Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: News

Re: “Neighbors Along One Fruitvale Street Are Organizing to Stop a Controversial Eviction

Hi Tate! We'd love your support! We just started this FB page where we will post updates and upcoming actions!
https://www.facebook.com/No-Evictions-on-E…

Posted by Luz Calvo on 05/09/2017 at 7:30 PM

Re: “Neighbors Along One Fruitvale Street Are Organizing to Stop a Controversial Eviction

I live in the neighborhood and want to get involved. Any tips?

Posted by Tate Jawdat on 05/09/2017 at 5:33 PM

Re: “Loopholes in ADA Law Make "No Pets" Clauses Nearly Impossible to Enforce

Mr Willian has been so good to me and some of my friends we got our loans from him, if you need a legit loan today contact him via email: willianloanfirm6@gmail.com or call him on +1(214)305-8945.

Posted by johnson loanfirm on 05/06/2017 at 5:53 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

The City should be making decisions on investments and property deals based on benefits returned to Oakland residents and to the City. There is no consensus among Oakland residents and taxpayers on BDS and Israel's settlement policies. I do not support the policies of the current Israeli administration including its settlement policies and I think David Horowitz, one of the recipients of Zimmerman's largesse, is despicable. Nevertheless, if evaluating every City decision based on the political views of the parties we may be on a very slippery slope.

Posted by Vivian Kahn on 05/06/2017 at 5:20 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

Mr. Jerry Udanski, the Venezuelan economy is oil dependent and hence the drop in oil prices has devastated their economy. You are a relative newbie to Oakland, BTW. Some of us who subscribe are born and raised in the East Bay which makes me a native, hint can you name the First Raider playing field:)? Do you know what large international food chain started in Oakland:)?? Cheers Harbor Bay Isle anyone:)??

Posted by Gordon Hopkins on 05/05/2017 at 5:47 AM

Re: “Oakland Schools’ Special Education Reading Clinic May Close Due to Budget Cuts

Meanwhile in Berkeley, lawsuits are filed against the district for failing to teach students with learning disabilities how to read: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170502006972/en/Students-Reading-Disorders-Sue-Berkeley-Unified-School

With the reading clinic, Oakland has a program in place that complies with California A.B. 1369, that requires school districts provide dyslexic students with an evidence-based, multi-sensory, direct, explicit, structured, and sequential approach to instruction.

Instead of expanding the reading clinic program and avoiding future litigation, OUSD decides to eliminate the program.

If only this wasn't so typical of Oakland School leadership.

Posted by ooo111000 on 05/04/2017 at 6:30 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

Excellent commentary Mr. Udinsky..

What a shameless piece of reporting expounding anti Israeli propaganda ad nauseam. Give me a break.

Posted by Linda Forde on 05/04/2017 at 5:45 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

This article is a shameless hit piece, not journalism. The issue has to do with whether the proposed project is worthwhile for Oakland. If you are going to question the background of all investors, then you should always go into the backgtround of investors. However, this so called journalist happens to favor one political agenda over another. So approving projects for Oakland should be a political decision and not an economic decision. This is how Venezuela has become a disaster of a country. If Oakland is guided by this type of so called journalism propaganda, Oakland will follow Venezuela to the bottom of the economic junkpile.

Posted by Jerry Udinksy on 05/04/2017 at 9:34 AM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

From your article"Portfolio Development Properties, a Walnut Creek-based company, over the terms of the propertys sale. Portfolio approached Oakland last November with an unsolicited proposal to build a drive-thru Starbucks on the empty lot at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and 73rd Avenue. The city didnt seek proposals from other developers." 73rd and Bancroft is part of the old GM/Chevvy plant and probably cannot be used for housing due to contamination, but a Gentrification like a Starbuck's drive through can be, nascent gentrification, why Walnut Creek AND unsolicited, dont't we have Oakland real estate folk of the same of better caliber?? How about a Soul Food diner??

Posted by Gordon Hopkins on 05/04/2017 at 7:38 AM

Re: “Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts

SF Bay Area is an absolute nightmare for renters. I feel very badly for people who are getting evicted. A once affordable region, we are now only affordable to the wealthy and those who have bought houses years ago. The people who make our lives possible have few affordable places to live.

Posted by Sage Feldemeyer on 05/03/2017 at 11:29 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

Why is this Eastbay news and and this:

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article…

Isn't?

Again, I'm not fan, but somehow BindGraham seems to look for the MOST divisive issues he can find without regard to relevance or, so it seems, full disclosure of the story; picking and choosing what parts to trumpet.

EBX, get rid of BondGraham. Get a REAL reporter, not a FOX wannabe.

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 05/03/2017 at 6:26 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

> I would like every settlement to disappear, but he has every right to support them.

Ernest Montague, it's not illegal for a US citizen to financially support Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but it's also not illegal for a newspaper to publicize this who a US citizen gives their money to.

> There are more than one Islamic organizations in the US with ties to terror groups.

Their links should be publicized too.

Posted by Felix Dzerzhinsky on 05/03/2017 at 5:30 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

Isn't Zimmerman and company a major campaign backer of our local politicians?

Is this more Libbyest real estate cronyism?

I know Libby prefers fashion statements, to political statements, but does she have anything to say here? Since the Ghost Ship fire and Raider's retreat, our mayor's gone into hiding. What happened to transparency and secret sauce? Mayor up Libby!

Great reporting. Thanks!

Posted by Ann Nomura on 05/03/2017 at 9:46 AM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

Zimmerman supports Israel and illegal settlements. I was not aware that was illegal in the US. Can anyone help me out with the law? If not, then it's his business and right to spend his money as he wishes. I would like every settlement to disappear, but he has every right to support them. There are more than one Islamic organizations in the US with ties to terror groups.

