Last night at the CIty Council meeting, the Mayor nominated Arthur Autorino to the Planning Board. Remember Gina Mariani vacated her seat a long long long time ago and it’s taken months for the Mayor to finally make a decision about this, probably much to the relief of the rest of the Planning Board as they have been down a member for many months now. Considering the kicking and screaming from Diane Coler-Dark when the initial list came out, I would definitely call Arthur A. the “safe pick” for the Mayor.
I’m a tiny bit disappointed because I would have liked to see the drama unfold if someone less “acceptable” had been nominated for the sheer entertainment value alone. But alas, we shall not be privvy to that sort of community theater.
From what I understand, Arthur A. comes from the business community so I suppose it would be good to get a different perspective on the Planning Board from a business-y sort of view.
Speaking of safe issues, one of the other item of interest last night was the call for review of the Transporation Commission’s decision regarding parking removal in front of the new Alameda Theatre, but I haven’t finished watching that video yet, so I’ll probably talk about that some other time.
Well…. glad they avoided what would have been a major shitstorm.
Comment by Jack B — May 7, 2008 @ 8:46 am
By “shitstorm” do you mean choosing a person to represent an opinion held by a large plurality (if not outright majority) of Alamedans? Where I come from, we don’t call that a “shitstorm,” we call it “good government” or “adhering to democratic principles.”
Of course, representing the citizenry is a secondary need. Lauren’s entertainment is Job 1.
Comment by dave — May 7, 2008 @ 9:45 am
Oh Dave, that’s harsh.
Comment by Linda Hudson — May 7, 2008 @ 1:56 pm
I think the “shitstorm” would be caused by an appointment of yet another pal of mega-development, clearly not a ‘person that represents an opinion held by a large plurality (if not outright majority) of Alamedans’. JKW would have been a huge mistake. Better a relatively unknown like Arthur Autorino.
Who knows more about the appointee?
Comment by David Kirwin — May 7, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
An unproductive field can sometimes benefit from a good downpour of manure.
Comment by AlamedaNayTiff — May 7, 2008 @ 5:09 pm
ANT – that is a cute line, but what are you saying? Are you suggesting the PB is “unproductive, and they would benefit from JKW on the dais – as the “reign of manure”?
If so, I disagree with both points.
Comment by Dave Kirwin — May 7, 2008 @ 6:10 pm
Sort of off subject, but related to politics, I read in the paper that Alameda is jumping onto the “Bailout” program to save homeowners from foreclosure, or in other words, save them from their bad financial decisions.
That a socialist measure like this snuck under the radar is amazing. What kind of people do we have running the city here? This is such a moral hazard that I’m gonna’ go out right now and Buy a Bentley and demand that the city pay for it lock stock and barrel.No difference.
oh- and in other news, the proposed plan to build 100 homes on Bay Farm Island was rejected. Why? Because ( surprise surprise) local residents said it would create traffic problems. These people are amazing. They themselves are relative newcomers to the island, yet its all OK since they already got their little piece if dirt, so now they have to make sure that NOBODY ELSE can. Greed. Outright greed.
Comment by edvard — May 11, 2008 @ 10:30 am
Edvard, the bailout program is just one little turd in the pink colored shitstorm of local feelgood legislatiion coming out the cc.
Comment by anachrofella — May 11, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
Edward, you should at least read the articles in the local papers before commenting on them. Cowan’s next development on Bay Farm Island has NOT been rejected!
The plan goes to PB tomorrow night, and according to the Journal it “will” go to CC for final approval. I would have thought that Cowan would have to appeal the PB’s decision to CC, but the local paper seems to be betting that PB will approve the development and the change in zoning, so Cowan can build homes in the industrial zone closest to the main runway of OAK. EIR says it is unhealthy place to live, and local employers who city encouraged to move here did so to get their manufacturing plants farther from residential areas…
While traffic is a major concern, it is certainly not the only one..
Comment by David Kirwin — May 11, 2008 @ 4:00 pm
I may be an old fool but I think the planning board will not approve the housing for Harbor Bay. I also don’t believe the council will approve it.
Comment by john piziali — May 11, 2008 @ 7:30 pm
It is not just the residents there that are against it. Other tenants in the business park are very concerned. Some of them have spent lots of money on new facilities out there– next to land that was also zoned commercial. Now they want to change the zoning and the businesses are worried about lots of complaints from new residents about trucks and noise from manufacturing (24 hour operations). I think their concern is legitimate–changing the zoning should not be allowed. If the market for business space is not great right now, the market for new homes is hardly better and if they can’t get a compliant project together now, they should wait until the market is better.
