Last night’s Planning Commission hearing on the College Avenue Safeway went well overall. Sure, the neighbors showed up in force to try to stop the project or at least to greatly reduce the scale of the project. But it was just a scoping session so staff and commissioners repeatedly reminded them to stick to scoping issues and that the merits of the project would be discussed later.

As I listened to speaker after speaker talk about their grave concerns about an expanded Safeway, I realized that they seemed to believe that the cost of doing nothing is nothing – that if we leave Safeway the way it is, there would be no cost to the neighborhood, environment, or the economy. I’d like to borrow a concept that Robert at the California High Speed Rail blog came up with about HSR – the cost of doing nothing is not nothing. Robert argued that not building HSR would end up costing the state much more in the long run, with increased air and car traffic, needs to upgrade airports and highways, pollution, etc.

In the same vein, we need to ask the question: what is the cost of leaving the Safeway as it is now? John Gatewood from ULTRA came up with these questions, about the environmental impacts of leaving the store as is:

• How efficient are the existing HVAC systems in the present store?
• How efficient are the existing refrigeration and freezer units?
• How efficient is the energy usage?
• How efficient is the existing loading dock? Do trucks need to idle longer because of lack of space, etc?
• How efficient is the existing parking lot configuration? Do drivers spend too much time looking for a space?
• What is the “embodied energy” of the existing structure, the energy that went into producing the materials used in the existing structures?
• What are the energy and carbon footprint coasts of demo’ing the existing structures and can these be recouped in the energy efficiencies and more environmentally sound new construction?

Beyond environmental impacts, the current store has real negative impacts on the neighborhood that effect quality of life and local business. In my comments to the Planning Commission last night, I told my story of being a pedestrian that frequently goes to that Safeway, as it’s a short walk from my home. Getting to the Safeway on foot is a nightmare – there are multiple opportunities to get hit by cars, and there are multiple times when both car driver’s and pedestrian’s views are obstructed. Part of the reason for this is that there are so many driveways – 9 in total on College and Claremont. Just the fact that the new Safeway will reduce the curb cuts from 9 to 4 will be a huge benefit to pedestrians, bicyclists, and to safety.

I’ve mentioned this before, but the current Safeway and its huge surface parking lot is a blight on the neighborhood that’s quite creepy at night. It is also entirely uninviting – unless I’m going to Safeway I avoid that side of the street entirely and often just go to a different part of Rockridge that’s more inviting to do my shopping.

The cost of doing nothing looks like this:

While doing something looks like this:

To me, the decision is obvious. I’m tired of this dangerous, ugly, and uninviting store being the center of the Alcatraz/College/Claremont shopping district. The cost of doing nothing is high, especially when we have the potential for a beautiful designed Safeway with hidden parking and more small, street level stories to keep the neighborhood dynamic.

If you’re interested in the details of the last night’s meeting, you can see coverage on Twitter #oakmtg. I just joined Twitter this week and will be using it primarily to cover Oakland meetings. You can find me @oaklandbecks.

Previous posts on College & Claremont Safeway:

• 11/12/09: John Gatewood: Safeway at College @ Claremont – Opportunity to Enhance an Urban Village
• 5/7/09: Safeway submits application, but “concerned neighbors” are not so happy about it
• 4/30/09: Safeway unveils new design plans for College Avenue store
• 2/15/09: College Safeway Update
• 12/8/08: Safeway stakeholders meeting canceled (or postponed?)
• 11/12/08: Safeway on College might be stuck with a “patch and paint” job
• 6/22/08: Safeway Community Meeting Turns into Public Venting Session

Monday, November 16th – Oakland Local Community Meetup

Via the Facebook event: “Oakland Local is one month old! Come join us at our first community meetup in downtown Oakland–community partners, OL bloggers & reporters, people interested in being involved with OL and anyone else who wants to support us are invited to our first meetup at TechLiminal. We’ll have beer, wine, snacks, schwag–and a chance to meet–and join–the Oakland Local team. If you’d like to do blogging or community reporting for this site, this is a chance to sign up and get hands-on instruction–or just hang out and build community.” The meetup takes place from 6:35-8:40 at Tech/Liminal, 268 14th Street, Oakland, CA 94612.

