Another "bad real estate deal"
My name is Pam Weber. Today the Port of Oakland will approve the sale of 60 acres of prime waterfront property for $18,000,000 -- about $300,000 per acre, which is probably about 1/8 market value. By the way, this is not to the highest bidder, but to a very well connected guy.
THEN the Port is going to subsidize the cleanup of the property for an amount of $20,000,000. So in essence, the Port is giving the developer $2,000,000 to take that dirty property off their hands! Another "bad real estate deal" (like the Raiders, the skating rink)!
do the math: the condos the developer wants to build -- 2,000 of them at, let's say, $500,000 each will generate $10,000,000 a year in property taxes. Since this is in a redevelopment area (approved by the city on July 29), those taxes will go to the redevelopment agency (NOT the County) for approximately 30 years. So the City gave away the Port land and will give the developer $20,000,000 and the city will get $280,000,000 over 30 years -- for doing absolutely nothing! What a great deal for the taxpayers. A clean deal would net the Port $150,000,000, the county would get legitimate property taxes and, by the way, the deal probably would not be tied up in court for years.
Please read the Port's agenda item. If you would like additional information feel free to call me.
Pam Weber 510-444-8541
Click on image to enlarge.
I just moved to Oakland in July and this place just blows my mind. The Port of Oakland deal is the dumbest transaction I have ever comprehended! This town has a guise and cloak run by people who I seriously think are either on the kick-back take, or just plain stupid (God can only help us if either one or both are true). The Port gave up a valuable piece of property that could have been both preserved and developed with the Port keeping some ownership rights and generating some income for port services and public safety. Now, developer (who is obviously smarter than our officials) will capitalize on the Commission's stupidity and clean the place up with a great tax break for doing so and making a mint off of some land that when then town talks about "Affordable Housing" the majority will never see. Man, I love this town!
Posted by: Janet on September 6, 2003 03:57 PMI think there is a gross misunderstanding of how redevelopment law works. The tax revenue generated from the project area, goes back to the redevelopment agency. The agency can use part of that money for toxic cleanup.
It can also use the revenue for the construction of affordable housing. Indeed, by law, it must do so.
It can also devote part of the new redevelopment funds to business development, and a more targeted program to help artists.
By law, the City redevelopment agency must establish a project area committee. That group is to be responsible for the design and implementation of the redevelopment plan.
If the City did not do this, they are in violation of the California Redevelopment law. They must actually form this group, and that committee is to consist of people who represent the area of concern.
In closing, a sale of this publically-owned property to a private developer is the only way to start the generation of property tax revenue from redevelopment.
So, it's not a bad deal for the city or the Port. Moreover, it's finally time that prime Port property were captured for redevelopment.
The citizens of that area suddenly have more power than they realize. The trouble is the redevelopment agency will not explain that to them.
Zen
Posted by: Zennie on September 7, 2003 02:44 AM*This discussion has been closed. No more comments may be added.*