Blogging Bayport Alameda

April 1, 2015

No joke

Filed under: Alameda, Alameda-ish, Development — Lauren Do @ 6:01 am

Someone posted this article on Facebook yesterday and I thought it was too good not to share.  While everyone is scrambling to create jobs for “tech” and insist on only having high paying jobs in their cities, the piece quotes that for every high paying job there are five service jobs that are created as a result.  Problem is: we’re not creating enough housing to keep up with housing those high paying tech jobs, let alone the lower wage service jobs that are created as a result.  We can keep making excuses as to why we can’t build any more where the jobs are located and in the meantime it forces the people who provide just as important services to commute long distances in order to be able to afford reasonable accommodations.

Excerpts from the piece, the tale of Ronnie Thomas who bikes to a Stockton train station then catches a bus in Fremont to commute to Stanford is particularly sobering.  And you thought your commute was bad…

“In regards to my commute, it’s not like I am isolated,” he said. “I am not doing anything special. There are hundreds and hundreds of other people doing the same thing I do, every day.”

Thomas’ commute is representative of the challenges a growing number of low-income workers face in the Bay Area as rents rise and affordable housing options continue to vanish, especially in Silicon Valley where the bulk of the employment opportunities are.

Silicon Valley’s tech boom has increased employment opportunities for low-income service workers even more than for programmers in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, compounding an already punishing shortage of affordable housing in the area.

But, the low-income workers — those that serve food, clean up after residents, maintain grounds and make Stanford’s campus work — are often forced to move far away, to cities like Manteca, Tracy and San Jose.

Building more affordable housing has been a tough sell in Palo Alto.

“The community has openly resisted high-density development,” said Simitian, in reference to the Palo Alto area. “An indicator of this was the community’s rejection of building a senior affordable housing project in Maybell.” In November 2013, over 56 percent of Santa Clara County voters voted against the building of a 60-unit apartment complex on Maybell Avenue for seniors who make less than the area median income.



  1. And your point is ?
    You sound like that City council member which made the claim to be the proud to have established the most Socialist City outside of Cuba , not my words , His own ! you thought Trish was bad …….
    Not everyone drive a Ferrari , not everyone has a lifer job with the City , as a matter of fact the vast majority of American need to work for a leaving , Danville , Lafayette , San Ramon and the like , these Cities are reserved for our public employees .
    It is not a question of being under paid it is a matter of being overpaid .
    That Hamburger which will never spoil worth $6.00 or that ice cream which cannot melt or cell phone , equipment and services , really worth what you are paying for . knowing they are manufactured by semi slave workers in China , When Vietnamese workers asked for better pay they shut the factories and moved to another Country , just like in the in the USA
    Sad reality you need to earn $30 an hour to be able to survive in the Bay area , only people which come close and over are all City Employees , Interesting ….

    Comment by Arnold — April 1, 2015 @ 10:58 am

  2. #1

    I think the point is that the Navy was a model employer in providing a housing-mix that met the needs of its workforce, and if the City of Alameda can reduplicate that same housing-mix than the traffic nightmare from future development that people currently envision will not materialize.

    Your entitled to your opinion about public employees and union members. If the compensation for these positions is as generous as you believe, I suggest you take time off from blogging and apply for one of these jobs. If public employees are over-paid they must be under-qualified, so how hard would it be to get hired for an open position? Low-hanging fruit waiting for your picking, yet you complain about other people eating from the tree. And your point is?

    Comment by Gerard L. — April 1, 2015 @ 12:49 pm

  3. Just a fool

    Dooooo announces having love child with Doug DeHaan, Spencer revealed as Godmother.

    Trish Truth is discovered to be 6 Y/O who lost her crayons.

    Russo saying best investment of all time was buying favors of Mayor and Council members for 5K in Election so he would be appointed City Manager. He also thanked the Fire Department for their advice. ” It was like Winning Lotto” said Russo.

    Jon Spangler announces his family has made enough off the special interest groups in Alameda thru promoting and 5 color flyers he will open up his own Manure Nursery at the Base.

    Comment by Cobalt Black Keys Johnson — April 1, 2015 @ 1:20 pm

  4. 2
    Navy didn’t provide diddly squat housing for it’s employees. Zilch, nada civilian employees at the base received any kind of housing assistance associated with working for the Navy.

    Most of the civilian employees at the base wouldn’t have lived in Alameda even if they had been paid to live here. They hated the thought of being associated with a Navy town and lived as far away as Sacramento or even Patterson just to get out of the inner Bay Area.

