Economics

Public Land Sold to Build Brooklyn Basin with No Affordable Housing Pledge by Developer

Published

10 years ago

February 26, 2016

Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf received an enthusiastic response from some community members when she announced she was calling on Gov. Jerry Brown to give the city $45 million to help build affordable housing at the site of the massive Brooklyn Basin project, the 3,100-unit waterfront neighborhood that is already underway next to Chinatown, between the estuary and Highway 880.

So far, no officials have explained why provisions for affordable housing were not built into the project before the City Council approved it in 2006. The city provided land, approvals and encouragement with no guarantees for either sufficient local hire or housing that can be afforded by current Oakland residents.

Back in 2006, councilmembers who approved the deal without affordable housing included Libby Schaaf, who was a member of the City Council at the time.

At stake now is whether the city can come up with the funds to build 465 units of affordable or even mildly affordable “workforce-priced” housing on its 4.5 acres of the 64-acre project, the largest residential development in the history of Oakland.

Originally, the city was counting on utilizing redevelopment funds in the deal that was reached in 2006. But in 2011, under Gov. Brown, the state dissolved local redevelopment agencies but left redevelopment law intact. Since then, state obligations under redevelopment law have been unclear and are as yet untested.

Community redevelopment agencies were originally designed for cities to build projects that increased property values and then kept for themselves the excess in tax receipts that resulted. The agencies’ goal was to make over “blighted” areas in urban cores and to build affordable housing.

Mayor Schaaf is seeking to convince the governor to honor the 2006 redevelopment agency’s commitment to build affordable housing at Brooklyn Basin.

While the housing goal has broad support locally, the project raises an obvious and disconcerting question.

How did the city find itself in the predicament in which a $1.5 billion project on formerly city-owned land required no commitment to build affordable housing by developer Michael Ghielmetti of Signature Development Group?

Affordable housing aside, other parts of the deal also appear to have been great for the developer and not so good for Oakland residents.

Back in 2006, some of the coalition of community groups that opposed the development when it was approved by the City Council still consider Brooklyn Basin to be one of the worst real estate deals ever agreed to by the city and contend that its development agreement may rank among the worst in the country.

Opposing the project was a community coalition, the Oak-to-Ninth Referendum Committee.

“Over a period of a couple of years, we were engaged in three lawsuits and lobbied unsuccessfully to try to get the City Council to demand a better deal for the city and to reject some of the onerous parts of the development agreement,” said James Vann, Oakland architect and housing rights activist who was on the steering committee of the community coalition.

The Port of Oakland sold the 64 acres of valuable shoreline property to Ghielmetti for $18 million—way below market value, according to Vann. At the same time the city initially agreed to buy back, after cleanup, 4.5 acres designated for affordable housing for $29 million — almost two-thirds more than what Ghielmetti paid for the entire 64 acres.

In 2014, Ghielmetti requested the city to purchase its sites early in order to fund the first phase of site preparation. New appraisals resulted in the city paying Ghielmetti $22.5 million.

According to a statement by Ghielmetti, the developer would be responsible for toxic cleanup, so he would not pay market value for the property.

The commitment to build affordable housing is a state redevelopment requirement. The 15 percent requirement is not an option for the developer, but a mandate.

The two parcels purchased for affordable housing are located farthest from the waterfront and next to the freeway. To protect those who would live in these units from freeway noise and pollution from Highway I-880, sound walls will be built and windows facing the freeway will be un-openable.

At the ground level on one of the city-owned parcels, Ghielmetti will build a parking structure and a market on the other. He will retain ownership of those projects, and the city will pay Ghielmetti to build affordable housing above the projects.

At present, the developers include Signature Development Group and Zarsion Holdings Group Ltd., a Chinese investor that bought most or all of Signature’s interest in the development and committed $1.5 billion to build out the project.

