Bay Area
After Geoffrey’s Challenges, Fight to Save Historic Venue Still Mired in City Council Conflict
The fight to save Geoffrey’s Inner Circle, a longtime entertainment venue and cultural institution at 410 14th St. and an anchor of the Black Arts Movement and Business District in downtown Oakland, has finally reached the Oakland City Council after working its way through the city’s planning process for several years.
Council rejects one development proposal, while another remains undecided.
By Ken Epstein
The fight to save Geoffrey’s Inner Circle, a longtime entertainment venue and cultural institution at 410 14th St. and an anchor of the Black Arts Movement and Business District in downtown Oakland, has finally reached the Oakland City Council after working its way through the city’s planning process for several years.
The Planning Commission had approved two alternative development proposals submitted for the same site by San Francisco-based developer Tidewater Corporation, one for an apartment tower and another for a residential tower.
At the Council meeting Tuesday, following hours of debate and many speakers — most of whom were strongly in favor of Geoffrey’s and its owner Geoffrey Pete and opposed Tidewater’s proposals — council members voted unanimously to uphold Geoffrey’s first challenge, rejecting the proposal to allow the developer to build an office tower at the site of a parking lot next to Geoffrey’s historic club.
Ultimately, the vote to deny Tidewater’s application won 6-0, with two council members absent. Voting against the company’s proposal were Dan Kalb, Nikki Bas, Rebecca Kaplan, Carroll Fife, Noel Gallo, and Kevin Jenkins. Janani Ramachandran and Treva Reid were excused.
However, the second vote, whether to approve the proposal to build a residential tower, was a more contentious decision for council members. It was argued that state law requires them to pass nearly all residential construction or face severe penalties that include loss of funding for affordable housing.
A motion proposed by Councilmember Fife to approve the Tidewater development, along with many amendments designed to safeguard Geoffrey’s building and business, failed to pass. Voting in favor were Kalb, Kaplan, Bas and Fife. Voting against was Councilmember Gallo, while Councilmember Jenkins abstained.
The city attorney’s office ruled that there was in effect a tie vote, four who voted in favor and four opposed, which included the “no” vote, the abstention, plus the two absences. Therefore, according to the attorney, Mayor Sheng Thao was eligible but not required to break the tie at the next council meeting.
Tina Muriel, speaking on behalf of Geoffrey’s, presented a series of flaws in Tidewater’s proposal for the development. She explained that Geoffrey’s is identified as a national historic resource, with a designation similar to Coit Tower and the Painted Ladies in San Francisco. The city is supposed to protect and preserve such historic resources, which Oakland has not done. She also demonstrated that part of Tidewater’s proposal would require making alterations to Geoffrey’s building, which he has not agreed to do.
Speaking to the council, Nina Moore, a third-generation owner of Everett and Jones Barbecue, emphasized that Geoffrey’s Inner Circle, with 30 years in Oakland, and Everett & Jones, with 50 years, are part of the historic legacy of African American institutions that are still holding on in the city.
“When Geoffrey got that area (in downtown Oakland), nobody wanted to be over there. And now it’s up and its popping, the gentrification wants to come. They always want to be there and take from us, rather than supporting us.”
Based on her experiences as a businesswoman, she said she can foresee problems with the affluent neighbors who would move next to Geoffrey’s, and their complaints would not be limited to noise issues.
Neighbors would be “discriminating (against) the way patrons look, writing letters to the City Council,” she said. “It is so hard for Black people to build up something.”
Kenneth Session of Session Real Estate, in business for 29 years and past president of the California Association of Real Estate Brokers, said that based on his decades of real estate experience, “I oppose this building. I know that is not good for our community.”
Prominent Oakland businessman Ray Bobbitt said, “In 2020, (people) talked a lot about economic equality and social justice, (but) that narrative is gone; now we’re back to business as usual.”
He said that Geoffrey has been an economic mainstay in the community. He has provided countless college scholarships and opened his doors to hold wedding receptions, so low-income African American families, as well as Latinos and other people of color, can host their celebrations free of charge.
“(However), gentrification is about more than economics. This is about preservation of culture and heritage,” Bobbitt added, pointing out that Geoffrey has always given back to the community.
“Oakland’s new generation of African American businessmen were all mentored by Geoffrey Pete, every single one of us,” Bobbitt said.
