Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion

Re: “Oakland's Only Nigerian Restaurant Was Set to Close, Until Community Rallied Behind Miliki

Congratulations Miliki - your pepe fish head soup - ee de sweet-o! Ben & Sarah

Posted by Ben Wolf 1 on 06/07/2017 at 2:17 PM

Re: “Oakland's Only Nigerian Restaurant Was Set to Close, Until Community Rallied Behind Miliki

Isn't this old news? I had breakfast at Miliki months ago and an employee told me then, that the landlord had told them they could stay.

Posted by Eric Sisneros on 06/07/2017 at 2:16 PM

Re: “A New Oakland A's Ballpark: Our Writer Looks At The Good, The Bad, And The Unknown Of Three Rumored Sites

@Damon, not short sighted at all.

Look at the numbers for other such activities. The city takes in seven million a year from the Raiders... And spends eight million for a net LOSS of a million dollars a year! This city simply cannot afford to bleed tax dollars like this.

I've never seen figure for the A's or the Warriors, but I can't image them to be much better if at all.

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 06/07/2017 at 2:09 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Ahhh yes... The long term residents who scream "NO CHANGE IN OAKLAND!!!!!"

Funny, I searched the back articles on this topic. I found RESIDENTS called out as complaining that the high rise would alter the character of the neighborhood of not more than two or three story buildings, but not property owners.

Why do you suppose the author didn't call out owners as the complainers? It would have fanned the flames of his more than obvious position.

And why do think Oakland has a housing crisis? It's every bit bad a raygun wanting to take the country "back" to a world that only existed in Hollywood movies.

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 06/07/2017 at 2:03 PM

Re: “A New Oakland A's Ballpark: Our Writer Looks At The Good, The Bad, And The Unknown Of Three Rumored Sites

Reality check. I know it's a hateful concept and nothing could be more inconvenient.

How is $200 million in infrastructure provision not a public subsidy to a private sports stadium?

I would like a reference to a competent, independent study which shows how much sports stadiums contribute to local economies. Or not. What I've read says not.

Opportunity costs. What else might be developed at each site with an economic comparision? The Port of Oakland is the main cargo port for
San Francisco Bay. How would expansion/improvement of the existing
port compare with a stadium? Ports are used 24/7; stadiums are used a few hours a week at most.

A 100 year stadium? I think in 100 years something called climate change might have much of that part of Oakland (all three sites) under water. Maybe a stadium/aquarium complex.

880 and BART are currently running at well over capacity, not to mention that they are physically in very poor condition. What is
game-day traffic going to do to an already difficult commute?

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 06/07/2017 at 12:30 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Homeowners against development are indeed a big part of the problem. See the recent argument about homeowners trying to stop 400 units (that will displace no one) at MacArthur Bart. Also, people say they want good paying jobs in Oakland and then complain about tech companies. What other kinds of jobs are they thinking of?

Posted by AndrewOakland on 06/07/2017 at 12:18 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Welcome UBER. The opinions of a few do not represent the masses.

Posted by Josh Shaw on 06/07/2017 at 9:51 AM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

They wanted to keep Oakland to stay as a horrible place to live. How stupid is that???

Posted by Yuan Yan on 06/07/2017 at 1:11 AM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Don't say "We" because you do not represent a lot of Oakland's residents. There are a great many of Oakland residents that want to see development and progress being made to this great city.

The demands listed are very short-sighted if not laughable. Change is coming to Oakland whether people like it or not. The Bay Area is only so big and it's getting crowded day by day.

Posted by Robert Hope on 06/07/2017 at 12:27 AM

Re: “Can Legal Weed Save the Music Industry?

HELL0!!! do you want to be a member of the great illuminat brotherhood and start reciving 50,000,000,00USDmonthly and be popular among others and have riches and fame,,this is the only chance of being a member,i was sent by the freemason high chief to bring 52 members into the illuminatii have gotten 32,so we are looking for 2,,so try and be among the twenty people to be rich,wealthy and famous beyond measures,and your heart desires will be granted unto you. CALL AT+19149203849,WHATSAPP THE GRANDMASTER AT +2348032496611 OR EMAIL AT;powellscottilluminati666@gmail.com,,,so that we can begin the joining process...

Posted by powellsmith loanfunds on 06/06/2017 at 8:12 PM

Re: “Oakland Privacy Committee Urges Police Cut Ties with Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Gee, I'd really hoped that "public safety" had something to do with preventing drive-by shootings, muggings, car jackings and other typical Oakland inconveniences.

Is someone really in charge of "public safety" (whatever that might mean
in Oakland)?

Does Oakland really not have a "public safety" policy which has to do with
the violence and social dysfunction which somehow dominates so much of Oakland?

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 06/06/2017 at 6:23 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

This is the Keep Oakland Poor Committee. Uber will help to fill all those empty shops on Broadway and other Oakland streets. Uber will employ people at all income levels like admin assistants, IT support, janitors. They also will boost local restaurants and hang out in local bars. (adding more jobs for waiters, bartenders) They will even buy local weed

Posted by Kevin Dowling on 06/06/2017 at 4:45 PM

Re: “Top Ramen For Life: The Student Loan Crisis

Greetings to you.

We the Direct Access Online Finance Services offers secured &
unsecured loan at a very low interest rate of 3%. We offer Personal
loans, Debt Consolidation Loan, Venture Capital, Business Loan,
Education Loan, Home Loan or "Loan for any reason! Do you have bad
credit? You can still apply.via: jamesmooreloanfirm@gmail.com
Contact us today for your applications!!!

Yours Truly,
Customer Service
Direct Access Online Finance Services

Posted by Prince Idialu on 06/06/2017 at 3:31 PM

Re: “After Giving Oakland Schools Measure G1 Money, District Now Taking It Back — Leaving Principals With Yet Another Deficit

G1 funds are not tied to the Spending Limitations Protocol that was imposed in January. The SLP was imposed because of years of fiscal mismanagement under the new LCFF funding system which brought an average of $40 million dollars a year over previous levels for the last 4 years. The plan to distribute 50% of G1 funds during the upcoming school year is illegal. The mandate clearly states that funding should be collected this fiscal year and distributed, after proposals are approved, in 18-19. Once again, the district is treading on thin ice with its decisions and maybe be crossing over into completely disregarding the law. Please write about that!

Posted by Goyim Circus on 06/06/2017 at 2:35 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Oakland logic: Get those high paying jobs out of our city. Hopeless.

Posted by jpr on 06/06/2017 at 2:22 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Ummm.... Jason, it's not wealthy homeowner showing up at planning meetings making ridiculous demands of developers. Both Rockridge and Berkeley are full of UC Berkeley students renting housing for a semester at a time. It's been that way for decades. And THEY love to agitate and are easily motivated to do so without regard to long term effects. Happen to recall the battle over the new Safeway store? Berkeley is infamous for it's no-growth initiatives.

As to high density development near transit, let's have a look at a proposed Oakland project... MacArthur BART transit village. Activists there have brought a 400 unit development to a stand still. Not because there was no low cost housing included, but because it was, and I quote, "all crammed onto the lower levels".

While we're discussing areas other than Oakland, what about Albany?

Development costs money. Someone in the community burned a new development down... Twice in less than a year. How many units did that take out? Before that it was the development on West MacArthur.

Members of the city council "work with building owners"... Who have been operating slums for decades... Instead of closing them down and initiating appropriate legal actions to put those properties to right.

Take a little drive down east 10th, south of Fruitvale... Notice an old, VERY odd building? Looks a bit like it's about to fall down (not to mention holes in the roof). It's been that way for years. Oh! the outrage when people get killed in or near it.

The thing that is missed in the discussion of Uber is they aren't tenants. They BOUGHT the building. A large building well on the way to becoming yet another abandoned eyesore in downtown Oakland. Oakland has many. Have ya heard about the old library building in East Oakland? Site of a number of fires?

And just how is it we think it's OK to require a tech company to hire in Oakland, but not make same requirement for teachers, police and firefighters?! WTF?!!!!

Activists in Oakland and the surrounding areas drive development out and scream it's the home owners. It's not.

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 06/06/2017 at 2:17 PM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

The author fails to mention Uber has reduced it's planned workforce in Oakland by 2700 jobs, or 90%. Uber didn't specify why, but most people speculate it's the large number of demands made by the community.

The idea of forcing Uber to "hire and train Oakland residents for those high-paying tech jobs" is a ridiculous burden to place on a company that is free to locate elsewhere. There are tons of "techies" who live in Oakland and commute to tech companies on the peninsula, preventing Uber from locating here will not stop the gentrification.

Posted by Oakland_Native on 06/06/2017 at 11:27 AM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

In previous eras, people moving en masse would trigger development to ease housing pressure. That's not happening now anywhere near where it needs to, because wealthy homeowners are trying to preserve their wealth and the racial / economic / age makeup of their neighborhoods by blocking new development, and landlords want to preserve scarcity for their assets and have maximum leverage over their tenants. Development is isolated to the few neighborhoods where stuff can get built instead of spread to all neighborhoods. (Rockridge has its own nice BART station and is super low-density around that. Same with North Berkeley. Why is that?)

Every market rate condo built for "tech bros" means one older apartment building the "tech bro" doesn't move into instead, and one tenant that isn't at risk of getting displaced. People are being displaced despite new development because *that new development still isn't enough.* You can't just put a wall around the city and you can't just keep playing musical chairs with the same amount of chairs.

Building public housing, affordable housing, fixing the MID, fixing Prop13, repealing Costa-Hawkins, enacting stronger rent control and anti-eviction measures are all super super important, and we need to also start talking about a vacancy tax on residential and commercial spaces to prevent large real estate holders from just camping on vacant properties to preserve scarcity, but there need to be places for everyone to live - even the "tech bros."

"Tech" is not blameless and Uber certainly is problematic for a million other reasons and I think deserves plenty of discussion as to whether they're who we want as an anchor tenant in Oakland. But they aren't /causing/ displacement - homeowners and landlords are.

Posted by Jason Braatz on 06/06/2017 at 11:00 AM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

Give it up. I HATE Uber, but anything that brings much needed cash into this town need to be considered.

Those condos were going up long before Uber bought the Sears building. One has to understand how long it takes to get a construction projects under way. It's not weeks or just a couple of months. Sometimes years.

Posted by Bruce Ferrell on 06/06/2017 at 10:39 AM

Re: “Gentrification Station: Why Oakland Still Says NO to Uber

"Uber can start by making sure Uptown Station does not become Gentrification Station. " It has already happened. I live 3 blocks from the Sears Bldg and already the neighborhood has shifted to enticing tech (etc) workers. There are already several massive condo bldgs going up in the surrounding areas (i.e. UNaffordable housing). These are basically for Uber employees and all the other tech companies that will be moving in. As a non-profit worker I couldn't afford to move into my own apartment bldg now (which is mostly run-down). Thank goodness for that evil rent control. How dare I keep $$ out of my long-suffering millionaire landlord's pocket! I know, I know I'm supposed to be a programmer, or in finance, real estate, banking, law, etc etc making $100 K or more a year instead of trying to do good for the community. It's all my fault for not jumping on the start-up bro bandwagon. Please Ayn Rand, save me!

Posted by Vincent Blafard on 06/06/2017 at 10:03 AM

Most Popular Stories

Best of the East Bay


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation