I was going to write about the West Midway decision for today but it’s been a week and I’m tired.
So instead, I leave you with former Mayor Trish Spencer and one of the main FOCCers (Friends of Crab Cove) telling the Alameda County Democratic Club what the FOCC would prefer to see go into the vacated Federal facility in lieu of a Wellness and Respite Center to serve, truly, the most vulnerable members of the community.
That’s right, you are not mishearing her: parking and/or a bus turnaround. And this is not atypical of her in case you were wondering. This is standard practice for her, to center the needs of the comfortable over the vulnerable.
Later on in the meeting she acknowledges that there are not a whole lot of other alternatives to the Wellness Center for homeless individuals, that there’s not much of a consolidated plan, and goes on a longer tangent about unfunded pension liabilities and therefore Alameda without the ability to hire more police officers. But it’s telling that her framing around the issue of homelessness is not to discuss services but rather police enforcement.
For a longer video with (hopefully) answers to some questions that folks may have lingering. Visit: https://www.facebook.com/acdemocrats/videos/345018943016505/
Blogging Bayport Alameda 
WW is already funding a bus turnaround and additional parking on acquired surplus federal property. Does Trish remember 2014 at all?
Comment by BMac — February 8, 2019 @ 9:09 am
Recap of the meeting from East Bay Citizen
Comment by Mike McMahon — February 8, 2019 @ 10:35 am
The video and the East Bay Citizen story remind me of the importance of having regular democratic elections…
Comment by Jon Spangler — February 8, 2019 @ 4:22 pm
For those of you who want a sneak peek at the arguments that will appear in the voter pamphlet for April 9th special election, here they are:
http://www.mikemcmahon.info/election19.htm
Comment by Mike McMahon — February 9, 2019 @ 12:48 pm
And the cracks begin to appear in the proponent’s endorsers of Measure B. Besides the picture below the Executive Director of Save Alameda Parks is being questioned as being legitimate since the organization does not appear to exist.
Comment by Mike McMahon — February 10, 2019 @ 9:54 am
The ballot arguments for B and against A that Mike McMahon posted seem unlikely to persuade many voters (and the former Mayor’s advocacy on these issues has been ineffective and embarrassing), so it seems quite likely A will pass, B will fail, the “Carte Blanche for APC” side will win, and “The FOCCers” will lose.
That probably means it’s a waste of time to raise procedural or substantive concerns about the project, but here are a couple:
According to some new FAQs Doug Biggs recently posted on Next Door, the previously announced plan for meetings with the neighborhood has now become “a by invite only meeting of neighboring stakeholders towards the end of February” and then “larger community wide open houses in March.” Meanwhile, it looks like there was an open house on McKay yesterday for insiders and supporters. This means there’s some sort of tiered “transparency,” first for insiders and supporters, then later for some selected “stakeholders” by invite only, then even later for the general Alameda community and that looks to be happening when voting will already be underway in March.
On the question of the fiscal viability and sustainability of the project, the same new FAQs say there has only been a preliminary financial plan submitted to HHS, that the plan will change, and that it will be re-submitted after the election. This is a big project with financial risk, including a bond repayment as well as uncertainty over other costs and revenues. It remains unclear what potential fiscal responsibilities the city would have if things don’t go well initially or how this will be financially sustainable over time.
Stepping way back and looking at the larger context, it is interesting that there are now three very significant projects happening within a few blocks of each other in the West End that all seem likely to come into being in the next year or two: (1) A cannabis dispensary going in on Webster and Haight, (2) a reduction of lanes on Central and the installation of a problematic protected bike lane across Webster and Central that will continue past McKay, and (3) the opening of a regional homeless center on McKay steps from Crab Cove that will be serving seniors but that will also provide drop in services.
All three projects may prove to be positive developments, but does anyone seriously think these three things could all happen at the same time anywhere in Alameda other than in the West End in the Webster Street corridor? Has the city thought carefully about the possible interconnections among these projects and the possible complications of having all three of these happening at the same time, including if one or more doesn’t work out as advertised?
Comment by Wondering about McKay — February 10, 2019 @ 8:12 am
Remember, this is now a campaign, and much like all campaigns there is a time for supporters to get together to build a common understanding as to what the group is advocating in favor of. After all, I’m fairly sure that when other campaigns, like a school parcel tax, is run the initial meetings are for key supporters only and then open to a tiered level of supporters as well.
However, I do hope that the community at large is able to tour the site, I was on the tour yesterday and it only solidified my support for the project. It is exactly in the spirit of what Alameda is supposed to be: reuse of an existing building and bringing it back to the use it was initially intended for (that building was housing before it became office space) and allowing seniors who have had much hardship in their life to live out the rest of their life in a healing place with dignity.
Comment by Lauren Do — February 10, 2019 @ 8:20 am
I live here in the West End a couple of blocks from McKay, I don’t see any connection or conflict between the dispensary and the project on McKay. Also the new street and bike plan for Central Ave. looks to me like it would help traffic safety in the area, so I am naturally in favor of the project.
Comment by JohnP.TrumpisnotmyPresident. — February 10, 2019 @ 11:35 am
Barbara Thomas and Trish Spencer are trying to tank a great project for Alameda.
Comment by Eyeroll — February 10, 2019 @ 7:44 pm