Under the original deal signed by the city in 2006, the City of Oakland agreed to build the affordable units, which currently are estimated to cost $225 million. If the city could not come up with the money, the developer agreed to repurchase the property.

Workforce housing proposed by the city for the project would be geared to families and seniors making $60,000 to $80,000 a year.

Mayor Schaaf’s press conference last Thursday raised the possibility that Gov. Brown would give Oakland the money that it might have received before redevelopment agencies were dissolved.

“We have no reason to believe (state leaders) will not honor this obligation, but because it’s unusual and because there’s so much community support for it, we wanted to ensure that the governor and the state Department of Finance hear very clearly and loudly the level of support behind honoring this obligation,” said Schaaf, flanked by other elected officials and community groups.

Mayor Schaaf and Assistant City Manager Claudia Cappio have close ties to the governor and worked for him while he was Oakland’s mayor.

Cappio is deputy city administrator, in charge of the mayor’s development efforts. Until recently, she was executive director of the California Housing Finance Agency, appointed by Gov. Brown in 2011.

As a result, Oakland may have a fair chance of winning the funding, at least compared to other cities.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Bay Area

CITY OF SAN LEANDRO STATE OF CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION NOTICE TO BIDDERS FOR ANNUAL STREET OVERLAY/REHABILITATION 2019-21 – PHASE III

WORK DESCRIPTION: The work to be done consists of roadway paving, base cement stabilization, concrete curb ramps, driveways, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, traffic detection loops and pavement striping, and doing all appurtenant work in place and ready for use, all as shown on the plans and described in the specifications with the title indicated in Paragraph 1 above, and on file in the office of the City Engineer. Reference to said plans and specifications is hereby made for further particulars.

Published

2 days ago

February 20, 2026

Oakland Post

PROJECT NO. 2020.0050

BID NO. 25-26.011

BID OPENING: The bidder shall complete the “Proposal to the City of San Leandro” form contained in the Contract Book. The proposal shall be submitted in its entirety. Incomplete proposals will be considered non-responsive. Sealed bids containing the completed Proposal Section subject to the conditions named herein and in the specifications for ANNUAL STREET OVERLAY/REHABILITATION 2019-21 – PHASE III/PROJECT NO. 2020.0050 addressed to the City of San Leandro will be received at City Hall, 835 East 14^th Street, 2^nd Floor San Leandro at the office of the City Clerk up to 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 19, 2026, at which time they will be publicly opened and read.
WORK DESCRIPTION: The work to be done consists of roadway paving, base cement stabilization, concrete curb ramps, driveways, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, traffic detection loops and pavement striping, and doing all appurtenant work in place and ready for use, all as shown on the plans and described in the specifications with the title indicated in Paragraph 1 above, and on file in the office of the City Engineer. Reference to said plans and specifications is hereby made for further particulars.
OBTAINING THE PROJECT PLANS AND CONTRACT BOOK: The project plans and Contract Book may be obtained free of charge from the City’s website at:https://www.sanleandro.org/Bids.aspx Bidders who download the plans are encouraged to contact the City of San Leandro Public Works Department Engineering division at 510-577-3428 to be placed on the project planholder’s list to receive courtesy notifications of addenda and other project information. Project addenda, if any, will be posted on the website. A bidder who fails to address all project addenda in its proposal may be deemed non-responsive.Bidders may also purchase the Project Plans and Contract Book from East Bay Blueprint & Supply Co., at 1745 14^th Street, Oakland, CA 94606; Phone Number: (510) 261-2990 or email: ebbp@eastbayblueprint.com.
PRE-BID CONFERENCE: A mandatory pre-bid conference will be held on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 2:00 PM and on Wednesday, February 25, 2026, at 10:00 AM as follows:
Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 2:00 PM
Zoom Meeting ID: 883 8752 6074
Passcode: 502955
Zoom Link: https://sanleandro-org.zoom.us/j/88387526074?pwd=hZ5rjB8AWdLAUem3CtByFiZxqKarHj.1
And
Wednesday, February 25, 2026, at 10:00 AM
Zoom Meeting ID: 898 2672 0472
Passcode: 091848
Zoom Link: https://sanleandro-org.zoom.us/j/89826720472?pwd=JgZX2nXMpLSRM5xDPr7EJUxl7QIznr.1The information presented at the conferences will be identical, all bidders must attend one of the pre-bid conference and sign the attendance sheet. A firm that didn’t attend the pre-bid conference isn’t qualified to bid on the project.Questions regarding the plans and specifications may be submitted in writing to the project engineer until 5:00 p.m. five (5) days before, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays, bids must be received by the City. The City will not respond to oral questions outside of the pre-bid conference. The response, if any, will be by written addendum only. Oral responses do not constitute a revision to these plans or specifications.
VALUE OF WORK: The Engineer has estimated that the value of work is between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.
SAN LEANDRO BUSINESS PREFERENCE AND PARTICIPATION GOALS: The work performed under this contract is subject to Section 1-6-225 of the San Leandro Municipal Code regarding local business preference and participation. A list of companies that hold a San Leandro business license is located on the City webpage under the finance department, here: https://www.sanleandro.org/340/Business-License
SAN LEANDRO COMMUNITY WORKFORCE AGREEMENT: The work performed under this contract is subject to the Community Workforce Agreement adopted by City Council Resolution 2015-104. Contractors attention is directed to Section 10.