Tuesday, November 17th – Oakland City Council Budget Workshop

Before the regular Council meeting, there will be a special budget workshop to discuss plans for closing the $19 million budget gap. This will be an important meeting, and V Smoothe has given an overview of the staff proposals. See the full staff report and check out my post about how to watch and understand City Council meetings if you need some guidance on how or where to view the meeting. The budget workshop is scheduled to run from 4-6pm in the Council Chambers in City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Tuesday, November 17th – League of Women Voters Forum on State Governance Reform Efforts

If you’re at City Hall, stop by this event in between the budget workshop and the Council meeting. Years of legislative stalemates, budget deficits, and declining service levels have led many to the conclusion that decision making in California government has become largely dysfunctional. The League has been closely following the growing number of proposals for reform, from changes in the budget processes to a constitutional convention. Several are in initiatives being readied for the 2010 ballots. A representative from the State League will outline these proposals and discuss the League’s positions. This event will take place from 6:00PM-7:30PM at Oakland City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, Hearing Room 3 (just inside the 14th St. entrance).

Tuesday, November 17th – Oakland City Council Meeting

After two hours of budget discussion, the City Council still will have to conduct their regular meeting, and there is plenty to discuss. Among other items, they will be discussing Rebecca Kaplan’s billboard proposal, Oakland’s federal legislative agenda, participating in Alameda County’s obesity and tobacco prevention programs grant, a stimulus grant update, and the Oakland Fundy for Children and Youth (OFCY) 2010-2013 strategic plan.  See the full meeting agenda and check out my post about how to watch and understand City Council meetings if you need some guidance on how or where to view the meeting. The non-ceremonial parts of the meeting start at 7pm in the Council Chambers in City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Wednesday, November 18th – Planning Commission Scoping Session on College Ave Safeway

As John Gatewood wrote about last week, the Planning Commission will be holding an EIR scoping session on the College and Claremont Safeway project (not to be confused with the Pleasant Valley Safeway, which already had its scoping session). This scoping session will help determine what the EIR will study, and though public comments should stick to those issues, the neighbors who oppose this project will be out in force in an effort to try to stop the project. Whether you love the current project or not, if you’d like to see the current monstrous parking lot and ugly store updated, please come to this meeting and help balance the statements made by those who oppose it. The Planning Commission meeting will be held on Wednesday, July 15th at 6:00 pm in Hearing Room 1, City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza and the full agenda can be read here.

Wednesday, November 18th – AC Transit Meeting: Vote on Accepting MTC’s Conditions for Fund Swap

The AC Transit Board will be voting on the acceptance of conditions from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in order to swap BRT capital funds to operating funds, in order to stave off some of the planned service cuts. If you haven’t been following this issue, check out V Smoothe’s two thorough posts about it. The Board will also be discussing the creation of a funding task force, communication between the Board and the BRT Policy Steering Committee, and an employment agreement with the interim general manager, Mary King. This meeting will take place at 6pm in the 2nd floor board room, 1600 Franklin Street. You can read the agenda and see the relevant memos here.

Wednesday, November 18th – Community Convergence for Climate Action

Join the Oakland Climate Action Coalition in celebrating and supporting the community-based solutions we hope to see in Oakland’s Energy & Action Plan. Don’t miss this inspiring evening of live performances, free food, and community as we showcase the solutions that will make Oakland a model green city. Convened by the Ella Baker Center, the Oakland Climate Action Coalition is a cross-sector coalition of community-based social justice organizations, environmental experts and advocates, labor unions, and green businesses working for an equitable and just Energy & Climate Action Plan for the City of Oakland. This event takes place from 6-8pm at Laney College Theater, 900 Fallon St @ 9th Street. Find more info and RSVP at the Ella Baker website.

