Blogging Bayport Alameda

December 17, 2021

Non responsive

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:07 am

Remember the OGC complaint by former OGC member Rasheed Shabazz seeking the records of Trish Spencer from NextDoor? Well in trying to understand how helpful Trish Spencer was or how aggressive the City was in trying to procure the records from Trish Spencer there was a public records request asking for responsive records from the City around asking Trish Spencer for her records. If you had money on Trish Spencer, good government advocate, as not trying very hard to help you would have won big time.


December 16, 2021

New overlay who dis?

Filed under: Alameda — Tags: — Lauren Do @ 6:06 am

Someone decided to open a PRA on South Shore Shopping Center and any correspondence about between the City and the owners. I guess this was to try to sort out if there are any active plans or possibly active collusion between the City and the owners. In case you’re wondering if there’s any juicy gossip in there, I’ll save you the time of scrolling through 600 pages worth of responsive records. There’s very little in there except for huge sections of people trying to schedule a meeting. I hope the PRA requestor didn’t sprain a finger scrolling through all 600 pages.


December 15, 2021

High stakes testing

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:19 am

The School District is sending home with all students COVID testing kits which is terrific given that we’re coming up on the holiday break and it’s a good, easy way for the District to urge families to test prior to returning to school.  

The product they’re sending home looks pretty easy to use and, according to the website, it’s not that expensive in the grand scheme of US home testing kits.  It’s pretty depressing how far behind the US is when it comes to easy, cheap, and plentiful testing.  I was reading articles where some experts were questioning the efficacy of the home tests, mostly because they were afraid that people would under-report their COVID status if it wasn’t done in a facility which would document the COVID status for data collection.  Personally, I’m not that worried about it.  I think the majority of people would self-isolate if they register a positive result, or at least get another test in a professional lab to be sure. Yes, I know there are the stories of parents who continue sending their kids to school even in the face of a positive result but MOST people aren’t assholes like that I would hope.


December 14, 2021

But for

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:04 am

On Friday the City released a statement regarding the death of Mario Gonzalez. Months after Mario Gonzalez’s death the coroner’s office finally released the cause of death, from the press release:

The County Coroner’s autopsy report concluded “the cause of death is the toxic effects of methamphetamine, with the physiologic stress of altercation and restraint, morbid obesity, and alcoholism contributing to the process of dying.” Because there was a physical altercation, the coroner further classified Mr. Gonzalez’s manner of death as homicide.

The Alameda District Attorney’s office has the responsibility now to determine whether charges are appropriate against the individuals involved. While we wait for the District Attorney’s office to make their decision and with the knowledge of the Coroner’s report, the City will work diligently towards completing its ongoing independent investigation and take appropriate action.

There’s links somewhere to the autopsy but I’m not going to link to it because, well, it’s morbid as hell.


December 13, 2021

A drop in the housing bucket

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:04 am

File this one under: business still moves along despite Trish Spencer’s best efforts. Added to the, very long, list of Council Referrals for the next meeting which, of course, will not get heard is one by Trish Spencer to:

Consider Directing Staff to Immediately Agendize an Urgency Hearing on Senate Bill (SB) 9.

The referral was prompted by exactly two people, one ACT leader and one Open Government Commission gadfly. They want an MOU or something to be in place by January to, I don’t know, make Alameda like Los Altos in trying to halt development under SB 9 via an urgency ordinance. Staff is saying they don’t anticipate a deluge of application that would necessitate bypassing the process to development objective standards to comply with SB 9 but Trish Spencer doesn’t care about facts just feelings. And if someone, somewhere out there is feeling something — however wrong it may be — she’s willing to carry water for as long as it’s anti-government.

But, staff has already spent staff time to start developing some objective standards and have the normal course of government action to commence around SB 9. In fact the Planning Board, tonight, has the very issue of SB 9 in front of them which is a much better use of time rather than humoring Trish Spencer and friends through endless hearings which will have the most useless public comments about whether or not we should be complying with state law. No, everyone’s time is better spent ensuring that — in the case that Alameda does have an application — it can be evaluated fairly and with clear guidelines in place.


December 10, 2021

Inconsistency: thy name is Trish Spencer

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:00 am

In September 9, 2016 Trish Spencer called for review a project at the Harbor Bay Business Park. The project was one that would have accommodated around 150 residents in a supportive living situation for senior citizens. This fell outside of the the area that the Port of Oakland expressly forbids residential living:

Her reason for calling the project for review AND voting to overturn the Planning Board approval?