Dated: February 13, 2026 Sarah Bunting, City Clerk

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of February 11 = 17, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – February 11 – 17, 2026

Published

6 days ago

February 16, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Business

California Launches Study on Mileage Tax to Potentially Replace Gas Tax as Republicans Push Back

Under current law, California depends heavily on revenue from the gas tax to fund roads, highways, and infrastructure, but those revenues are projected to shrink as electric vehicle use grows and overall gasoline consumption drops. The mileage study would look at a “road charge” system where drivers pay based on how many miles they drive, rather than how much gas they buy.

Published

2 weeks ago

February 10, 2026

Oakland Post

Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City is the author of AB 1421. File photo.

By Tanu Henry, California Black Media

California lawmakers are moving forward with a study to explore a mileage-based tax as a potential replacement for the state’s traditional gas tax — a shift supporters say is driven by declining fuel tax revenues as more drivers switch to fuel-efficient and electric vehicles.

The research, tied to Assembly Bill (AB) 1421, would extend and support work by the state’s Road Usage Charge Technical Advisory Committee through 2035.

The bill does not yet enact a new tax. Instead, it extends the study and advisory work until 2035 and would have the Legislature receive findings and recommendations, with a report due by Jan. 1, 2027.

Republicans in the California Legislature have been vocal in their opposition. Assembly Republican Leader Heath Flora criticized the proposal.

“We already pay the highest gas taxes in the nation. Now Sacramento is talking about adding a new tax for every mile people drive,” Flora said. “Piling on another tax right now shows just how out of touch politicians in Sacramento are with the reality working families face.”

The plan has drawn broader GOP criticism from leaders outside the Legislature as well. California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton called a mileage fee “absolutely outrageous” and said, if elected, he would veto the tax, adding that tracking and charging drivers for every mile is unacceptable.

Supporters say the study is a pragmatic response to long-term funding challenges.

On the Assembly Floor on Jan. 29, Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D–Suisun City), the bill’s author, said that California’s transportation funding is “becoming less stable, less equitable, and less sustainable as more drivers switch to fuel-efficient and zero-emission vehicles.”

“Drivers using the same roads often pay different amounts for that use,” Wilson continued. “Low income and rural commuters who must drive farther and less efficient vehicles can pay more while others contribute less despite roadway impacts.”

Wilson and other supporters contend that a per-mile road charge could ensure that all drivers contribute fairly to the costs of maintaining roads, regardless of the type of vehicle they drive.