Thursday, November 19th – Oakland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting

Oakland’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) meets monthly to discusses bicycle and pedestrian issues. This month’s agenda covers the Kaiser Hospital—MacArthur Blvd Median Crossing Design, the Alameda County Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Subdivision Corridor Improvement Study, and Safe Routes to Schools Projects designs. The BPAC is extremely inclusive – any Oakland resident who attends three consecutive meetings becomes a voting member of the committee – so if you’re interested in bike and ped issues, you should consider attending. The BPAC will be meeting from 5:30-7:30pm in Hearing Room 4 of City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Thursday, November 19th – Walk Oakland Bike Oakland Meeting

Come to WOBO’s Nov. 19th volunteer meeting for an “advocate training session.” Have you ever wondered how to get your elected official’s attention and raise awareness about the importance bicycle and pedestrian improvements in Oakland? At this month’s volunteer meeting we will have a representative from the Oakland Heritage Alliance (OHA) speaking about effectively lobbying city hall. Some of the topics Naomi Schiff will cover include how to give effective public testimony, and how to work behind the scenes to persuade elected officials to champion a cause. Participants will leave with ideas for effective advocacy. The meeting will be followed by a pub crawl – not to be missed! This meeting will be held from 6:30-8:30 pm at Bay Area Wilderness Training, 2301 Broadway, Suite B – enter on 23rd Street. For more info, visit WOBO’s website.

Tuesday, October 20th – Oakland City Council Meeting

Tuesday, October 13th – Final Vote on EBMUD Water Supply Management Plan 2040

So I was planning to write about the Public Works Committee hearing on the Oakland Airport Connector today, but that’s going to have to wait until tomorrow because I’m fired up after last night’s Safeway EIR Scoping Session at the Planning Commission.

During the public comment section, I was sure I had entered an alternate universe where ULTRA, STAND and RCPC agree on almost everything. If it had been April 1st, I would have suspected it was an April Fools joke. Seriously, can anyone point out to any project ever that all of those groups have agreed on? Probably not. (For those not in the know, STAND and RCPC oppose most dense developments in North Oakland and ULTRA embraces urban density.)

Of course, the groups didn’t all say exactly the same things. RCPC members, for example, had to take the opportunity to take jabs at the College Safeway project, but overall, the groups and their members expressed a similar vision. Here are some of the ideas and concerns that were brought up:

• Pedestrian/bike/transit access & safety: This was the number one theme of the night. Everyone agreed that the current layout and Safeway’s current plans are unappealing and dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists. As for transit, Larry Meyers from ULTRA pointed out that the 51 bus stop on Broadway is 1/4 mile from the Safeway! To make this space more friendly for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders, people suggested moving Safeway to the corner of Broadway and Pleasant Valley, moving most stores up to Pleasant Valley, hiding parking behind the stores, using parking structures instead of a surface lot, adding bike parking, mandating free transit passes for employees, having a free shuttle from BART, and extending streets and sidewalks so they go through the plaza.

• Creating a connection between neighborhoods: Many speakers agreed that this plaza was partially responsible for a disconnect between Temescal, Piedmont, and Rockridge. Tom Dolan from ULTRA recommended extending the street network through the plaza, much like in Eric’s fantasy plans, to make the plaza feel like it was a part of these neighborhoods. He also recommended creating a civic space within the plaza, which he argued would bring more customers to Safeway. Others focused on architecture, expressing concerns that the current plan does not fit in with the architecture of any of the surrounding communities and explaining that Safeway has many relevant architectural styles to choose from.

• Housing: I’m sure the commissioners expected ULTRA to call for housing to be added to this project, but having STAND and RCPC call for housing was very powerful. Everyone agreed that this is one of the best places for dense, urban housing and retail in all of North Oakland. Several speakers made connections between housing and the environment, arguing that people living in this new housing would walk to the retail below and therefore would not be contributing as much to greenhouse gas expansion. Others brought up the Conley Report, and how it recommends housing in this plaza.

• Traffic flow: Several speakers were concerned about traffic flow, particularly around the Pleasant Valley and Broadway intersection. Ronnie Spitzer from RCPC said her son was hit by a car a couple months at that intersection and was concerned the increased traffic this project would bring would make it even more dangerous and congested. Stuart Flashman from RCPC recommended studying charging for parking, to discourage driving. A STAND member recommended studying parking usage at different times of day on different days of the week and also suggested “smart parking” – having an electronic sign that shows how many spaces available so cars don’t just drive around and around.

