18 months ago, AUSD and the Board of Education received a demographic study for the district from Lapkoff and Gobalet. This study came under a lot of criticism during the Edison enrollment/lottery discussion and I thought it would be interesting to look at how it has faired two years out.
Wednesday's Chronicle had an article on the front page of the Bay Area section entitled "Report urges preserving Bay Area outdoors" which urges the Bay Area work and preserve at risk open space.
In today's Alameda Journal newsletter from "former councilmember" Barbara Thomas which is so rife with bad information that it hints at why she was so spectacularly voted out of office in her run for reelection in 1991. (she received barely 20% of the vote in 1991, just beating Don Roberts for fourth place)....
It has become apparent that there is a lot of confusion surrounding SunCal's map in the sea-level rise section of their master plan which is being read by many as depicting solely sea level rise.
So it looks like Alameda Point as an issue in Alameda is beginning to heat up. What is unfortunate, and completely predictable, is the way in which things are beginning.
At Wednesday’s ARRA meeting, something miraculous happened. A councilmember decided to take a real leadership role in the Alameda Point project. After years of moving the Alameda Point project forward while trying to keep a respectful distance from it, someone on the council stepped up to the plate and took a full-fledged position.
The discussion of “what happens if redevelopment bonds go belly up” is an exercise in “what if?” because so far it hasn’t happened, though with the current real estate situation, it probably won’t be long before one does.
The response to Monday's clearing the air post just keeps coming...
A reader writes in: "are you stupid? or just evil?" you decide.
While the net is abuzz with posts about SunCal's financial struggles in the "new" economy. Catellus, Alameda's partner in the Alameda Landing project, is finding itself with similar struggles.