Comment by Kevis Brownson — May 11, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
Thanks for the hope John. I hope you are correct. It has often been reassuring to hear the words of the Fool on the Hill.
- Wish I could remember the lyrics to that Beatles song.
However, it will take some time before I will be able to feel trusting, or ‘comfortable’ with the intentions of the handful of votes deciding the fate of our community. I’ll have to wait and see what happens since I lack your trust.
Comment by David Kirwin — May 11, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
The headline of the paper said that the planned development was rejected in plain English, so unless someone in the editing department missed something, I’m not sure why this would be mentioned. That seems strange.
In regards to local residents have ‘concerns’ about new houses and anything else being built due to the noise, well I fail to see this as being a legitimate concerns seeing as how this neighborhood is very close the the Oakland Airport and I-80. These residents just need to come clean and admit the truth which though sounds ugly, is really that they all want their homes to be the last built on the block.
It won’t get passed. The little gentleman’s club that Alameda has become will assure that will be the case.
Comment by edvard — May 12, 2008 @ 7:49 am
Lauren has already dealt with the housing development in her latest point, so I won’t correct edvards misreading, other than to note that I think Dave Kirwin’s paranoia complex is rubbing off on edvard, or the other way around.
In another unrelated thread (instead of this one, which happens to be about the appointee to the Planning Board. Kirwin charged that Autorino has gone on record as opposing Measure A. Other than citing Jean Sweeney as your source (who made up her charge) prove that Autorino has spoken against Measure A.
Comment by notadave — May 12, 2008 @ 8:06 am
notadave,
thanks for the free analysis of my mental status. Perhaps I can return the favor.
Anyhow, please read my other statement about this issue, which is that this whole thing is supposedly about the noise and ‘pollution’ that future residents might have to endure. So I suppose that we’re in the business of making decisions for people who don’t even live here yet? Someone in Alameda has a mighty powerful crystal ball…
Comment by edvard — May 12, 2008 @ 8:42 am
NAD – Funny should cite that Edvard and I as sharing paranoia – especially since we hold polar opposite views on this new Cowan development.
Aside from Edvard certainly not reading beyond the headlines, his idea that the ‘present’ should not decide for the ‘future’ is pure naivety.
Edvard – that is how it always works – always has, always will. It’s called evolution, whether on a cellular level or a societal level, the present always forms the future.
“The entire argument against building these homes is about noise,”
Jeez Edvard – you’ve really not been paying attention!
Your comments about the decision already being made also show that you are trying to judge the content by the headline – you should have read the articles. This “soundbyte mentality” is probably more common now than ever, as the younger generation is bombarded by more and more info, resulting in less thorough inspection of fact and reason. Often quality is better than quantity, especially in areas of how you are going to invest your time – better to do fewer things if you will be able to them well. As in; read the entire article before commenting on the reasons or the decision.
Comment by David Kirwin — May 12, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
I just had a thought,lets all wait and watch a couple of planning board meetings to see how this guy does. Then we can decide if he loves or hates measure A. Unless someone out there knows Aurthur Autorino, and can give us some factual information. Sorry Jean Sweeny does not count as factual or even in the realm of reality.
Comment by john piziali — May 12, 2008 @ 10:10 pm
“Sorry Jean Sweeny does not count as factual or even in the realm of reality.”
Holy crap John – nice way to show gratitude for all the public service Jean has done.
This whole city owes her huge thanks for all her work trying to prove to the city that we should get the “Central Park” right-of-way back from the railroad for “a song”. That was Jean Sweeny’s song.
I may not always agree with her, but often she makes sense, as with most of her ‘green’ ideas for the Point; and her work has saved the city millions of dollars. Then again as I recall your decisions on the PB were not based on saving the tax payers’ money.
Comment by David Kirwin — May 12, 2008 @ 10:37 pm
What do we know about Arthur Autorino? He’s been on the Economic Development Commission – what has he done there?
A Google search shows he was a V.P. of TheraSense, (VP marketing, then Operations) and made a great deal of money exercising his stock options. Also shows him to be a defendant in class action suit of the employees of TheraSense. Of course I still don’t know anything about him, but I’m sure many will be watching him like the rest of PB.
Comment by David Kirwin — May 12, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
Jean has done wonderful things for the city, no doubt, but she is also prone to igniting wildfires with overblown, and often false allegations.
In your post #19 you state “of course I still don’t know anything about him” So how come you stated he had spoken against measure A. If you want to have any shred of credibility left, Kirwin, put up or shut up.
Comment by notadave — May 13, 2008 @ 7:52 am