Don Howe 
Member since Mar 19, 2013


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: “Oakland Planning Commission Approves 'Mammoth' Tower Next to MacArthur BART

I'm not seeing a way to respond to a specific comment, but thanks back to you, Brandie, for correcting me and adding detail to the community benefits complications - the comments to this post are exploring the issues around this project in considerably more depth than the post managed to. I do want to add, though, that I think this project all by itself, with no additional concessions, will end up being a significant community benefit. But if any significant chunk of money gets extracted from the developer, I'd like it to go to significantly subsidized retail rents aimed at local businesses and a full-service grocery store.

Posted by Don Howe on 02/03/2017 at 12:07 PM

Re: “Oakland Planning Commission Approves 'Mammoth' Tower Next to MacArthur BART

I was there too (and spoke in favor of the tower, as I've done in the past.) Brandie Albright raised a few other points as well; why just report on this one? If Tom Limon's immediate and direct response to this request for recusal was accurate, then no: he has no conflict of interest. Albright, by the way, is a huge asset to the community and my neighbor; we may disagree on this project but her input isn't served well by this post, which appears to have cherrypicked the most potentially inflammatory statement (and the most readily refuted, at least in legal terms.) That was spotty and incomplete reporting. Over here in your utterly failed reporting column: ANY of the comments by ANY of the 46 people who spoke in favor of the project, including representatives of multiple unions, East Bay Forward, and the Greenbelt Alliance. You also forgot to note some (oh wait: I mean any) of the community benefits coming from the developers; was it half a million bucks for Mosswood Park improvements? Check your notes and get back to us on that OK? Then go find a current rendering of the building; the one you're using has been revised and (to my eye) significantly improved in the places it counts. I will look at this building every morning when I leave my house, and I can hardly wait.

Posted by Don Howe on 02/02/2017 at 4:22 PM

Re: “Oakland's Anti-Coal Activists Decry ‘Deceptive’ Mailer

I got this mailer too, and I find this summary of its inaccuracies, omissions, and outright lies - as well as the apparently phantom nature of "Jobs 4 Oakland" - to be quite newsworthy. Please continue reporting it.

Posted by Don Howe on 06/28/2016 at 3:19 PM

Re: “Sunset Magazine Finds New Horizons in Jack London Square

Walter Street? Really? Come on, you guys. You're local press. Get it right. And if that's not possible at least fix it faster than this.

Posted by Don Howe on 06/04/2015 at 10:16 PM

Re: “Video: An Oakland Taco Bell Is Paying Its Janitor in Burritos, Not Money?

Ok, I'll elaborate some. Hit by a car as mentioned already, slip and fall on spilled liquid, inhalation of toxic dust disturbed by sweeping action, exposure to other hazardous materials from noncompliant cleanup of illegally-dumped construction debris on property, puncture wound from inadvertent contact with sharp object, dumpster lid falls on hand or arm. Oh, and food poisoning from consuming bad paycheck. Just off the top of my head.

7 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by Don Howe on 02/20/2015 at 9:16 AM

Re: “Gallo Sought to Censure Gibson McElhaney for Wrongdoing

I'm encouraged - a little - that there's one member of the city council who understands that at the bare minimum, we deserve some explanations. Too bad it's not the one I voted for; that would be Dan Kalb. Dan? Got an appetite today? Anything? My vote is watching this.

16 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Don Howe on 02/20/2015 at 6:51 AM

Re: “Records Indicate that Gibson McElhaney Used Her Council Office for Personal Gain

"This is a violation of the privacy to which I am entitled." Really? Gibson McElhaney is certainly entitled, but not to privacy in her side windows. Nobody in an urbanized area has an inherent "right to privacy" that precludes being overseen by other structures; a single family home built to code on that lot would also see and be seen from the neighbor's windows. If that condo is allowed per the zoning in place for that neighborhood, then it's allowed. This kind of special-circumstance, privileged and inside-track NIMBYism is infuriating to see coming from the very group that's expected to honorably steer Oakland's development. But not surprising.
Next, what's up that Gibson McElhaney needed to have that letter written for her? It's quite short and makes very few arguments. She couldn't have managed that herself? How embarrassing.
Finally, is 530 32nd St in West Oakland now? That's news.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Don Howe on 02/18/2015 at 7:48 AM

All Comments »

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

© 2018 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation