood@EnterpriseCommunity.org
direct line: 415.400.0973
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:40 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 12th Street project
From: Amanda Brown-Stevens [mailto:amandabrownstevens@gmail.com]

To: Hood, Heather
Cc: Campbell Washington, Annie; Simons, Adam J.
Subject: Re: 12th Street project
Thanks for this thoughtful info Heather!

Annie and Adam - I just wanted to add my thoughts from a political communications and governing
perspective. As we all know, Oakland is in a somewhat unique moment right now, where a combination of a hot
real estate market and new political leadership create an opportunity to potentially attract much needed
development. I would therefore (respectfully) disagree that option #2 would lead to a more comprehensive
affordable housing strategy, or any positive outcomes. The perception that activists are able to run developers
out of town is something the city needs to end, not encourage.
Any more of this conversation is probably better had in person than over email...
Amanda
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Hood, Heather <hhood@enterprisecommunity.org> wrote:
HI Annie and Adam.
Thank you for working on this incredibly knotty problem of what to do now with the 12th Street project! I
appreciate the chance to lend some thinking. Heres a little more thinking Rick (Jacobus) and I worked on:
In a perfect world, the City would have never let this site go to a private developer because its a really good
site for affordable housing. I am not one to think every site -public or not- should be affordable housing. But
this one is pretty precious. It would score very well for the tax credits to finance an affordable project and in
our new world with CA cap and trade funds, it would be very competitive for these funds (which also can pay
for public works needs in the area). So its really regretable this happened from my view -a very short
sighted move. The developers reps' misrepresentation to the local community about what the project was is
really gross. Nonetheless, like we discussed yesterday, I recognize that its important to preserve the
Citys reputation with the private sector and its not a good time to signal the City is fickle. The developers
want certainty so going back now on the deal after UrbanCore has spent $100,000s exploring the site (and their
posse of lawyers, investors, architects, etc.), would be bad.
Since we arent in a perfect world where we can turn back time, we tried to come up with some compromises. I
noted a bunch of quantitative assumptions* below, but wanted to suggest that since these were done quickly,
that Claudia or someone like Matt Schwartz from CHPC -who is suppose to be getting on contract to work with
the Housing Dept and Tomiquia- run some less squishy numbers and participate in any negations. We didnt
play out what the cost to develop 300 units is (not including the land costs) b/c that would take a LOT of
1
time. But the numbers were helpful to develop perspective.

option 1 - Do not sell the property because of misrepresentation. Council folks could signal, "doors open for
development in Oakland but developers cannot knowingly manipulate our citizens with lies about the proposed
project. That is simply acting in bad faith and unacceptable." So a) it takes a stand for community members
vulnerable to manipulation and b) keeps the spotlight off the parcel and on the developers behavior in this
instance.
option 2 - Smoke him out -as my grandfather would say. Do not sell the property to the developer by delaying
decision making.
a) Delay the council decision and
b) Meanwhile, work with back channels to the advocacy community to create bad press, demonstrations, etc. so
its the advocates that run him out, not the City leadership. The main thing that I believe makes this all so much
worse for the affordable housing community is that the City is naked without an affordable housing strategy -for
renters protections, preserving existing and funding new affordable housing. Use that ire for now while
a strategy is put in place that leads to certainty for private developers.
option 3 - Reappraise the value of the property with another appraisal company. Its almost half a year after the
last one, and likely the land value has gone up. Have UrbanCore pay the full price of the land and:
a) Provide some community benefits in the surrounds (to be worked out over time. Almost everything but
housing itself is comparatively cheap for developers).
b) Put 60-75% in the general fund and 25-40% of it in a fund for affordable housing. (REMEMBER these are
rough numbers) This would get you about $1.5m-2.6m for an affordable housing fund. Note that with todays
costs, that wouldnt get you more than 3-8 affordable units -depending on other financial tools. Not exactly
something to have a party about. But might strike a balance in such a way that allows everyone to move
towards the aforementioned affordable housing strategy.
option 4 - Reappraise .. start negotiating for a lot of affordable homes to be included on the site -like you did
requiring 25% affordable units. Keep negotiating and it can probably realistically get to 10% or 30 units. Since
UrbanCore wants the units to start as rentals and move to condos, he likely wont be open to depths of
affordability under 80% AMI (electricians, teachers, architects, cafe owners, nurses). Note, this 30 units is
better than the 3-8 homes in option 3.
OK, I am done for today. But would be glad to talk anything through tomorrow. My cell is 510-9104328. May the force be with you! ~Heather
*assumptions:
- the area median family income (AMI) in Oakland MSA is $92.9k (this is a HUD figure and includes a bunch
of Alameda and CC Counties so high for Oakland since oakland and Richmond would be much lower than the
rest of their counties) Its the best number we can find.
- rent on a 1BR unit for 80% AMI is about $1500
given this, the income group UrbanCore is targetting is ($3000/month) earns about 160% Oaklands median
income
- at $3000/month, a unit would be worth about $600k
- SOonto the property: 300 units total, 20% affordable would be 60 units
the capitalized value difference for the rent lost to the developer for him to create an affordable rather than a
market rate unit is about $333k/unit less
2
- so 60 of the units were affordable, UrbanCore would translate that into the property being worth $20m less in
total value
Heather Hood
Deputy Director, Northern California
Enterprise Community Partners
101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1350
San Francisco, CA 94104
hhood@EnterpriseCommunity.org
direct line: 415.400.0973
-Amanda Brown-Stevens
510-816-2978
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:40 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: Proposed Sale and Development of East 12 Parcel
E12 Parcel Development_Letter to Councilmember Washington SIGNED.pdf
From: Sheila Ibanez [mailto:SIbanez@CalNurses.Org]