I asked the question earlier would we put what I called “regular residential” in this location and the answer was no and my response to that then has to be if it’s not appropriate for “regular residential” it cannot be appropriate for a vulnerable population and that’s where I stand.

She went on to describe how noisy the location was (remember this is in the green shaded area on the map in the tweet above, the majority of the business park is in blue) and that if that location were to be residential then it would be difficult for existing homeowners to make the argument to the Port of Oakland to reduce noise levels.


December 9, 2021

Malicious compliance

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:09 am

Councilmember John Knox White posted this updated yesterday regarding the Housing Element and the aftermath of the special meeting which was jaw dropping in the lengths that both Councilmembers Tony Daysog and Trish Spencer were willing to go to avoid actually affirmatively furthering fair housing in Alameda.

So, rather than — as staff would have done in the past — chalk up Tony Daysog and Trish Spencer’s suggestions as complete nonsense designed to be provocative and not necessarily a solution; staff complied with their suggestions and will bring forward the pieces necessary to move forward these City Councilmembers solutions.

The Navy cap for Alameda Point was already under discussion before Trish Spencer insisted it was her idea but the housing in the business parks directly in the zone of influence of the Port of Oakland, that one is ALL Trish Spencer.


December 8, 2021

Unhealthy honor system

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:08 am

Regardless of how the Open Government Commission voted on Monday night here are a few important bits of information that we learned.

  1. When the public records request was made for Trish Spencer’s NextDoor communications in April, the City Attorney’s office asked Trish Spencer to make these documents available as the “custodian of record”
  2. The City Attorney’s representative could not recall receiving anything other that possibly one response from Trish Spencer which might have actually come from the City itself.
  3. The request for the public records came after the news that Trish Spencer had posted a list of names of people under consideration for sitting on the police reform committees so, at the very least, she should have produced that post/comment from NextDoor but did not.
  4. Eventually when the City was made aware that they had access to an agency account on NextDoor and that Trish Spencer had made comments on those posts they began collecting her responses and then eventually produced those as responsive products to the public records request.

December 7, 2021

The car always wins

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:07 am

For those anxiously wondering if we will ever get to the Council Referral portion of the City Council agenda the answer is: not this time. We’re currently at item 10-I and, at this point, I’m wondering if we should start a betting pool around whether we’ll get into double lettered agenda numbering before the referrals will ever get heard. Honestly, until the City Council can get through a regular agenda and all the normal agenda items they shouldn’t even consider addressing the referrals until then. This should serve as an incentive for folks who love the referral process to try to make the meetings go by a lot quicker. Sadly, Trish Spencer won’t understand this and will continue stretching these meetings into forever o’clock for shits and giggles. Of the nine referral items only one is not a Trish Spencer joint. That one belongs to Tony Daysog.

The consent calendar alone has 12 items to hear. Based on past practices we know that Trish Spencer is bound to pull at least one or two of those. Given that the is the agenda item about teleconferencing, a bunch of user fees, and the affordable housing fee I don’t see how this Council can complete the consent calendar before 9:30 PM assuming a 7:00 PM start time.

At this point is it even worth it to talk about possible agenda items which might be interesting since it’s unclear if the Council will have time before 11:00 AM to even get to the regular agenda? See there are still continued items from the last regular City Council meeting which, should, get heard before the regular agenda for this meeting.


December 6, 2021

Selective service

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:06 am

Tonight is definitely one of those nights that if you’re at all interested in the drama of city government you should tune in. It’s not a Planning Board meeting or a City Council meeting, it’s an Open Government Commission meeting. Specifically on deck tonight is a complaint which has been lodged by former OGC member Rasheed Shabazz regarding the City’s failure to produce Councilmember Trish Spencer’s communications on NextDoor.

The TL;dr all of the attachment of the complaint is thus: complainant files PRA, there is confusion at the City level as to who is supposed to respond back to the complainant. Months go by and there’s no response so complainant follows up. City says they have no responsive records. Some back and forth from complainant and City where complainant points out that Trish Spencer has records responsive to this and City saying they don’t have access to NextDoor even though they have a public information account which has interacted with Trish Spencer on NextDoor. After then they start monitoring and downloading her activity on NextDoor but there seems to be no attempt to secure older records.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Blog at