It has Been One Year Since Over 400 Families Were Exiled From Alameda

Dear People of Alameda,

It has been over one year since my family was forced to evacuate the Harbor Island Apartments. There have been many myths and misconceptions about the owners, residents, and the city’s involvement, or lack thereof, in the so-called, Harbor Island evictions.

The city was already aware of the complex’s deteriorating conditions, but last March, when the front page of the Alameda Journal featured the “beleaguered” apartments due to the decertification of Section 8 vouchers by Housing Authority, the public was reminded of the Fifteen Group’s history of mismanagement.

That same month, the infamous, “Physical Improvement Project Survey”, sponsored by the City of Alameda Development Services, Community and Programs Division, was distributed in my neighborhood. We were told that the city had set aside Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for physical improvements in Census Tract 4276. Although the survey was about physical improvements, the first question asked if we, strongly agree or disagree, that “living in a racially, socially, and economically mixed community creates many problems for residents.” This is hardly a question about physical improvements, but a warning of what was to come.

It appeared as if as soon as the first Bayport residents moved in across the beltline property on Atlantic in July, we were notified by the Sanders Brothers (Fifteen Group owners), we had to move out. A noticed was taped to my door indicating that, after two-thirds of my life, in my home, I would have 60 days to leave.

My neighbors rallied and spoke out at city council meetings. Soon after, I was on of three residents allowed to attend a task force meeting between the city and the owners. The Harbor Island Task Force, comprised of representatives from different city departments, had previously met over the course of three years, yet this meeting was the first time residents were invited.

We heard that the owners were planning to renovate, although the plans were not specific. We found out the rental office would be converted into a Rental Assistance Center, and they would even be sponsoring a Rental Assistance Fair for residents. At this event, food and music were to be provided to compensate for years of neglect and to disguise their intentions to relocate us as far away from Alameda as possible. One apartment listed by the owners in Vallejo was even featured later that week on the news for a shooting. Their Resident Removal Center was good for nothing; except tape, boxes and bubble wrap. (They hadn’t even heard of craigslist before.)

It was also disturbing how some people wanted to justify the Fifteen Group’s actions by emphasizing alleged criminal activity in, and around, the complex. Not surprisingly, most of the illegal activity was committed by non-residents and employees of the super-Villain Sanders Bros. and Co.

There is also the perception that Harbor Island only had low-income and African American residents, but our community was very diverse. There were many hardworking, working class professionals, as well as students, elderly and disabled residents. Ethnically, we had a mini-UN, as there were also Latinos, Filipinos, Asians, Africans, Europeans and people of many other nationalities who were affected as well.

The city, hesitantly, filed a lawsuit on our behalf to have a temporary injunction to halt the tenancy terminations. After a legal move by the 15 Group to send the case to federal court, a judge ruled that the city had no standing to sue on behalf of residents. However, the judge did said if, 15 Group attorney, Mark Hartney, “was selling a bill of goods” that there would be, “trouble in river city,” but that trouble never materialized. Many felt that the lawsuit was a false hope that was too little too late, but many appreciated the gesture.
Housing Authority Director, Mike Pucci, was quoted by Hartney as in favor of the move-out, as it would help with the “deconcentration of poverty.” Pucci, who originally recommended relocation benefits of $250 to assist residents, practically made the 15 Group look like Good Samaritan with their “moving stipend” of $1000. Not only was it not nearly enough to cover the moving costs associated with moving, but tenants had to completely vacate their residences to receive the money. On top of that, the check my mother received bounced. Had we been dependent on receiving that money to move, I don’t know what our current situation would be.

Through our search for apartments, it was discovered that many local landlords did not know of the Rental Assistance Fair, and had many vacant units. Many landlords also sympathized with residents and offered to lower deposits, waive application fees and credit checks.

I felt grossly disrespected by all the landlords who were unseen until someone whispered rent control at a city council meeting. Landlords then came out in full force to defeat proposed legislation for relocation benefits and the prevention of future mass evictions in complexes with over 40 units. One landlord even had the gall, to wait until December, a month after our Nov 3, move-out date to promote his, “How to Find an Apartment” videotape.

Former city councilwoman, Barbara Kerr on her website asks, “So what is the problem?” with mass evictions. Kerr then points out three other complexes near the Bayport-Catellus Project, the Atlantic Apts (186 units), Alameda Park Apts (64 units), and Garden Court Apts (63 units), which total about 313 units. Assuming these units are occupied by families, and factoring the 40% vacancy rate at Harbor Island last summer, there could be a potentially devastating repeat in my neighborhood with very similar demographics. That is a problem, which needs a solution.

The 15 Group caused the school district lose $4.3 million through the loss of school aged youth and the College of Alameda is also suffering from low enrollment. There is also the uncalculated loss to local business, especially on the West End. Finally, there is the psychological damage inflicted by such a traumatic experience.

There were also two deaths related to the forced move. One woman suffered a miscarriage due to the stress she experienced, and my friend’s grandmother, whose doctor advised them not to move due to her condition, moved and soon after passed away from pneumonia. We all wondered if we were being rushed out to prevent a mass health suit, as there were unexplained signs posted earlier that year indicating we were at risk of respiratory damage in our buildings.

The last lease didn’t even expire until June, had our children not been forced to interrupt their studies and adults been allowed the time to make proper arrangements, many residents would have been glad to stop paying slumlords for false promises of future improvements.

I believe there was an organized effort to remove our community from Alameda. The fiscal damage to the school district only expedited the agenda to close a West End school within two years time. The removal of the low-income population only served the city’s goal to raise median income. Historically, Alameda housing segregation trends has placed 30% of Alameda’s 6% African American population in census tract 4276; this was a three month reversal of said trend.

The Guyton settlement of 1993 also required the city to increase its affordable housing stock by 1995, which the city has yet to achieve. There should be an independent study of not only the effect of the tenancy terminations, but of the policy of Measure A, because this was surely a byproduct of its economic and social consequences.

There is also a need for a citywide tenant’s alliance. The purpose of this organization is not to create a divide between tenants and landlords, as the relationship is interdependent, but tenants should know their rights. No one in Alameda, or anywhere, should ever have to live in the conditions were did, or be put through an experience such as ours.

Reginald James
Former Harbor Island Resident