Oakland Focus News | Oakland News Online Blog

Some who are against the Oak to Ninth project will claim this as a victory, but that's wrong. This doens't throw out the Oakland City Council's approval of the project, as reported elsewhere. Judge tosses Oak-to-Ninth impact report New development project write-up in works taking into account court's concerns By Kelly Rayburn, STAFF WRITER - OAKLAND TRIBUNE Article Last Updated: 11/21/2007 02:42:49 AM PST OAKLAND — Two sides are claiming victory this week after a Superior Court judge issued a ruling on two lawsuits that challenged Oakland's massive Oak-to-Ninth development project. The legal battle pitted the city and project developer Oakland Harbor Partners against the Coalition of Advocates for Lake Merritt and the Oakland Heritage Alliance over questions of whether the city adequately considered the impact the project will have on the surrounding environment. The two groups filed separate lawsuits. Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee ruled on them simultaneously Friday. I

Flawed Oak To Ninth Referendum Killed By City Attorney, But Lawsuit Challenge To Action Dropped In October of 2006, and pointing to a major flaw in a referendum to delay the controversial Oak to Ninth Development Project, Oakland City Attorney John Russo killed the petition drive. The reasons he gave at the time were: Here are the facts: • The City of Oakland is required, upon request, to provide a date-stamped, certified, hard-copy of any ordinance; • The Referendum Committee finally requested a certified, hard-copy of the ordinance on September 8 th –several weeks AFTER the signatures had been turned in; • The Referendum Committee claims they were told by the City Clerk’s office they could download the ordinance from the website, but cannot tell us who specifically gave them this direction; • The copy of the ordinance that the Referendum Committee used read “NOT ACCURATE –TO BE UPDATED” on the Table of Contents; • Even though one of the primary concerns for the Committee was a pote