I wanted to talk about the conversation around the leases, especially with Darcy Morrison running around claiming that Alameda Point has generated $126 million in net income over 12 years. As proof, she points to David “Action Alameda” Howard’s “analysis” of the ARRA’s cash flow analysis (wonky terms, but stick with it for a second). That should have been her first tip off that she should check her math.
Someone has hired a lawyer to threaten the City Council with a lawsuit over Alameda Point. They should hire someone to read things for them first.
Almost from the get-go, some folks have tried to claim it was untrue (I guess that I was making it up, despite linking to his statement), and then again at the end of last week, the ever-correct Jane Smythe claimed that Matarrese had changed his mind because his statement was no longer on the web. At the same time, Don Roberts celebrated 20 years of talking about things without knowing what he’s talking about with special guest Pat Bail! Pat repeated the canard that Frank Matarrese had seen the light about Alameda Point because of “All” the opposition to the project (part of the “one-person, one-community-group” strategy to defeat the Point). The ironic proof? Matarrese’s website no longer presents his announcement of his support.
Yet another group has popped up around the Point, that makes 2. Honestly, do Action Alameda, SOC!A, Citizens for a Better Alameda, Keep Measure A Committee expect us not to realize that the contacts for these groups are all the same people? Heck, Gretchen Lipow is listed as a key person for three of them!
Well the suit has been settled. For $2.25 million. And, as reported by Michele at The Island, the amount is covered by the California Joint Powers Risk Management Authority, thus no drain on the Alameda’s general fund, and thus, no bankruptcy. (It really must get tiring being oh so wrong, oh so often).
Apparently someone else watched the SOC!A video about Alameda Point and realized that all their photos showing open space at Alameda Point were in locations that SunCal’s Master Plan has slated for Open Space, making the point of the video a bit pointless (pun intended).
It seems that there is a small group of people who are upset at the Alameda Point signature gatherers not standing on street corners yelling, “will you sign this initiative to put measure a for the whole city on the ballot thereby ruining our small-town community.” It was surprising to hear who is acknowledging that this is the case.
Why has the response to concerns about asbestos at the FISC Hospital fire been so slow? Two weeks to issue a statement? Even more troubling is the narrative, coming from top city officials, that asbestos testing was done on the air. So far, the facts do not seem to bear this out.
In today’s Alameda Journal newsletter from “former councilmember” Barbara Thomas which is so rife with bad information that it hints at why she was so spectacularly voted out of office in her run for reelection in 1991. (she received barely 20% of the vote in 1991, just beating Don Roberts for fourth place).
So it looks like Alameda Point as an issue in Alameda is beginning to heat up. What is unfortunate, and completely predictable, is the way in which things are beginning.
Alameda news and opinion
Mindfulness in the face of challenge.