Subject: Proposed Sale and Development of East 12 Parcel
Dear Councilmember Washington,

Please see the attached letter from California Nurses Association Co-President Zenei Cortez opposing the planned sale
and development of the city-owned land at the corner of East 12th Street and Second Avenue near Lake Merritt (East 12
parcel).
Thank you.
Sheila Ibanez
Confidential Secretary
Executive Office
Phone: 510-273-2280
Fax: 510-663-2771
May 12, 2015

The Honorable Annie Campbell Washington
Oakland City Hall
Oakland, CA 94612
RE: Proposed Sale and Development of East 12 Parcel
Dear Councilmember Washington,
The California Nurses Association (CNA) represents thousands of bedside and public health
Registered Nurses (RNs) who live and work in Oakland and across the state of California. CNA
members work at the bedside and are intimately aware of the impact city planning decisions have on
the health and well-being our patients and communities.
Nurses have grave concerns about the planned sale and development of the city-owned land at
the corner of East 12th Street and Second Avenue near Lake Merrit (East 12 parcel). In the midst of a
housing affordability crisis in Oakland, the Citys proposal to sell this publicly owned land to private
developer UrbanCore, LLC presents a significant health threat to the Oakland community. The
proposed sale and development would create a 24 story, 298-unit luxury high-rise apartment tower
where the median rent would be over $3,000 per month, far above what any low-income Oakland
resident can afford. As currently proposed, the development would have no affordable units and no
real community benefits. Such a project would only act to contribute to the rampant gentrification of
our Oakland community, which is displacing and disrupting our Oakland community.
Long-time residents are being pushed out of Oakland every day because of skyrocketing rental
costs. Oakland rents have increased dramatically in recent years, and with wages slow to catch up,
Oakland is becoming increasingly unaffordable to long-term, lower-income residents. According to a
recent Forbes ranking, Oakland ranks 2nd, just behind San Francisco, in worst cities for renters.1
Oaklands position on the list is due in large part to its high average monthly rent and staggering 10.5
percent year-over-year change in apartment rent. This ranking reflects the crisis in housing
affordability, displacement, and inequality in Oakland, all of which have significant health
consequences.
Built environment and social conditions in places where people live and interact with others
have significant impacts on health and well-being. When neighborhoods change rapidly, pushing
existing residents to the margins, disparities in health often widen. This becomes evident in health
1
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/emeg45efhgm/worst-cities-for-renters-9/
outcomes such as cancer rates, incidence of asthma, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease, as these
marginalized residents are often priced out of neighborhoods with healthy housing, healthy food, and
healthy urban environments.
According the Center for Disease Control, displacement also has many health implications that
contribute to disparities among special populations, including the poor, women, children, the elderly,
and members of racial/ethnic minority groups. These special populations are at increased risk for the
negative consequences of gentrification. Studies indicate that vulnerable populations typically have
shorter life expectancy; higher cancer rates; more birth defects; greater infant mortality; and higher
incidence of asthma, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.
With what we know about the serious implications of gentrification and displacement, the
Citys decision to move forward with the sale of the East 12 parcel is especially problematic. A market
survey conducted for UrbanCore in 2013 by the Riverstone Residential Group, and made public by the
city, put the rental price for a one-bedroom apartment in the proposed tower at $3,150 a month, making
the units affordable only to households with $113,000 or more in yearly income. Yet the median yearly
household income in the 94606 zip code (which roughly encompasses the Eastlake community
surrounding the East 12 parcel) is $38,363, according to the US Census as of 2013. These figures make
it clear that this development would not offer options for most of the nearby community and instead
would likely drive prices up in the surrounding area.
Further, the decision making process around the East 12 parcel sale and development has not
included adequate involvement and input from impacted community members or public health
advocates for consideration of the adverse impacts the project would have.
The development of cost-exclusive luxury high rises that raise rents and exacerbate
displacement directly contradicts the Oakland City Councils stated mission of building community
and fostering livable neighborhoods. As working families are finding it increasingly difficult to stay in
Oakland, prioritizing affordable housing and public benefit is crucial to protect and improve the health
of Oakland residents.
As such, we urge you to do everything within your power to address the concerns associated
with the proposed sale and development of the East 12 parcel and in doing so, ensure that any potential
sale and development of this public piece of land be for the true betterment of public health for the
entire Oakland community, including housing for low-income residents and other community benefits.
Sincerely,
Zenei Cortez, RN
Co-President, California Nurses Association (CNA)
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:40 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 1911 Telegraph Ave
-----Original Message----From: Ty Hudson [mailto:thudson@unitehere.org]