    Comment by jack — April 1, 2015 @ 6:13 pm

  5. Jack:

    I was simply questioning the systematic demolition of rental housing because of the racism that exists in Alameda.

    Comment by Gerard L. — April 1, 2015 @ 8:12 pm

  6. You got that right. Alameda is no doubt the most racist Island in the bay. Yerba Buena is probably the second most racist. Angel Island runs a close third followed closely by Treasure and Alcatraz.

    Comment by jack — April 1, 2015 @ 9:27 pm

  7. Jack: The systematic demolition of rental housing because of the racism that exists in Alameda has nothing to do with an island.

    Comment by Gerard L. — April 1, 2015 @ 10:34 pm

  8. 4. what was the arrangement with East Housing for example, which was torn down to make way for Bayport? Did the Navy, build it, own it, lease it? As multiple units dwellings it was considered valuable housing stock by affordable housing advocates.

    Comment by MI — April 2, 2015 @ 8:05 am

  9. 7

    I am aware of East Housing being demolished and replaced with (mostly) SFH’s. Are there other examples of large scale multi-family demolitions?

    And can you cite any evidence that EH’s conversion was driven by racism?

    Comment by dave — April 2, 2015 @ 8:38 am

  10. Of course the Navy provided housing at NAS Alameda: Bachelor Officer Quarters, Bachelor Enlisted Quarters, WAVE Barracks, Big Whites for married naval officers with families.
    What any of it has to do with today’s housing discussion is beyond me.

    Comment by vigi — April 2, 2015 @ 9:15 am

  11. East housing was for military not civilians and was basically junk. The other side of Atlantic was civilian ghettoish apts but was not government housing and is still there. There were three groups of low income housing in Alameda that were built during WWII for civilian base workers who paid low rent. They were called “projects” by regular Alamedians. One was at the end of Atlantic right across Webster and was called the Webster St Projects, another was where Coast Guard housing is now and was called the Estuary Projects the other was about where Alameda Landing is now and I think was called the Alameda Projects. There tons more of these Projects on the Oakland side of the Estuary build for civilian war workers of all races and colors.

    Once the war was over low income folks stayed in the projects and others moved on. Couple decades after the war the projects were either demolished or made into government housing for poor folk.

    Comment by jack — April 2, 2015 @ 9:39 am

  12. 9

    When EH was demolished then City Manager Jim Flint likened the Bayport Development to a “tsunami” that would repeople the West End.

    Take a look at West Housing at Alameda Point. I think this is from the Flint era as well. When the Fire Department cut holes in the roofs was that a training exercise or a deliberate action to render these apartments uninhabitable? No need to call Ms. Ott’s attention to this matter.

    On my side of Atlantic, I spent six months last year living in one of Jack’s ghettoish apartments, while my ghettoish house was remodeled to make it more ghettoish.

    The investment group that owned this ghettoish apartment practiced “prudent capital infusion” which included allowing fire suppression systems to go untested. Yet, they still collected market rate rents because Alameda’s Measure A has limited competition from new supply.

    The tsunami, Ms. Ott’s inattention, Jack’s comment, and Measure A. That’s my evidence of racism.

    Comment by Gerard L. — April 2, 2015 @ 11:26 am

  13. Call it whatever you want, Romney didn’t get elected, did he.

    Comment by jack — April 2, 2015 @ 12:09 pm

  14. Jack: How many voters wouldn’t vote for Romney for the simple reason he was Mormon, versus the voters who would not vote for Obama because he is a black muslim kenyan socialist?

    I’m from the Irish race. Religious intolerance is just another form of racism to me, with The Troubles and all.

    Discrimination against people for the simple reason they are on the bottom of the economic ladder is another form of racism I deplore. I don’t want my financial success to come from walking on the backs of the less fortunate. Someone has to work at Alameda Landing, lets build them a place to live or put them up in some of that gift you describe as “junk” that we received from the Navy.

    But maybe you are right it might not be racism it might just be the stupid. We can fix racism, but everyone knows you can’t fix the stupid.

    Comment by Gerard L. — April 2, 2015 @ 12:40 pm

  15. #14 you are labeling people so maybe you should look at the last sentence of your #14 post as well as your whole rant.

    Comment by Jake. — April 2, 2015 @ 1:57 pm

  16. 14
    I was just parroting Harry Reid’s self admitted justification for lying about Romney’s tax paying. In other words, it’s okay to lie through your teeth if the lie helps the cause and you’re a Demoncrat.

    Comment by jack — April 2, 2015 @ 2:51 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at