• More community discussion needed: It seemed that nobody besides Safeway was happy with how their open houses went a few weeks ago. Speakers called for further meetings with the community to solicit input on the project. One speaker specifically called for Safeway to meet with residents of the senior housing complex across the street.

When the public comment ended, the commissioners spoke, first commending the speakers for sticking to talking about what the EIR should cover and not just complaining about the project. They all seemed extremely impressed by the community’s presentation and I wondered how it must have felt for them to have all of these groups who disagree on every development project finally come together on something. Annie Mudge said, “It’s remarkable that STAND and ULTRA agree on anything.”

The commissioners agreed with public sentiment about pedestrian, bike, and transit access, housing, tying the plaza to the community, and the need to create a more urban project. Several of them brought up SB 375 and the General Plan, and suggested that Safeway’s current plan might not comply with either of them. Oh, and practically all of them said that this Safeway is their primary supermarket and that they shop in this plaza often.

Sandra Galvez said that Safeway should keep in mind that this project will be here in 20-30 years, “not 20 years ago.” She thought the EIR should be very inclusive and broad because the project would “probably be drastically altered.”

Madeleine Zayas-Mart agreed that alternatives should “think big” and specifically recommended looking more closely at the Conley report. She argued that Safeway should make this more pedestrian friendly, which would attract more customers. She said she curently shops on College because it’s more pleasant to walk down, but that she would shop in this plaza more if it was more attractive to pedestrians.

Blake Hunstman said that this is a “jewel of a site” and an opportunity for mixed use alternatives. He didn’t understand the orientation of the site in Safeway’s current plans and thinks that they missed the opportunity to make Safeway and the other stores part of the community by bringing them to the street.

All of the above commissioners had strong concerns about the project but they all were a bit reserved in their comments. All of them until Michael Colbruno spoke, that is. He immediately said the current proposal feels like a “big mall” and that this is an opportunity for Safeway to “do the right thing.” He said he didn’t want to see Joyce Roy walk 1/4 mile for a quart of milk (in her comments she had said she has to walk through a sea of cars just for milk) and that he currently sees pedestrians walking in fear with their groceries. Colbruno argued that the pedestrian, bicyclist, transit user component should be key to Safeway’s project.

Colbruno continued, explaining that this development should look like Oakland (the crowd clapped), as Whole Foods has managed to do. He then said that the storefronts should face the streets directly (more clapping). Colbruno said that Safeway’s current plans were not a good corporate decision and that the project as is would fail for the corporation and the community.

As a model for what could be done with this development, Colbruno brought up the Target development in West Hollywood, which includes housing. He said this development produces a significant amount of West Hollywood’s sales tax (though that’s really not saying much since West Hollywood is tiny). He ended by saying that locally grown produce is very important to him, especially after seeing Food, Inc. and that he wondered if the EIR could study the effects of bringing produce from afar rather than from local sources. I care a lot about locally grown produce and buy nearly all my produce at the farmers market, but this request seemed a bit absurd.

After last night’s hearing, I imagine that Safeway and its representatives understand what the community and the Planning Commission wants to see, which is nothing short of scrapping the project and starting over. It was inspiring to see so many disparate groups come together for something more important, and it seemed to have worked. Now we’ll just have to wait and see what the EIR shows and what new plans Safeway comes back with.

Previous posts on this project:

• 7/15/09: A Better Oakland – New Broadway Safeway EIR Scoping Session tonight
• 7/14/09: John Gatewood: Former opponents united in opposition to Safeway plan for Rockridge Center
• 7/1/09: What do we want for the Pleasant Valley Safeway project?
• 6/30/09: Transbay Blog – More Pleasant on Pleasant Valley
• 6/23/09: Pleasant Valley Safeway & Longs community meetings

Monday, March 16th – Urban Sustainability & Community Development Forum

The Center for Community Innovation is sponsoring a lecture by UC Berkeley City and Regional Planning Professor Malo Hutson with discussant  Romel Pascual, LA Deputy Mayor for the Environment. The “green movement” has provided a window of opportunity for cities to develop in a more sustainable way. What role can the government, nonprofit and private sectors play in ensuring that our urban communities are more sustainable and equitable? This talk will explore the opportunities and challenges that exist in our current political and economic climate to enhance the quality of life within economically disadvantaged urban communities by focusing on four areas—economy, environment, equity and health. This forum will be held at 6pm in 106 Wurster Hall, located on UC Berkeley’s campus, just off Bancroft and College. No RSVPs necessary.  Admission is free and refreshments will be served.

