Former Albany Bulb Homeless Settling into Gilman Street Underpass

ALBANY, CA: One of the shelters set up by people previously living at the Albany Bulb. Photo Credit: Euna Park, July 18, 2013
ALBANY, CA: One of the shelters set up by people previously living at the Albany Bulb. Photo Credit: Euna Park, July 18, 2013
Homeless residents who recently moved out of the former landfill known as the Albany Bulb in April appear to have taken up residence in the Gilman Street/ I-80 underpass.

According to a report by ABC7 news, the freeway underpass has become a tent city. 

At the end of April, the City of Albany reached a settlement that entitled each resident to have $3,000 if they left the area with their personal belongings and did not return.

In the ABC7 report, former Bulb resident Amber Whitson, said, "The city gave people $3,000 each. I once had $3,500 saved up and couldn't find a landlord that would rent to me; $3,000 is nothing and they knew that and they knew it would be gone right away and it was."

[Related article: City Settles With Residents Evicted From Albany Bulb] 

According to Berkeleyside, homeless encampments in that area are nothing new.

Watch the full report by ABC7 here.
Rochelle Nason June 02, 2014 at 12:27 AM
lubov mazur, what is your basis for asserting that certain members of the City Council hid the letter from the public? How could they have accomplished that? It was directed to the attention of the then-City Manager (and cc'd to the staff member whom she subsequently assigned to chair the Homeless Task Force). I share your feeling that the letter should have been made available to the public - it is Exhibit A, and if you look at Exhibit B you can see that I was researching the issue (for information that could be shared with the Waterfront Committee, the Homeless Task Force, and the public). It troubles me that the City Manager and her designated Homeless Task Force chair did not share this important document with either body. But that makes me wonder whether the City Council was ever even informed of the letter. Are you saying that the letter was provided to a majority of the Council, but not to all of the members, and that the majority hid it from the others? That seems like a pretty serious accusation. Do you have evidence to support what you are saying?
lubov mazur June 02, 2014 at 06:32 PM
Look at the record. It speaks for itself.
Rochelle Nason June 02, 2014 at 08:25 PM
Well, maybe the record just says different things to different people. I see that the city staff received the letter. I think you and I would agree that the letter should have been shared with the general public, starting with the City Council, the Waterfront Committee, and the Homeless Task Force. But you claim to see evidence that it was received and then 'suppressed' by certain members of the City Council, and I see nothing that indicates that at all.
lubov mazur June 03, 2014 at 01:55 PM
Maybe it's my unrealistic expectations that citizens serve for the benefit of the city and its residents without forwarding their own self-interest agendas, but after my personal experience with the people still active in municipal politics who ruined what should have been an open election process with dirty tricks and a late SLAPP suit, I am justifiably suspicious. Many should be.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »