S.-2 21-0035 Approval by the Board of Education of a Long Term Ground Lease with Eagle Environmental Construction & Development (EECD) for Affordable and Workforce Housing at the Former Tilden Child Development Center, 4551 Steele Street, Oakland, CA, 94619-2743, a District surplus property.
As a 26 year resident and home owner of the City of Oakland where our children has attended local public and private schools in the City and love our City. I am appalled that board members would sit idly by and oppose the development of a site where the City of Oakland needs additional tax funds to address the issues of affordable homes. Especially for our local school teachers, first responders, police officers, health care workers who are not able to afford living in the city of Oakland where they work. That they would prefer to sit idly by and not take advantage for a local developer who has a track record for success in our community to develop a project that will employ local employees. This makes absolutely no sense at all. He will insure:
1. The local community has an opportunity to be trained.
2. He is green bond certified by the International Community.
3. He will provide affordable housing to the most essential employees.
Vote YES for the EEC Development project.
I’ve been driving by these properties for years, finally we have an opportunity to to do something positive with the properties. Let’s do it, we can relook at doing something different at the end of the lease.
I am a 40 year resident of Oakland who has watched the negative impacts of Prop 13 on Oakland public schools. While we work to reverse the that 1978 proposition, we must do what we can to stop whatever harm we can. This 75 year lease is harm that can be stopped. Public land must be used for public good and this is not it. The amount to be paid to OUSD by private developers is nowhere near equivalent to the value they would be receiving. The talking point of it will bring workforce housing is a sham as there is no guarantee in the agreement that workforce housing will happen. Please vote no!
There is no way to appropriately estimate the need of OUSD students for land and facilities 75 years into the future. Public land should be protected to serve a public good. The fees being proposed in this proposal are abysmally low and represent an almost give-away to a private developer. It makes me sad.
This lease will not benefit the community at all, I oppose this development. OUSD should not give away public land.
I thought this was approved last year, so why are we still in discussion. Please approve this new development.
As a 26 year resident and home owner of the City of Oakland where our children has attended local public and private schools in the City and love our City. I am appalled that board members would sit idly by and oppose the development of a site where the City of Oakland needs additional tax funds to address the issues of affordable homes. Especially for our local school teachers, first responders, police officers, health care workers who are not able to afford living in the city of Oakland where they work. That they would prefer to sit idly by and not take advantage for a local developer who has a track record for success in our community to develop a project that will employ local employees. This makes absolutely no sense at all. He will insure:
1. The local community has an opportunity to be trained.
2. He is green bond certified by the International Community.
3. He will provide affordable housing to the most essential employees.
Vote YES for the EEC Development project.
I’ve been driving by these properties for years, finally we have an opportunity to to do something positive with the properties. Let’s do it, we can relook at doing something different at the end of the lease.
This is for affordable housing, why is this a question!
I am a 40 year resident of Oakland who has watched the negative impacts of Prop 13 on Oakland public schools. While we work to reverse the that 1978 proposition, we must do what we can to stop whatever harm we can. This 75 year lease is harm that can be stopped. Public land must be used for public good and this is not it. The amount to be paid to OUSD by private developers is nowhere near equivalent to the value they would be receiving. The talking point of it will bring workforce housing is a sham as there is no guarantee in the agreement that workforce housing will happen. Please vote no!
There is no way to appropriately estimate the need of OUSD students for land and facilities 75 years into the future. Public land should be protected to serve a public good. The fees being proposed in this proposal are abysmally low and represent an almost give-away to a private developer. It makes me sad.