Posted by Ernest Montague on 05/03/2017 at 7:37 AM
Posted by Naomi_Schiff on 05/02/2017 at 10:37 PM

Re: “Supporter of Controversial Israeli Settlements Would Benefit from Exclusive Oakland Public Land Deal

I guess the City of Oakland learned nothing from the E 12th street housing development debacle several years ago. Here we go again with exclusive deals and ignoring state laws that outline a specific process for disposing of public land. The E 12th street project turned out okay, but only after a major expenditure of time, energy and money by the developer, the city and the neighborhood. Why can't the City just do it right the first time? There are mixed opinions about Israels intrusion into the west bank. Given Oakland's proclivity to take positions on national and international policy issues, it is ok for the city council to have that discussion. However, there should be no mixed opinions about the need to follow the correct and legal process. If you don't, it will never turn out right.

Posted by Gary Patton on 05/02/2017 at 7:48 PM

Re: “Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts

From Costa Hawkins: (ii) A condominium dwelling or unit that has not been sold separately by the subdivider to a bona fide purchaser for value. The initial rent amount of the unit for purposes of this chapter shall be the lawful rent in effect on May 7, 2001, unless the rent amount is governed by a different provision of this chapter. However, if a condominium dwelling or unit meets the criteria of paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (a), or if all the dwellings or units except one have been sold separately by the subdivider to bona fide purchasers for value, and the subdivider has occupied that remaining unsold condominium dwelling or unit as his or her principal residence for at least one year after the subdivision occurred, then subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) shall apply to that unsold condominium dwelling or unit.

The apartment/condo is still rent controlled, until it sells. If you read all of Costa Hawkins you will see that it doesn't break rent control with every condo or single family homes. A subdivistion is five or more units. Find a good lawyer.

Posted by Michael Stangl on 05/01/2017 at 1:13 PM

Re: “Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts

Well the responses listed here explain why we are in this crisis. I lost my rental home in Oakland in 2015 after having lived there problem-free for 17 years. The landlord had promised me he would never sell in 2013 when my husband passed. In March 2015 he sent me an email saying he was coming over with a real estate agent in two days. When I expressed obvious shock and confusion, he first tried to say he had told me about this already and then when I said that was not the case, tried the "oh, I must have told your husband about it, but not you"- possibly the worst and stupidest lie I've ever been told. The house was immediately shown and sold to a young wealthy tech couple in their early 20's who worked in SF and just wanted to be near the BART. I had to move by late May. I got conflicting advice from City of Oakland Rent Adjustment Board and others - some said I had rights being over 60 and having lived there over 10 years would require a year's advance notice of the landlord selling, other attorneys I spoke to said I had no rights at all in a single family home. For two months I frantically searched all corners of the east bay - running into massive competition with other renters offering higher rents to landlords, flirting with landlords, you name it. I finally found a 2 bedroom cottage in Lafayette, successfully advocated for my two senior indoor only cats to be admitted, and signed a year's lease June 1. On July 3, I received a letter saying the Lafayette property had sold and all the buildings and many of the trees, were going to be torn down and rebuilt.
So without being fully unpacked, and already having had to give up my washer/dryer, piano, dining room table and chairs, and many, many other things, I moved again in October 2015. This time I bought an affordable condo further out in Walnut Creek. I have a 45 minute commute in the am (BART parking fills up way before I start work in Berkeley) and usually wait until 7pm before attempting the return home. I am most definitely a displaced Oaklander but I have come to appreciate that at least no one can sell me or price me out, and the City of Oakland is truly not invested in protecting ANY renter. Even the idea that a landlord give advance notice (vs 2 days) to a long-term renter is outside the scope of the greed mentality.

Posted by JeanetteSarmiento1 on 04/30/2017 at 12:10 PM

Re: “The Secret Sidewalk May Not Be Secret Much Longer

I used to go to the secret sidewalk as a teenager, in the mid-eighties. I went once during the day, but it was a nighttime party hangout spot that couldn't be beaten. It was rare that my friends and I would meet anyone else on the sidewalk, although one night, the word had gotten out, and a full blown party was happening. For the most part, we crossed the tracks, climbed up to the bridge,and headed east.We followed the rules of the sidewalk: Never straight, always foreward, never sideways, and sometimes in reverse. We would smoke a bowl with Buddha (a white figure, spraypainted on a large rock), and once we passed the jail (a metal barrier, to keep cows off the sidewalk, I think), we would enter the valley, near the end of the sidewalk, and sit down hanging our feet off the side, and party. We sometimes went to the end of the sidewalk, but mostly stopped where the Troll (the only homeless person we knew of, living in a tiny, low space under the sidewalk) was. He rarely talked to us, and never took the drugs and alcohol offered to him. If we were really lucky, a train would come, lighting up the whole valley, and rumbling loudly until disappearing into the tunnel underneath and near where we were sitting. Good times.

Posted by Phoenix Mueller on 04/30/2017 at 7:20 AM

Re: “Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts

Yeah, Iam Rhiannon, Berkeley has a loophole. It sounds as if it's a bait and switch scam and it SHOULD be closed... But I'm not a resident of Berkeley. I AM a resident of Oakland. Do keep in mind, HUGE swaths of Berkeley's rental units are occupied by students. Yeah, they are residents, but are also... Transient. Here for a few years and then gone.

Oakland on the other hand, has a bread and circuses and temper tantrum mentality... If the populace can't demand other pay for what they want, they tie it up so thoroughly the developers go away and no one get's housing.

Witness the proposed construction for the MacArthur transit village... Potentially about 400 new housing unit are now completely stalled. Not because there isn't low income housing reserved, but what is reserved is all on the lower levels.

Do you think that encourages needed new development?

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 04/28/2017 at 8:56 PM

Most Popular Stories

Best of the East Bay


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation