Clarence C. Johnson 
Member since Feb 13, 2014


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Vote by Oakland Council President McElhaney Preceded Husband's Substantial Contract for UrbanCore Project. Was it a Conflict?

This article is so obviously trying to blur lines between fact and innuendo . "Preceded husbands contract for urban core project". Notice it says husbands contract for UrbanCore project, rather than husbands contract for Urbancore. That's because the contract the husband had wasn't actually with Urbancore, but with KCP. The $4000 went to KCP, not to the husband. Also, what's "substantial" contract, if we don't know how much her was her husband paid? Was it $100? $50? Is that "substantial"? Husbands contract with KCP is one thing, KCPs contract with Urbancore is another thing, and the only thing with a dollar value in this article and the only thing that can therefore be considered substantial? Yet the monetary impact for McElhaney is unknown.

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 07/15/2016 at 11:58 PM

Re: “Vote by Oakland Council President McElhaney Preceded Husband's Substantial Contract for UrbanCore Project. Was it a Conflict?

Did other employees of KCP donate to other councilmembers campaigns? That was conveniently left out of this article. Or did EBX not even look into that? Don't cherry pick facts to paint the narrative you want

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 07/15/2016 at 11:46 PM

Re: “Did the Express Get its Rent-Control Reform Ballot Measure Story Wrong? Hell No. Here's Why ...

But what BondGraham still hasn't answered is if there are plenty other examples of summaries exceeding 500 words, which is Katz original point. If that is the case, then there is no intent to delay.

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 06/08/2016 at 3:45 PM

Re: “The Express Announces Nick Miller as Incoming Editor

Great news! Another bespectacled white guy to tell us what's good for minorities!

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 04/01/2016 at 12:27 PM

Re: “JP Morgan Chase's Home Loans in Oakland Mostly Went to White and Wealthy Residents

Nice clickbait headline. If the headline was "Loans went to people with high credit score" it may have inspired a great big "Duh".

There's not much leverage the city has here, in asking to provide loans to individuals they find to be lacking good credit - as $800k in municipals deposits is nothing to any bank, much less JP Morgan that has $2.6 trillion on its balance sheet.

Guess its a slow week over at the EBX headquarters in Black vs. White news.

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 01/22/2016 at 6:00 PM

Re: “Special Deal Would Benefit Influential Oakland Developer

I usually hate NIMBY-ism, and how it tends to find common cause with "progressive" politics to keep rents high. The Mason has a total of 104 units. That's it. If it built any more, the neighbors would complain about height, and if it built any less, then rents would be much higher than the $2800 for a 1 bedroom. Go visit the property, a good chunk of it is walking space between 23rd and 24th. If such a big fuss is made about 104 units, how is Oakland going build housing for anyone?

On the other hand, I just bought in the area, and it will be to my benefit to keep rents high. So I guess if I cant beat 'em, might as well join them. So thank you, EBX doing your part in making sure the members of the community oppose any housing in general. My nest egg and property value is much better off as a result.

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 11/04/2015 at 9:50 AM

Re: “Oakland Leaders Still Missing in Action

Again, EBX is out of touch and contradicting its own message. All of a sudden when rooms are being rented out to temporary visitors on AirBNB, EBX cares about housing inventory? If EBX wants more inventory they could very easily support housing, for which EBX only supports affordable housing. And who will subsidize that affordable housing? Not wealthier new residents who have cars, because EBX wants to eliminate parking spaces as well. Not developers E12th St Parcel, because EBX opposes that as well.

In fact you will find EBX arguing every detail about why specific housing projects should not be built, but you will never find them actually advocating to build new housing. So sorry if I'm not buying the "inventory" argument.

And as far as the sustainability of Ubers business ? Ubers is capitalizing on an inefficiency created by the corrupt and monopolistic system of taxi medallions. The medallion lawsuit boils down to limiting # of Ubers on the road, in order to maintain their monopoly. It wont work, because the public has voted with their dollars, and removing Uber would be take away an affordable service that people depend on.

Uber has so far created a profitable business that is wildly popular, affordable, and most importantly provides an important service that the public relies on. EBX "business" is to capitalize on the fears of poor people of color, by pandering, grandstanding, and posturing for clickbait headlines all in the name of "progressive" journalism.

Posted by Clarence C. Johnson on 09/30/2015 at 12:33 PM

All Comments »

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation