Alameda fails to apply for housing funds - March 11, 1992

Alameda fails to apply for housing funds

By Brett Mahoney (The Tribune)
March 11, 1992

ALAMEDA – Although facing a court order, the city council voted last night against submitting an application for state funds to build low-income housing.

“We have made a good faith effort to meet the deadline, so we are still in compliance with the court order,” said City Attorney Carol Korade last night as the crowd of 500 cheered the council’s decision.

According to Alameda’s 1990 court settlement with resident Clayton Guyton, the city must use its best efforts to meet a March 20 deadline to apply for state Proposition 84 Rental Housing Construction funds to build 85 units of low-income housing.

Despite a “Herculean effort” by the city’s housing officials, the city council said no viable sites have been identified for building low-income and affordable housing.

The council voted unanimously to inform the Alameda County Legal Aid Society, which brought the suit on behalf of Guyton, that is was unable to meet the deadline but will continue attempts to provide low-income and affordable housing.

Thirty-five residents spoke at the meeting, complaining that low-income housing should not be built in their neighborhoods because it would lower property values, create traffic congestion and make streets unsafe.

One resident received a standing ovation when he said building low-income housing in the island city would only lead to the creation of “an East Alameda like East Oakland or create a roving bands of anarchist gypsies which vandalize storefronts as they do in Berkeley.”

At least one member of the crowd did not cheer the decision of the city council, which was sitting as the Alameda Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.
Guyton said that he will take the city back to court.

The Alameda Housing Authority listed 11 potential sites for low-income and affordable housing.

Eight of the sites were ineligible for the state Proposition 84 funds because the city did not own them and could not gain control in time to meet the March 20 deadline.

The council previously rejected two of the three sites it has control of after neighborhood groups voiced strong opposition.

Source: Mahoney, Brett, “Alameda fails to apply for housing funds.” Oakland Tribune, 11 March, 1992:A3.

Alameda settles suit to add low-cost homes - April 30, 1990

“Alameda settles suit to add low-cost homes”

By Janet Joson (The Tribune)
April 30, 1990

ALAMEDA – Fearing the courts could overturn its low-density law, the city council has settled litigation with two residents who claimed the measure discriminates against poor people.

Measure A, approved by voters in 1973, prohibits construction of homes larger than a duplex. But the city has agreed to an interpretation of the measure which allows the Alameda Housing Authority to replace lost low-cost homes built with federal funds, said City Attorney Carole Korade.

The Housing Authority can now provide up to 325 low-income apartments by building new units or acquiring existing ones.

Clayton Guyton and Modessa Henderson filed their lawsuit on behalf of the Buena Vista Community Association in January 1989 after the city refused to provide low-cost housing when the 615-unit Buena Vista Apartments converted from subsidized to market-rate rents.

“I’m glad it’s over,” said Henderson, a single mother who’s lived at the complex (now called the Bridgeport Apartments) for 13 years. “It’s been three years of personal sacrifice.”

“We’re not bitter. We’re not disgruntled,” added Guyton, a transportation dispatcher at the Presidio in San Francisco. “We’re very pleased with the results of this lawsuit.”

The city council agreed to the interpretation Tuesday. None of the council members would reveal the closed-session vote, but Vice Mayor Lil Arnerich and Council members Lil Arnerich and Bill Withrow said in separate interviews that approving the settlement was the best way to save Measure A from further tampering.

“All of us want to preserve Measure A,” Arnerich said. “If this had continued through the courts…the courts would have probably struck it down in some manner.”

But Mayor Chuck Corica, who was elected to the city council on a Measure A platform, disagreed.

“How do they know we would have lost in court? If we did, we could have appealed,” he said.

Council member Barbara Thomas could not be reached for comment. The settlement requires the city to provide money for additional affordable housing using redevelopment and federal Community Development Block Grant funds and new commercial development fees. The city also will have to pay the Legal Aid Society of Alameda County, which represented Guyton and Henderson in the lawsuit, $95,000 in attorneys fees and other costs.

Legal Aid attorney Michael Rawson said his clients were instrumental in rallying other low-income tenants together and using state and local laws to challenge the city’s housing and land-use policies.

“This wasn’t handed to us on a silver platter,” Guyton said. “Nobody did more for us than we did ourselves. “He and Henderson said Friday at a press conference that they will help other tenant activists fight for low-income housing.

Tomorrow the council will vote on a resolution reaffirming its support of the law and discuss the merits of rezoning the city’s residential areas to better preserve Measure A.

Source: Joson, Janet, "Alameda settles suit to add low-cost homes." Oakland Tribune. 30 April, 1990.