Kaplan, Rebecca
Cc: Jones, Andre; Garzon, Clara; cburgos@oaklandnet.com; Bolotina, Olga; Simons, Adam J.; Gerard, Jennie; Nosakhare,
Shereda; Wei-Ling Huber; Christine Garrett; Andreas Cluver; Josie Camacho; Terry Sandoval
Subject: 1911 Telegraph Ave
Dear Councilmembers:
I am writing to you about an item on the City Councils closed session agenda for Tuesday, May 19th, regarding real
property negotiations for the property at 1911 Telegraph. As you probably know, the City is in an RFP process for the
development of that property with a hotel and/or residential development. City staff is in the process of selecting from
among 8 developers who have submitted proposals for the property. Staff will inevitably have to weigh various factors in
making a selection, including the extent to which each prospective developer can be counted on to provide significant
community benefits in its proposed project.
Given the twin crises of income inequality and housing affordability in Oakland and the Bay Area, widespread anxiety
about the relationship between development and displacement, and the recent controversy about the 12th Street
remainder parcel, we believe it is crucial that the City staff who are tasked with selecting from among the 8 prospective
developers will need to receive clear direction from the City Council that community benefits should be of the utmost
importance in the selection process. There will likely be a question about the level of affordable housing provided in this
development, and this is a very important issue. We also want to remind you that, by itself, no affordable housing policy,
no matter how strong or how well funded, can solve our housing and inequality crises if the current wave of
development in Oakland produces nothing but low wage, poverty jobs. We hope you will make it clear to staff that the
creation of good jobs, both in construction and in the operation of the hotel and associated restaurant(s), is
indispensable, and that the selection process should be guided in large part by an assessment of which developers can
be counted on to create good jobs and be good partners with the community.
As you may know, the RFP listed labor peace as one of the community benefits that should be addressed by the
proposals and would be considered in the selection process. Labor peace the absence of labor conflict and strife is
a community benefit in and of itself. It is also something that the City can require if the project involves City proprietary
interest that could be put in jeopardy by a labor dispute, as in the case of a ground lease, city loan, or city profit
participation. Should this project involve City proprietary interest, we urge you to make labor peace a requirement in an
eventual DDA. In any case, we urge you to make community benefits central to the selection process for this
development.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this issue.
Thank you.
1
Ty Hudson
Research Analyst
UNITE HERE Local 2850
http://www.unitehere2850.org
http://www.unitehere.org
cell: 213-509-9114
Maxson, Nayeli
Friday, May 29, 2015 3:39 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: 25% for Parks Maintenance
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
From: Chris Pattillo [mailto:pattillo@pgadesign.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:02 AM
Subject: 25% for Parks Maintenance
Mayor Schaaf and Members of the Oakland City Council,