Tuesday, March 17th – Oakland City Council Meeting

This week’s City Council meeting looks like it’s going to be another contentious and long one. They’ll be voting on measures that are set to be put on a special election ballot, including the hotel tax and the repeal of Measure OO. At the last Council meeting, they could not agree on the details of a Measure OO repeal so it should be interesting to see where the votes end up at this meeting. The Council will also vote on a resolution in support of Assembly Bill 312, which would require BART to create an office of citizen complaints for the BART police department.  See the full meeting agenda and check out my post about how to watch and understand City Council meetings if you need some guidance on how or where to view the meeting. The non-ceremonial parts of the meeting start at 7pm, and if you’d like to see the meeting in person, head to the Council Chambers in City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Thursday, March 19th – Oakland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting

Oakland’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) meets monthly to discusses bicycle and pedestrian issues. The BPAC is extremely inclusive – any Oakland resident who attends three consecutive meetings becomes a voting member of the committee – so if you’re interested in bike and ped issues, you should consider attending. The agenda for this month’s meeting is not yet online, but I know that they’ll be voting on new officers. The BPAC will be meeting from 5:30-7:00pm in Hearing Room 4 of City Hall, 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Thursday, March 19th – 2nd Annual We Love Old Oakland

On Thursday, join Old Oakland Neighbors in a community celebration. There will be entertainment, delicious food, music, stimulating conversation, and more in support of Old Oakland! Old Oakland Neighbors is a grassroots community group that welcomes residents, business owners and other concerned individuals in our neighborhood. Tickets for this event are $10 and include appetizers and door prizes. All ages are welcome. This event will be held from 6-10pm at the Washington Inn, 495 10th Street at Washington. For more info, email oldoakland@sbcglobal.net.

Friday, March 20th – Open House with Oakland’s State Legislators

Join Senator Loni Hancock, Assemblymember Nancy Skinner, and Assemblymember Sandre Swanson for a joint open house this Friday. Meet your state representatives and their staff, learn about State programs and services and celebrate the arrival of a new season. The open house will be held from 5:30-7:30pm at Elihu M. Harris State Building Atrium, 1515 Clay Street, Oakland (between 14th and 16th Streets). To RSVP, please email melissa.male@sen.ca.gov or call (510) 286-1333.

Another busy week ahead of us in Oakland. Here are some meetings and events worth checking out:

Monday, February 23rd – East Bay Young Dems Meeting

Join the East Bay Young Dems for our first general meeting of 2009. We’ll be introducing the club’s NEW initiatives to engage more young adults into the political process, hold our elected officials accountable, increase our online presence, and continue to celebrate our successes with style. At this meeting, we’ll also be electing our new club Treasurer. The meeting will be from 6:15-8:00pm at Spud’s Pizza, 3290 Adeline Street (at Alcatraz) in Berkeley. The Executive Committee will convene after the general membership meeting. All are welcome to stay and participate.

Tuesday, February 24th – Walk Oakland Bike Oakland Meeting

Help put the “Walk” in WOBO! At last month’s meeting (which saw our biggest volunteer turnout yet) we told you all about our priority bike campaign. Apparently you liked what you heard, because we got tons of sign-ups up to help with Broadway bike counts, outreach at community events (like to Bike to the Movies Night) and collecting signatures from businesses in support of the campaign. At this month’s general meeting, we’re asking for your help identifying WOBO’s next pedestrian campaign. Come to this Tuesday’s general meeting – at a new location this month: 2301 Broadway, Suite B – with your top ideas for how WOBO can make walking in Oakland safer and more inviting! Snacks will be served. The meeting will be from 6:30-8:30pm at Bay Area Wilderness Training, 2301 Broadway, Suite B – enter on 23rd Street.

