City Brings In Hired Guns; Asks Union Rep To Rip Waterfront Project/Developer
— by Jeffrey Wisniewski — 3 January 2011 — 34 comments below »
In all likelihood prompted by Mayor Ed Balico and City Attorney Mick Cabral, an ill-informed union bigwig — in fact, the same guy who randomly appeared and spoke against the Hercules Bayfront project at the September 14 city council meeting, and who also gave big money to Joe Eddy McDonald’s failed reelection campaign — wrote a hit-piece on the waterfront developer (AndersonPacific) in Sunday’s West County Times in what is now the City’s latest attempt to derail the long-awaited, well-received and award-winning project.
The far-reaching editorial is full of untruths and distortions, e.g.: “At last week’s City Council meeting, Anderson tried to ram through a resolution that would prohibit the use of eminent domain to obtain the property needed for the ITC.”
A resolution for a temporary moratorium of eminent domain, as requested by the developer, was not on the city council’s agenda. The city attorney and city manager made sure it was not for fear that the council would actually approve it, and uhm, make progress. Jim Anderson was not even at the meeting. And the term “ram” implies that this was done with haste. The city council approved the Waterfront Now initiative — which codified the waterfront development as a transit-oriented, walkable community in the exact form of the Hercules Bayfront project — in July 2008, almost 30 months ago.
AndersonPacific has been working exclusively with now-former City Manager Nelson Oliva and City Attorney Mick Cabral in “negotiations” for a DOPA which includes a simple land transfer for the ITC project. (I use negotiations in quotes because negotiations have never really taken place.) Oliva was recently released from his contract following a public uproar in the wake of information that he purposely hid the City’s debts and realigned City priorities to his own financial benefit, i.e., Sycamore North. And Cabral — the Contra Costa Times editorial board has twice called for his firing. Not the most reputable of a negotiating team, to be clear.
Another unfortunate distortion: “The cost of the Intermodal Transit Center and all related infrastructure improvements is estimated at $81 million, with the majority of the money coming from federal, state and regional governments.”
The $81m figure is accurate, but only $26m of funding has been secured (according to former interim City Manager’s fourth weekly report), far from a “majority.” The City has applied for an additional $27m in funding, but those funds are far from guaranteed. The bulk of the project’s cost (as much as $55m) — if the project is built — will likely be funded from the redevelopment agency’s ailing budget.
The City is resorting to another round of baseless, fundamentally-flawed attacks on the waterfront project. The City is willing to accept awards for the vision (including Mayor Ed Balico telling reporters in Emeryville last month that this project is the city’s top priority), but refuses to allow progress be made at city hall.1 Oliva’s dismissal will certainly help end the logjam, but Cabral and three members of the council — Balico, Don Kuehne and Joanne Ward — remain as obstacles.
Hercules Bayfront is a privately-funded project that surrounds a publicly-funded train station. In this economy, and with the financial condition of the city and redevelopment agency, it makes no sense to turn away the private investment that will generate jobs (both construction and long-term), increased property taxes (which will help replenish the redevelopment agency’s budget), and much-needed sales tax revenue. Both sides will be able to eventually agree to terms one way or the other (with neither side leaving happy, as the saying goes), but they first actually need to meet at the table and, uhm, negotiate. That hasn’t happened yet and it is long overdue.
- At one point progress was being made — during Long’s tenure — but then the council abruptly fired him.↩
This was a slanderous and duplicitous ad manufactured to look like a real article. I would like to know who provided the disinformation to the union. This needs to be investigated by the DA. The sad thing is the union is being used and if we lose Anderson -they lose jobs. Stupid!
Can someone explain to me what Balico and Cabral have against this project or Anderson? And what’s the deal about the EIR? … needing some catch-up.
@ Watching (if that is your real name) — That question can be asked several ways: Why did the City fast-track Sycamore North? Why did the City spend $2m on a failed annex? Why did the City allow for the New Town Center project to apparently fleece the redevelopment agency? Why did the City invite Walmart only to pursue eminent domain following public outcry? The answer is failed leadership.
Recall the illegal campaign post card that was mailed prior to the last City Council race? Did we ever find out who sent it?
Jeffrey, why the snyde remark? Watching asked a few questions and you have not helped to enlighten him/her. Isn’t that what we’re all here for, to work together to become educated, fix our city and get on with all the award winning development you all hold so near and dear? We all understand that the CIty council and manager have failed us miserably.
Oh yea, before you ask, no, my name is not “Been here 50 years”.
# Been here 50 years
Hey Been, Is your name really Ben?
Let me try to answer the question from Watching.
Walmart, Sazbo, Safeway Train Station, Eminent Domain, Helicopter Pads, Convention Center on the Waterfront, Waterview Parking Garages, Red Hat, Sycamore North, Sycamore Crossing, Market Hall, New Town Center, Cinema Town, Canceled meeting on Jan4th, no agenda established on the Dec meetings to discuss the waterfront…….
