Lena Tam: Is there a Public Right to Know? – The Alameda Version

In recent years, as an elected official, I struggle to balance the community’s ‘right to know’ (or simple curiosity) against the privacy of individuals or adhering to good faith and fair negotiations with groups or corporations. I have been criticized from both ends of the spectrum. A blogger once told me that I have no right to know why he wanted the public information — he was clearly fishing for something interesting to write. Others have argued that there is no real public ‘right to know,’ and that all dealings of government should be secret, and any dissemination of information to anyone is considered a “leak.”

We pride ourselves in Alameda on the “small town” feel and believe our right to know is paramount. We want to know who is moving into the house next door, how much they paid for their home, what are their remodeling plans, what new business (Target or Orchard Supply) is going into the Alameda Towne Centre, how much money is it going to cost to bring Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to Alameda Point, or why we didn’t get contacted when there was a Dodge commercial on the Bay Farm Island Bridge. Sometimes we jump to conclusions with partial facts in order to promote a political agenda. That is where a review of the public records is a good means to determine another party’s credibility and veracity.

Kate Quick: Can’t Get No Satisfaction

Once in a great while, most people in Alameda come together in a collective notion that all is right with the world and we are going in the right direction. The application for consideration of Alameda Point for the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab appears to be one of the things we have been able to coalesce around.

But, more often than not, we group ourselves into factions: Is the City going down the tubes financially, or not? Is all development bad, or is some o.k.? Do we want to allow low or moderate income housing or should we always go for high end homes? Are big box stores good for our tax base or will they drive out our local merchants? Should we encourage use of public transit or are we so wedded to our cars such expenditures are wasteful? Does Measure A protect us from undesirables or is it preventing us from having flexibility in land use decisions?

Mark Irons: “Oh the humanity!”

We all know that infamous cry from the newsreel footage on the fateful day when the Hindenburg suddenly burst into flames and was, within seconds, reduced to a heap of glowing embers. Lately, in thinking about our fair ship of state in Alameda, I’ve gotten that image and cry stuck in my head, and intuitively I’ve been grasping for analogies. Alameda always has enough public opinion to fill such a gasbag. Even though for years the hydrogen was thought to be the culprit in the disaster, the thin skin covering its frame has become suspect as a key component, it’s coating possibly causing flame to viciously rip across the air ship. That too might be applicable. The actual spark or ignition remains unknown and so is a missing link in the analogy, but thankfully we haven’t reached that step anyway. There were however, immediate sabotage theories, so if Alameda finally does go down in flames the Hindenburg analogy may continue to be useful.

Jordan Battani: Community, not just an NBC sitcom

Sooner or later. if you have any kind of social life at all here, somebody asks you how long you’ve been in Alameda. My answer is invariably the same –I came back in the fall of 2001. My answer has the virtue of consistency, if not accuracy. We did move here in September 2001, but I can’t say we came back because neither of us had ever lived here before. The person who had lived here before was my mother and the reason we came to Alameda in 2001 is because she was too ill to live alone anymore, and we needed a house where she could join us for as long as she had left.

After a house hunt that covered much of the East Bay, we found a much abused craftsman in Alameda on the edge of the Gold Coast and I called my mother to tell her the news. Skipping over the indignities the house had suffered through neglect and a 1970’s makeover, I described the neighborhood and location. There was a long pause on her end of the call, followed by the comment “that’s where the rich kids lived when I was in high school.” All I could think was that it had been a long time since rich anybody had lived in the house we were about to move into, but what I said was, “well Momma, better late than never.”

Rob Bonta: Show Your Support For Bringing Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory To Alameda

As most of you know, on May 9, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory announced that Alameda Point was a finalist for location of LBNL’s second campus. Over the next few weeks, Alameda will “roll out the red carpet” in welcoming LBNL, and I hope that all of you will join many other Alamedans in personally participating in this process. There are a number of ways that you can get involved. First, you can show your support by attending a pre-public meeting BBQ on July 13, 2011, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the grassy mall area across from the Auctions by the Bay Theater, located at 2700 Saratoga Street on the Point. Second, following the BBQ, you can attend the public meeting with representatives from LBNL in the Theater. Third, you can put a sign in your window or on your lawn indicating your support of the City’s efforts to “Put the Point to Work,” which signs will be available soon from the Economic Development Department in Room 120 at City Hall.