Wednesday, February 25th – MTC Hearing on Use of Stimulus Funds

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is proposing spending $70 million of new federal economic recovery funding on an “Oakland Airport Connector,” which even BART acknowledges is nowhere near “shovel ready.” This $70 million is urgently needed RIGHT NOW to keep existing local transit agencies from imminent service cuts and fare hikes. If you ride BART, AC Transit or any transit in the Bay Area, we need you to join us in fighting service cuts and fare hikes! Join us on Thursday, Feb. 25th at 10am at MTC (101 8th St., across from Lake Merritt BART) in telling MTC to direct new funding to critical public transit needs, not the costly Oakland Airporter.

For further info on this issue, check out V Smoothe’s article at OakBook. Also, look for a lengthier post here tomorrow (Monday) about this MTC hearing.

Thursday, February 26th – Charter Schools: A Step Forward or Backward for Public Education – CANCELED

UPDATE: This event has been canceled. You can find out why at NovoMetro.

Via NovoMetro:

Charter schools are a hot topic in Oakland, and this debate will be a face off between pponents and advocates of charter schools. Arguing that charter schools are part of a new Jim Crow system of education that forces an increasing number of black and Latino students into separate, inferior schools will be Shanta Driver and Yvette Felarca, representatives of the civil rights group Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN). Arguing that charter schools provide students with an education to enhance their academic skills  in order to compete and be productive members of society will be Ben Chavis, founder of the American Indian Public Charter School in Oakland, and Janet Roberts, current Principal of the American Indian Charter School. Oakland Unified School Board Director Chris Dobbins will be moderating the event. The public is invited to attend and will have ample opportunities to pose questions to the speakers in what is sure to be a hotly contested debate. The debate will take place at 5pm in the OUSD Administration Building, Hunter Hall, 1025 Second Avenue.

Thursday, February 26th – The Strength in Debate Series Part 1: Global Warming & Environmental Justice

The Bay Area Urban Debate League (BAUDL) and Standing To Represent Our Next Generation (STRONG) will host the first public debate event in the Strength In Debate Series, featuring the most talented orators in Oakland high schools. The purpose of the Strength in Debate Series is to showcase the exceptional talent of these students and to reward their dedication and commitment to argument and advocacy. Eight Oakland high school students will face off to debate about engaging and controversial issues and to propose solutions to such important problems as global warming and urban decay. The evening promises to be both exciting and informative — these young people have a lot to tell us about urgent matters and they are eager to do so. The debate will be held from 7:00-8:30pm at St. Sugustine’s Episcopalian Church, 529 29th Street.

Yesterday was a momentous day for the Oakland City Council. Not only did they swear in the first Gen X City Council Member, Rebecca Kaplan, but the council also voted in a new president. After 10 years of Ignacio De La Fuente serving as president, Jane Brunner will now lead the council.

I honestly don’t envy the jobs of Brunner, Kaplan, and the rest of the council right now. As City Attorney John Russo explained at his speech yesterday at the swearing in ceremony, the council and the city are going to have a tough year ahead of them and will be forced to make difficult decisions. They won’t only be forced to decide between services we want and services we need, but between services we need and services that are essential to keeping the city intact. (You can see Russo’s full speech at A Better Oakland.)

A few months ago, Russo’s speech might have left me feeling depressed, but today I woke up feeling very hopeful about the future of our city. One of the main reason’s I’m so hopeful is because I feel Rebecca Kaplan brings with her just what the council needs right now – fresh energy, innovative ideas, and, maybe most importantly, the willingness and ability to form coalitions between groups that do not often work together.

At Kaplan’s reception yesterday, she told her supporters that her first focus in office is to add to the infrastructure requests that Mayor Dellums drafted to submit to the Obama administration. I got a chance to talk to her in depth about her plan and asked her what her top priorities would be for infrastructure funding. First, she focused on two projects that are entirely ready to go – street paving and implementing the Bicycle Master Plan. Street paving requires no EIR and could be implemented immediately (and I think we all know that parts of Oakland desperately need it). As for the Bicycle Master Plan, the plan itself is great and the EIR is already done – now we just need the funding to complete it.