These and many other things have either taken precedence over the waterfront or have taken redevelopment and city funding away from the waterfront. These are all signs that there are people in city hall (maybe Balico, maybe Cabral, maybe others as well) that are not in favor of the waterfront at least not in favor of it as planned. It is apparent that factions of city hall want some other product on the waterfront, something different than what the original charette envisioned and something different than what the Waterfront Initiative calls for.
I suspect that the reason or this is either they just believe in a different vision for Hercules and will try to push their vision through regardless of what the public voice has been or they have some sort of “vested” interest in doing projects other than the waterfront (does Sycamore North or Red Barn come to mind about now?). In any event it is very obvious that they are opposed to the Waterfront Initiative regardless of their claims to the contrary.
To the members of city hall that may be listening “Actions Speak Louder Than Words”.
@ Been here — Interpreting my remark as “snide” says more about the reader than the author. (It was meant to be playful.)
Looking for Facts: Why the loaded question? Who said that the postcard was illegal? If the developer sent it, as I suspect, that would make it an independent mailing. My understanding is that only if it were mailed by a candidate or candidate committee, or at the behest of a candidate, would the source of the mailer need to be provided.
Rome is burning, why are you trying to make issue over this mailer? Seems you might be more concerned with the apparent misuse of redevelopment funds well documented in this blog, and the likelihood the city is on the brink of insolvency.
Jeffrey, my apologies for the spelling error….
It would have come across as playful had you answered the questions. Instead you told Watching what questions he/she should have asked.
# Looking for facts
Postcard?
Try the “Push Poll” if you want to recall something that was done just prior to the last election. If it was not illegal it was at least unethical and if not unethical it was at least reprehensible.
PS: I think the answer is what you said, “they have some sort of “vested” interest in doing projects other than the waterfront”.
I think the City Manager wanted to divert more projects to NEO, and Balico wanted more opportunities to reward his cronies. Hilltown and Red Barn developers allowed for this, so their projects landed on the front burner. Jim Anderson didn’t “get it”. Hence his project was doomed to go nowhere. My take on it.
Oh for heaven’s sakes! What does one political mailer out of dozens have anything to do with this topic -the original article – which was a paid ad, a libelous and slanderous smear? Of course I can’t speak for Jeff, but although I realize some folks have very good reasons for not posting their real names, and it is much easier to post and be a critic without revealing who you are but it means more if you can take ownership for your words . That article was full of disinformation. And the way it was done made it appear it was legitimate although the huge picture of nothing so they could occupy a half-page was a little obvious. If you’ve read it you will notice it was prefaced by “Commentary” instead of Editorial and it was not on the Letters to the Editor Page. They purchased the space and ran it – its a political ad. Anderson may have grounds to sue. The disinformation regarding the EIR alone is worth noting as the EIR is the City’s and they can release it whenever the heck they want to. And they should release it – its been ready for about 2 months. The answer to “Been’s” question is not simple – for all the reasons listed and no sarcasm intended, it appears there are folks at city Hall who either are opposed to the concept, or just put self-interests first (which may in fact be the case). A lot of money was fed through the redevelopment agency through all those other projects and pocketed by Oliva friends and family members as employees but so far all we have to show for it is a half built behemoth that may end up an instant slum if it isn’t configured differently. The D.A., who has been contacted, or so I have been told, needs to delve deeply into this and follow the money. The Charette vision wasn’t just a bunch of houses – it includes parks, the Bay Trail, open plazas with contributions from the Hercules Historical Society for little bits of history, parking, retail, a coffee shop, business offices, etc.etc. Those of us who attended all the community meetings and were able to provide input to the architect’s drawings were shown a wonderful development that Hercules could be proud of – not just a bunch of houses. The InterModal Train Station is at the center so that piece is critical. While the City was so busy spending millions other places, it didn’t bother to purchase the property the station is supposed to sit on! Remember, once the area is built, its done, and we have to live with it whatever it is. Hercules has a wonderful opportunity to make something special which is why it has actually been awarded prizes for these plans. So why do we even have Sycamore North , the Field of Dreams, more talk about Hilltown, and for ten years – nothing has been done about the wonderful opportunity Hercules has? This is a sophisticated development which requires a marriage of public and private interests – something that is relatively new in the real estate world and certainly not easy. But it can be done. Let’s please not lose the vision with petty squabbling! And do join us at the Recall Meeting, rescheduled January 6th, 7 pm at round Table Pizza.
@Been here: You had been shooting the messenger….why? Mr. Wisniewski, clearly, had been informing the citizens of Hercules of what has been going on in our community, politics or otherwise. As far as I’m concerned, he has done this community good. What have you done, besides the sarcassm, in your 50 years here in Hercules? Maybe you could bring your sarcassm to the city council meetings and start bringing up your sarcasstic ideas in the podium and not here in this forum. We could use it up there you know 8).
Hi Jeff,
Though I am not yet officially in my new assignment, I try to read the Waterfront Watch as often as possible. I read the article posted today, “City Brings in Hired Guns…”, and wanted share my belief that Mr. Hodess wrote this commentary without any urging from city staff. The opinions and statements expressed are those of the author and those he represents.
If you want to discuss this, please give me a call.
@ Fred Deltorchio — Thank you for your perspective. I responded to you directly via email.
Fred,
Welcome and congratulations and/or commiserations as the case may be. The point is what motivated the union to produce the hit piece? A half page is expensive. Where did he get his disinformation? That came from somewhere – where? It would be great if the City could address the comments publicly. Perhaps you should call
this guy in and give him the facts?
@ Fred and Susan – I think that Fred should communicate the facts as he sees them in some type of community forum…… ie. West County Times, Hercules Patch etc.
Wow,
This is just like a wild west TV series. Land grabs, corruption, the bad guys take over the town, the big wheels from back east come in to try to build the railroad, the evil company manager sends in the payed off politicians to run the show, the town folk rise up, then the sheriff steps in and take over down at the court house.
I can’t wait to see how this ends.
I’m staying all the way through to the credits and the music.
Maybe they could sell popcorn down at the carnival trailers too?
@PS Many thanks for the type response I was hoping for, in that you explained the background on the waterfront impasse, or stall, or delay, with ideas for why. I’m simply a bit late to the game as a Hercules follower, and lack historic knowledge. I’m sure I’m not alone.
I meant, of course, type of response….
Been Here 50 years,
Have you really been a resident of Hercules for 50 years? (just curious). That means you were here when it was a company town as it really didn’t get going until Hercules Powder Works created the plans and started things going! If so, you have lots of interesting stories re Hercules to share. I’m sure the Hercules Historical Society would love to hear your stories – they are constantly seeking anecdotal memories!
# Susan Keeffe
Could mean 50 years on the planet.
PS,
I thought of that after I submitted!
Susan,
I never claimed to be a resident for 50 years. I’ve been “here”, the Pinole/Hercules area for 50 years. A resident for 25 years. I’ve watched both towns grow for better or worse.
I have been on the planet in excess of 50 years. I moved to Pinole in 1960. I was here when Hercules was a company town. I went to school with the kids from Hercules. I do have my share of stories.
I want to wish you all luck with your campaign to build the waterfront and recall the remaining three council members.
This will be my final post on this site. I will take my “sarcasm” and go back to my apolitical life, dumb and happy.
# Been here 50 years
Come now, nothing wrong with having some perspective to push on. You have created a sounding board that helps some of the rest of us formulate our views with.
Been Here 50 years, Oh No! Please reconsider! This Blog may have begun as a Waterfront Blog but it has grown to so much more! Its always good to hear different points of view!this is no longer about the Waterfront – its about all of us and our tax dollars and pride in our City.
# Susan Keeffe
“its about all of us and our tax dollars and pride in our City.”
Which is about the waterfront
@ Susan Keefe – I think I know how “Been Here 50 years” feels as I have been the target of some of Jeff’s comments as well. That has curtailed some of my enthusiasm for posting here but I still enjoy keeping abreast of what’s going on even though I post fewer comments now. The fact is …… It’s Jeff’s sandbox!
31 year resident.
You’re right but so what! Isn’t the concern about transparency?
PS – on target as usual! I wonder what the next revelations will be!
Jeff, I enjoy your articles and this forum for public discussion. I have made several comments and i generally agree with the concensus for a Recall election. I take issue with your characterization of the Union Rep as being “Ill informed” and as someone who is at the beck and call of ANY city official… His job is to secure employment of his membership and to counter the influence of greedy developers who push one-sided deals that are bad for Cities and local workers. It would help if you contacted THAT Union Official, to see what the motivations are for his article in the Times…
@ Sal — I spoke with Aram Hodess, the author, for a half-hour yesterday.
Saltthe Plumber,
He is very ill informed! And we’re wondering why? I’m not anti-union ,having previously been a member of one for 19 years, but if this was a protective strategy it was based on inuendo, distortions of facts, and total disinformation. That doesn’t help his membership at all and could backfire. I am still wondering where he is getting his information from and why he felt he had to spend so much money on putting on an ad masquerading as a genuine article. All it did was serve to reflect badly on him. In the future I would hope he attends the community meetings scheduled by the City where the Waterfront Plans have been laid out in detail by the City, the Architect, and the Develooper. As I stated previously, this not about building houses! Its far more complex and comprehensive and involves multiplle agencies including transportation agencies.
I reinforce what Susan is saying. That article exhibited gross misunderstanding of what is happening (or not happening) on the waterfront and was a recapitulation of the stunning ignorance this same man showed at a City Council meeting several weeks ago. Stunned residents stared at one another after he sat down from that talk, with everyone clearly thinking, “What was that guy talking about?!!!” We do know that people interested in continuing the lies and malfeasance of this city’s leaders were responsible for inviting him to speak at that Council meeting, and that their motive was clearly to obfuscate the issues and suggest ridiculous things about the developer (who has support for his vision of waterfront development by well over 90% of Hercules residents). I have no evidence that these same city representatives were involved in coaching for this newspaper article, but experience has shown that our past suspicions of duplicitous intent have much more commonly been too tame than too aggressive.