Kitty Kelly Epstein, professor of education and urban studies, called for dramatic reforms in the city’s planning department and Planning Commission. “They have treated Geoffrey and his business in a deplorable fashion.”
Activism
An Inside Look into How San Francisco Analyzes Homeless Encampments
Dozens of unhoused people are camped at Sixth and Jesse streets in San Francisco’s South of Market neighborhood. Tents made of tarps and blankets, piles of debris, and people lounging alongside the allies and walls of businesses are seen from all angles. These are some of the city’s hotspots. City crews have cleared encampments there over 30 times in the past year, but unhoused people always return.
By Magaly Muñoz
Dozens of unhoused people are camped at Sixth and Jesse streets in San Francisco’s South of Market neighborhood. Tents made of tarps and blankets, piles of debris, and people lounging alongside the allies and walls of businesses are seen from all angles.
These are some of the city’s hotspots. City crews have cleared encampments there over 30 times in the past year, but unhoused people always return.
But it’s normal to have tents set up again within less than 24 hours after an encampment sweep, David Nakanishi, Healthy Streets Operation Center Manager at the Department of Emergency Management, says. Sometimes there’s less people than before but often there is also no change.
“Most of the people that were in the encampments that want to go inside, we’ve gotten the majority of those [into shelter],” Nakanishi says. “Many of the people we encounter now, are those who have various reasons to not accept shelter, and some are already in shelter/housing”.
Since the ruling of Grants Pass by the US Supreme Court earlier this summer, which allows cities the authority to ban people from camping or sleeping on the streets, San Francisco has been at the head of the conversation to crack down on encampments.
Where neighboring cities in the Bay Area are clearing encampments a few days a week, San Francisco is sweeping 10 times a week, two per weekday.
Considering the controversy that plagues the city around its harsh policies, the Post decided to tag along on a ride with Nakanishi to show us how he decides what encampments make it on the city’s sweep list.
Nakanishi, having over 20 years of experience in homelessness management, drives around the busiest parts of the city almost daily. He’s tasked with arranging a weekly sweeping operation schedule for city teams to engage with unhoused folks to help get them off the streets.
So what exactly is he looking out for when deciding what encampments get swept?
It depends, he says.
Locations like schools, recreational centers, senior centers, or businesses are places he tends to want to address quickly, especially schools. These are the places where the complaints are highest and access to facilities is important for residents.
He says he also takes into account 311 calls and reports made to him by city staff. On the date of publication, over 100 calls and reports were made about encampments around the city, according to San Francisco data.
Nakanishi made a few 311 reports himself on the ride along, pulling over to take photos and describe the encampments into his 311 app. He says it helps him remember where to possibly sweep next or allows smaller teams in the city to engage quicker with individuals on the streets.
Nakanishi also looks at the state of the encampments. Are there a lot of bulky items, such as furniture, or makeshift structures built out of tarps and plywood, blocking areas of traffic? Is trash beginning to pile up and spill into the streets or sidewalks? Sites that meet this criteria tend to be contenders for encampment sweeps, Nakanishi says.
Street by street, he points out individuals he’s interacted with, describing their conditions, habits, and reasons for denying assistance from the city.
One man on 2nd St and Mission, who rolls around a blue recycling bin and often yells at passing pedestrians, has refused shelter several times, Nakanishi says.
People deny shelter for all kinds of reasons, he says. There’s too many rules to follow, people feel unsafe in congregate or shared shelters, or their behavioral and mental health problems make it hard to get them into proper services.
Nakanishi references another man on South Van Ness under the freeway, who city outreach have attempted to get into shelter, but his screaming outbursts make it difficult to place him without disturbing other people in the same space. Nakanishi says it might be an issue of the man needing resources like medication to alleviate his distress that causes the screaming, but the city behavioral team is in the process of outreaching him to figure that out.
In October, city outreach teams engaged with 495 unhoused people. 377 of those engaged refused shelter and only 118 accepted placements, according to city data. That number of monthly referrals is consistent throughout the entirety of 2024 so far.
Nakanishi has long advocated for the well-being of unhoused people, he explains. In 2004, he was working with the Department of Public Health and told then-Mayor Gavin Newsom that there needed to be more housing for families. Nakinishi was told it was easier to deal with individuals first and the city “will get there eventually.” 20 years later, family housing is still not as extensive as it could be, and the waiting list to get placements for families is a mile long with over 500 names.