Rebecca also has ideas for new projects. The one I keep hearing her talk about is weatherization, insulation, and earthquake proofing of all city-owned buildings. I recently read The Green Collar Economy, and Van Jones pushed this idea as well. It makes sense not only for the environment, but also for long term economic planning, as the city will ultimately save on its energy bills.

Well, this all sounds great, but I know what you might be thinking: So what? Oakland always asks for funding from the state and federal government, and we almost always get shafted. It never seems that we get our fair share of funding.

Rebecca’s thought about this too, and so when she asks the Rules Committee to agendize this item for next week’s council meeting, she’s not only going to propose to add infrastructure items to the mayor’s requests. She’s also going to press to implement an action plan among council members to make sure we get this funding. Many council members already go to various conferences and meetings where they can build connections and lobby for funding for Oakland. But in the past, we often haven’t coordinated well enough to make this happen.

This year is going to be rough for government on all levels, particularly here in California where the housing market collapse has hit us so hard and the budget process in the legislature has essentially collapsed. The Oakland budget process won’t be fun either, and there are multitudes of reasons to be worried about the state of our city. I’m just glad to see new ideas and plans being developed and am hopeful that in 2009 our council will work together to get us through these difficult times without letting our city crumble.

I’ll be hopping on a flight to DC tomorrow morning so posting here will be light or non-existent this week. In the meantime, there’s plenty to keep you busy in the blogosphere:

• Paul Shigley shares the depressing news that California’s Legislative Analyst is proposing permanently shifting funds from local redevelopment agencies to schools, while Arnold’s recommending cutting even more funds from transit agencies.

• If transit agencies are defunded, at least we’ll still have bikes. The Walk Oakland Bike Oakland blog had a great post last week about one biker’s adventure biking across Oakland to get to dinner at a friend’s house. As someone who doesn’t bike in Oakland because I’m terrified of it, I really appreciated hearing that even seasoned bike enthusiasts get nervous sometimes, especially when biking at night.

• Now that the election’s over, I finally got a chance to start reading Closing the Food Gap, which I highly recommend if you’re interested in food insecurity issues. Chews Wise recently did a thoughtful interview with the book’s author, Mark Winne, about food insecurity in times of economic crisis. Though the topic is heavy, Winne does provide some thoughts on how we can improve the situation. (For some lighter reading at Chews Wise, check out the lettuce porn.)

• City Homestead posts about a campaign to get a vegetable garden on the White House lawn. Meanwhile, Genie is having a hard time finding space to plant her own vegetables in a community garden in Oakland.

• Uptown is rapidly growing, with new restaurants and entertainment options opening, and as usual, dto510 shares the latest news. City Homestead joins in the Uptown excitement with a post about new restaurants in the area.

• If you missed Mix It Up East Bay on Thursday, you can read all about it at Oakland North, including an interview with V Smoothe.

• Rather read V Smoothe directly? You must check out today’s post on how Dellums isn’t telling the full truth about the police department and Measure Y. The entire post is important, but the best part is this analogy:

It isn’t okay to lower our expectations just because they say it’s too hard to meet them. It’s like dealing with a self-involved boyfriend. You might get all upset when he flakes on something important to you or says he’ll bring you hot and sour soup when you’re sick, but instead shows up with wonton soup, because he likes wonton soup better even though he should know by now that you hate it. It’s totally tempting to just not say anything because you don’t want to seem petty or whiny or too demanding or whatever. But when you let it slide, all you’re doing is telling him that’s it’s okay to treat you that way. Why would you then expect him to ever behave any differently in the future? Same exact thing with the City. When we give the City a pass on abandoning their promises on one issue, we’re letting them know that the practice is okay. Why should they then feel obligated to do anything else they say they will?

Can I just say that this is the best Oakland analogy ever? Really, I’ll never look at the City the same way, though at least the self-involved boyfriend brings the wrong kind of soup – if you sent Dellums out to get soup he’d probably return with a speech about how important soup is and would then hire a new staffer tasked with creating a plan on how to get you soup.

Enjoy the week, and don’t forget about the important events going on in Oakland.