I am writing to encourage you to support the proposal to set aside 25% of the proceeds from the sale of the 12th
Street parcel for on-going parks maintenance at Lake Merritt. This parcel of land was created as a result of the
community driven effort to reconfigure 12th Street to create the now beautiful Lake Merritt Boulevard. It did
not exist prior to this effort. It is land we did not have before because it was covered by lanes of roadway.
From the very beginning the community viewed the sale of this parcel as a way to off set the costs of the now
completed park improvements. This proposal makes perfect sense. We have invested a great deal of public
money in Lake Merritt. If we do not maintain it that investment will have been wasted.
Maintenance is essential. Please support this brilliant idea to set aside 25% of the proceeds to create a park
maintenance fund.
Chris Pattillo, FASLA
Chair, Oakland Planning Commission
Chris Pattillo
FASLA
Principal
PGAdesign
444 17th Street
Oakland, CA 94612
Direct | 510.550.8855
Main | 510.465.1284
PGAdesign.com
Maxson, Nayeli
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Friday, May 29, 2015 3:39 PM
Maxson, Nayeli
FW: East 12th Street
From: Lane, Patrick

To: Maxson, Nayeli; Campbell Washington, Annie
Subject: RE: East 12th Street
Do we need to still meet before this goes to council?

Patrick Lane [mailto:pslane@oaklandnet.com]
Development Manager, City Of Oakland
Economic & Workforce Development Department
Project Implementation Division
250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 5313
Oakland CA 94612
tel (510) 238-7362
fax (510) 238-3691
From: Maxson, Nayeli
To: Lane, Patrick
Hi Patrick,
Im sorry, it looks like this Tuesday is getting quick busy. Well be in be in touch soon if we need to find a time later this
week. But thank you for your willingness to give us a briefing.
All the best,
Nayeli
Nayeli Maxson
Council Aide
Office: (510) 238-7273
Fax: (510) 839-6451
From: Lane, Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 1:18 PM
To: Campbell Washington, Annie; Simons, Adam J.; Maxson, Nayeli
Yes I can meet with you. My complete schedule is available in Outlook. But some good times are tomorrow afternoon
or next Tuesday afternoon.
1
Patrick Lane [mailto:pslane@oaklandnet.com]

Development Manager, City Of Oakland
Economic & Workforce Development Department
Project Implementation Division
250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 5313
Oakland CA 94612
tel (510) 238-7362
fax (510) 238-3691
From: Campbell Washington, Annie
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 10:49 AM
To: Lane, Patrick; Simons, Adam J.; Maxson, Nayeli
Subject: East 12th Street
Hi Patrick,
Could we find 30 minutes for a meeting on the East 12th Street remainder parcel project?
Thank you,
Annie

(510) 238-7004

Campbell-Washington Emails All PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Campbell-Washington Emails All PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Maxson, Nayeli

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Jessamyn Sabbag [mailto:jessamyn@oaklandrising.org]

Dear Councilmember Campbell-Washington,

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Karen Hester [mailto:karen@hesternet.net]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

-----Original Message----From: Simons, Adam J.

> I. Who we are

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Darline Mix [mailto:de.louise@att.net]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Flynn, Rachel

Hi John and Rachel,

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Pat Kernighan [mailto:pat.kernighan@gmail.com]

Greetings Councilmembers and former colleagues,

Christine Cherdboonmuang <christine.apocc@gmail.com>

Within current averages for per unit total costs.

average of 3 current projects with similar unit mix/financing

Affordable Family Housing at E. 12th Street Parcel

Mayor Schaaf and Members of the Oakland City Council,

Darline Mix <de.louise@att.net>

On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 3:54 PM, Darline Mix <de.louise@att.net> wrote:

Dear City Council Members:

Dear Members of the Council,

I am writing you as a member of Oakland Heritage Alliance. I urge the Council

Justin Rausa <justin.rausa@gmail.com>

Good evening Councilmember McElhaney:

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Pat Kernighan [mailto:pat.kernighan@gmail.com]

Annie Campbell Washington

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

From: Elissa Dennis [mailto:elissa@communityeconomics.org]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Jeffrey Levin [mailto:jeff@ebho.org]

Visit us at www.EBHO.org and follow us on Facebook and Twitter!

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Naomi Schiff [mailto:Naomi@17th.com]

Oakland Measure DD Community Coalition: www.waterfrontaction.org/dd

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Levitt, Zoe, Public Health, OOD [mailto:Zoe.Levitt@acgov.org]

Dear Chair Reid and Councilmembers,

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Parlette, Nancy

Sorry.I meant..1200 block of Lakeshore.

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Oakland Heritage Alliance [mailto:info@oaklandheritage.org]

Please see attached letter.

From: Dennis Rothhaar [mailto:dkrothhaar@gmail.com]

-----Original Message----From: Campbell Washington, Annie [mailto:ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com]

-----Original Message----From: Jeff Norman [mailto:jeffnorman@sharedground.org]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>

From: Christopher P. Hadley [mailto:cphadley@pacbell.net]

Campbell Washington, Annie <ACampbellWashington@oaklandnet.com>