The City has created a website dedicated to providing more information about LBNL and our community’s efforts to bring the second campus to the Point: www.lab2alameda.org. Please check the site often for updates on the City’s efforts.

David Burton: It IS Easy Being Green

At events for Community Action for a Sustainable Alameda questions often come up about how one can make a home more “green”. The list of things one can do is nearly endless, but we all have limits to what we can do. One way to get started is to think of a few simple priorities that
can inform the decisions you make about your home. Here are the highest priorities that should order your thinking:

1. Conserve – the resource you never have to use is the best resource. This thinking applies to energy, water, as well as materials.
2. Healthy Indoor Air Quality – Americans spend 90% of their time indoors (scary isn’t it?). Do all you can to insure that the air you breathe is good for you.
3. Recycle/Reuse – look for opportunities to reuse the things around your home. If you are purchasing new things for your house, look for products made from, or with, recycled materials.

If you make decisions with these priorities in mind, you will be well on your way to a “green” home. What are some examples of how these principles are put into action?

Mike McMahon: Civic discourse

The foundation of the democratic process is the ability and willingness of civic leaders and ordinary citizens to utilize civic discourse as a means to find common ground and broadly based effective solutions. Depending on the diligence of the public agency and the willingness of the print press to cover upcoming meetings, civic discourse was limited. In the “good old days” (I let you decide when this was), the framework for dialogue and the opportunity to speak was limited to a city council meeting or board of education meeting.

However, in the brave new world of increasing access to information, multiple channels of communications (email, Twitter, Facebook) and the rise of participatory media culture (blogs, comments on print media news stories, social bookmarking) the nature of civic discourse is changing. Civic leaders and public agencies can no longer control the framework for dialogue. Now ordinary citizens have multiple opportunities to engage in civic discourse. With the civic discourse moving out of the structured world of a city council meeting/board of education meeting, I offer some principles for civic discourse in the public:

Marilyn Ezzy-Ashcraft: Alameda at a Crossroad

Alameda was thrust into the national spotlight with the tragic Memorial Day drowning of Raymond Zack, as public safety personnel stood and watched. It is painful to be on the receiving end of such negative publicity as commentators, both locally and nationally, express anger, outrage and blame over this senseless death.

These reactions are understandable and appropriate, but now it is time to begin the process of reconciliation. Alameda residents need to know that our public safety agencies are capable of responding effectively to emergency situations. And on a more basic level, we want to know that all human lives are valued equally.

The City should engage an independent panel of experts to investigate the public safety response to this incident, answer the many questions raised by Raymond Zack’s death, and recommend appropriate consequences and policy changes. The findings of the investigation report will help assure that this sort of tragedy is never repeated.

Gone, daddy, gone

I’m just going to point out that my last break from blogging was in October 2009. So I think I’m due another pretty soon. Like starting today.

So for the next two weeks I will be taking a very brief hiatus from blogging, but like two-ish years ago, I wouldn’t leave without providing you with some Alameda content to fill your morning. So I’ve begged a few really great Alamedans to guest blog and they have graciously agreed to help out.

Much like last time, a few caveats. While I faithfully read each comment that gets posted, others may not be as fanatical as I am about doing so. So if you ask a question or many questions, you may or may not get a response. It just depends if the person is actually reading the comments section or not.

Bamboleo

Alamedan Reginald James has compiled an awesome resource detailing the history of the Clayton Gutyon Settlement.   A refresher, way back when two Alameda tenants sued the City of Alameda, alleging among other things that Measure A was discriminatory.

The end result was that rather than allow Measure A to be challenged in court, the City decided to settle with the plaintiffs and the Guyton Settlement was the result.   The Guyton Settlement establishes that the City will build 325 units — multi-family units — to replace the affordable units lost when the Buena Vista Apartments (now Summerhouse) were brought up to market rate.

I wanted to excerpts some of the articles that I found really interesting because while I’ve colloquially heard the history, it’s never been compiled in such a way.   I understand that Reginald J. intends to continue adding to it and it’s definitely a much needed compendium particularly for those of us that weren’t around during this time.