For the past several months I’ve been passing the Uptown Apartments every day on the bus on my way to work. And every day I look at them longingly, wishing I could live there but knowing that I can’t afford to. The rent is so high that I had a hard time imagining how they’d rent all those units.

Sure, they have lots of great perks, like a pool and various community rooms, and they’re next to a huge new park. But really, the rents just seemed so outrageous.

It turns out that Forest City is offering some much more practical perks as well, which I found out through an SF Business Times article via A Better Oakland:

When Tina Aiyer was searching for a new apartment in downtown Oakland, sustainable living was her top priority. A devout environmentalist, Aiyer considers her effect on the environment in everyday decisions, from transportation to food choices.

As an event planner, Aiyer needs transportation options to sustain her business. So when she saw that the LEED-certified Uptown development in downtown Oakland was offering discounted access to the car-sharing service Zipcar Inc., free annual public transit passes and access to bikes, she was sold. She signed a lease the day after she visited the apartment complex.

I just about freaked out when I read that. Apparently, as the article explains, perks like this are becoming common in the Bay Area, but I hadn’t heard of something so robust. Free public transit! Bike access! Cheaper Zipcar! What more could an alternative-transportation enthusiast ask for (well, besides a taxi stand)?

But then I started to wonder why I had never heard about this before. I’ve poured over Uptown’s website more than a couple times, yet this never jumped out at me. So I went back to their website thinking I must have missed it. Turns out I hadn’t – it’s just not there. Can someone please explain to me why Forest City isn’t promoting these incredible perks? It seems like it would be a huge incentive to pay more for rent.

There are several local and state transit issues that Californians will vote on this November, and each of them have been generating a lot of discussion in the blogosphere.

With the vote on Measure KK in Berkeley just a couple weeks away, it seems like everyone’s talking about Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). V Smoothe wrote two must read posts over the past week, making strong arguments for BRT. First, she explained that the main advantage of BRT is not speed, it’s reliability. Today, she followed up by debunking the myth that the proposed BRT line is redundant to BART. Raymond at Oakland Space Academy is open to the idea of BRT but is a bit more skeptical than most of Oakland’s bloggers.

Shockingly, the Berkeley Daily Planet distorted what happened at Jane Brunner’s recent BRT meeting in North Oakland. I attended the meeting and wrote here that the overwhelming sentiment of the Oakland community was in support of BRT. Yet Jesse Douglas Allen-Taylor claimed that Oaklanders at the meeting were as divided as Berkeley is on the issue (which couldn’t be much further for the truth). Luckily, in the same issue, dto510’s excellent opinion piece on BRT was published, along with a letter to the editor from me contesting Allen-Taylor’s claims about the meeting.

BRT is not all that’s at stake for transit on this November’s ballot. Prop 1A would authorize the sale of bonds to finance a high speed rail system from Los Angeles to San Francisco. While I agree with V Smoothe’s assessment early this year that the Altamont alignment of the rail line would have been much more favorable for the line as a whole and for Oakland in particular, I think this project is still worthwhile under the chosen Pacheco alignment. Robert’s been following this initiative closely for months now over at his California High Speed Rail Blog, making several convincing arguments about why we need high speed rail now. I especially appreciated his recent post explaining that the high speed rail project will provide needed economic stimulus to our state, much like bridges and dams did during the Great Depression.

Though at first thought it might not seem relevant to Oaklanders, Santa Clara County will be voting on Measure B, which would increase the county’s sales tax rate to fund the extension of BART to San Jose. Eric at Transbay Blog has embarked on an in-depth series of posts dedicated to explaining the history of this project and to making a clear argument about why BART to San Jose is a bad idea for the Bay Area’s regional transit system. 295bus agrees, arguing that the local transit agency’s obsession with the BART extension has gotten in the way of other opportunities to improve transit in the county.

And while we’ve all been distracted by the presidential race and the at-large city council race, there’s another important race happening in Oakland. At-large AC Transit Director Chris Peeples is being challenged by Joyce Roy, an Oakland resident who has staked her campaign on complaining about Van Hool buses and opposing BRT (PDF). Needless to say, I’m voting for Peeples, and Jeff Hobson from the Transportation and Land Use Coalition is too.