Alison Madden
Jul 23, 2017 · 2 min read

There are so many inaccuracies in this “official” “blog” post, such a hack job. There is no third appraisal, it’s a person who looks at the City’s appraisal and the tenants’s and decides on the paper, that is not a third appraisal. Also the “independent” hearing officer isn’t, she is checking with the City on her jurisdiction (which flows from the Plan not the City Manager’s opinion or even the City Attorney). This is not an independent process, nor is it an administrative appeal — there is no record, ,no recording, no transcript, and this person is not rendering a decision on matters appealed such as waiver, Municipal Marina slips nor even applicability of the Cal. Relo Assistance Act, she is simply saying they are not in her jurisdiction. So how can one get exhaustion of admin remedies when the hearing officer says they’re not even in her scope. Plus the ridiculous 3 hour appeals are held far away in Redwood Shores, a total slap in the face to marina residents who face hardship to get there, with no public transport and some unable to drive due to age or lack of a car.

So much more. Also not “many” tenants have begun the process of completing paperwork, a small handful and these were people that have been wanting to move and sell for three years but they couldn’t because of City policies of having to move a boat if it’s sold (not at play in the City purchase), which made the value much less due to costs of tow had they sold it to a private party over the past 3 years. Also a licensed appraiser did “not” appraise each boat. Although the appraisal process was “started” by a licensed appraiser he quit when it became apparent that the City was not going to honor his higher values. The City has since “slashed” those initial “licensed” appraisal amounts and taken the step of charging owners $50K to $100K to crush their own homes. Instead of just compensation for a taking (the Constitutional standard) they are “charging” people for the taking.

What a hatchet job this article is. And the above are only the most glaring issues. The City has deprived long term residents here of “any” offer (at least 5 I know of) and its relo “specialist” has high turnover and low standards. Contrary to the assertion that there are “many” people completing paperwork, tenants are actually allowing the “early exercise” time period to lapse, rejecting the cynical $10K scram plan offered by the City. But actually i ope all those people get paid and we then prevail to set aside this plan due to CEQA/EIR and jurisdiction, and we have the best of both worlds — the $ and no restrictions. Then we’ll laugh all the way to the bank.

    Alison Madden

    Written by