In 2020, he was a Senior Behavioral Health Clinician at a hotel in the city during the pandemic. He says in 2021 he collaborated with DPH to provide vaccines to those staying in the makeshift hotel shelters once those became available.
Despite the constant media attention that city outreach is inhumanely treating homeless people, so much so that it has led to lawsuits against San Francisco from advocates, Nakanishi says not a lot of people are seeing the true conditions of some encampments.
He describes soiled clothing and tents, drenched in urine, and oftentimes rodents or bug infestations in places where people are sleeping. He’s asked homeless advocates- often those who are the most critical about the city’s work- who have shown up to observe the sweeps if those are conditions the city should allow people to be subjected to, but not many have answers for him, Nakanishi says.
The city’s “bag and tag” policy allows city workers to throw away items that are “soiled by infectious materials” such as bodily fluids and waste.
Sweep operations are conducted at 8am and 1pm Monday through Friday. People at the encampments are given 72 hour notice to vacate, but some don’t leave the area until the day of the sweep.
City outreach workers come out the day before and day of to offer resources and shelter to those interested. The Department of Public Works discards any trash that is left over from the sweep and washes down the area.
Nakanishi told the Post that the only time the city takes tents or personal possessions from residents is when folks become physically violent towards workers and police take the items as evidence. Other items taken are bagged and tagged in accordance with city policy.
Stories from local newspapers such as the San Francisco Standard and the Chronicle show instances of SFPD handcuffing residents while their items are thrown in the trash or disposing of personal possessions without reason.
Advocates have long been pushing for a more competent and compassionate process if the city is going to choose to continue sweeping unhouse people.
No matter the lawsuits and constant criticisms from allies, the encampment sweeps are not slowing down, even with the cold weather quickly approaching the coastal city.
Nakanishi says there aren’t a lot of large encampments left in San Francisco so now they do runs of streets in order to stretch out the sweeps as much as possible.
It’s calculated strategies and years of first hand knowledge that make this job work, “It takes dedication to the work, caring for the people and the community, and persistence, patience and sometimes good luck to make the positive changes for the people on the street,” Nakanishi says.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of November 13 – 19, 2024
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of November 13 – 19, 2024
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.
Activism
LIVE! — TOWN HALL ON RACISM AND ITS IMPACT — THURS. 11.14.24 5PM PST
Join us for a LIVE Virtual Town Hall on the Impact of Racism hosted by Post News Group Journalist Carla Thomas and featuring Oakland, CA NAACP President Cynthia Adams & other Special Guests.
Thursday, November 14, 2024, 5 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. PST
Join us for a LIVE Virtual Town Hall on the Impact of Racism hosted by Post News Group Journalist Carla Thomas and featuring Oakland, CA NAACP President Cynthia Adams & other Special Guests.
Thursday, November 14, 2024
5 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. PST
Discussion Topics:
• Since the pandemic, what battles have the NAACP fought nationally, and how have they impacted us locally?
• What trends are you seeing concerning Racism? Is it more covert or overt?
• What are the top 5 issues resulting from racism in our communities?
• How do racial and other types of discrimination impact local communities?
• What are the most effective ways our community can combat racism and hate?
Your questions and comments will be shared LIVE with the moderators and viewers during the broadcast.
STREAMED LIVE!
FACEBOOK: facebook.com/PostNewsGroup
YOUTUBE: youtube.com/blackpressusatv
X: twitter.com/blackpressusa
-
Alameda County3 weeks ago
Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price Announces $7.5 Million Settlement Agreement with Walmart
-
Activism3 weeks ago
‘Jim Crow Was and Remains Real in Alameda County (and) It Is What We Are Challenging and Trying to Fix Every Day,’ Says D.A. Pamela Price
-
Bay Area3 weeks ago
In the City Attorney Race, Ryan Richardson Is Better for Oakland
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of October 30 – November 5, 2024
-
Alameda County2 weeks ago
D.A. Price Charges Coliseum Flea Market Vendors in Organized Retail Theft Case
-
Activism3 weeks ago
‘Criminal Justice Reform Is the Signature Civil Rights Issue of Our Time,’ says D.A. Pamela Price
-
Activism3 weeks ago
“Two things can be true at once.” An Afro-Latina Voter Weighs in on Identity and Politics
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
MacArthur Fellow Jericho Brown’s Poetry Reflects Contemporary Culture and Identity