Follow Lennar’s MoneySup. Chris Daly has a juicy item on his blog. He’s uncovered that Lennar has already spent $500,000 to try and qualify a mixed-use development at Candlestick Point and Hunters Point Shipyard for the June 2008 ballot. This Lennar financed project is being framed as the Bayview Jobs, Parks and Housing Initiative.
But just who has benefited from Lennar’s spending spree, so far?
The city's campaign finance data base shows that the biggest beneficiaries have been business lawyers Paul, Hastings, Janofsky and Waller; political consultants Terris, Barnes and Walters; campaign law and lobbying firm Nielsen, Merkamer, Parrinello, Mueller and Naylor, Sam Singer’s public relations firm, Singer Associates, Ground Floor, the public affairs firm run by Jim Stearns and Alex Tourk, and David Binder’s polling research. Oh, and then there’s the $17,500 Lennar paid to Pacific Petition, a petition circulation subvendor, to gather signatures to qualify this puppy for the ballot.
Meanwhile, supporters of the Bayview Affordable Housing initiative, which seeks to ensure that 50 percent of all housing built at Candlestick Point and the shipyard be affordable, are likely going to have to rely on community volunteers to qualify their competing measure for the June 2008 ballot.
Q. Which initiative do you think is most likely to benefit the people who currently live in the Bayview?
p.s As Lennar argues that it can’t afford 50 percent affordable housing in the Bayview, it’s worth noting that in 2006, Lennar President and CEO Stuart Miller made $1 million in salary, but his bonus decreased (from $21.5 million in 2005, paid half in stock and half in cash) to $4. 7 million, paid entirely in cash. Poor baby.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (8)
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker is a law firm, not four separate lawyers.
http://www.paulhastings.com/
Terris, Barnes and Walters is also a political consulting firm not three separate political consultants.
http://www.tbwmedia.com/
Those sites took about five seconds to find on Google.
Posted by Anon | January 24, 2008 09:12 AM
Another piece of asinine reportage. Sarah Phelan, Steven Jones, and Tim Redmond, not to mention Bruce Brugmann are the biggest hacks in journalism.
The SFBG is a piece of shit.
Posted by Michael | January 24, 2008 09:18 PM
Have to agree with Michael...The SFBG is a piece of shit. What a waste of paper.
Posted by jared | January 24, 2008 10:10 PM
More junk from the SFBG.
Posted by rothers | January 24, 2008 10:12 PM
sfbg is on the right track. in fact, Lennar is scheming behind closed doors to shove dozens of inappropriate high-rises on the waterfront. one company is planning a huge swath of san francisco with no public input whatsoever, and it's they're going to put it on the ballot without any public dialogue about whether dozens of high-rises on the waterfront are right for San Francisco. what's the rush? why the secrecy?
Posted by city resident | January 24, 2008 11:20 PM
Do a google search for Tourk's firm:
http://www.gfpublicaffairs.com/who.shtml
I don't see Jim Stearns' name anywhere. Would it be so hard to call Jim and confirm that he works for Tourk now?
Helpful hint - he has his own business and has for many years. Dunno why it's tough to find that out - he's the consultant to all the progressive campaigns...
Posted by city citizen | January 25, 2008 12:01 AM
Q. Which initiative do you think is most likely to benefit the people who currently live in the Bayview?
If they currentyly live in Bayview, they don't need housing, do they? The housing being built does not replace existing housing, it only adds to the supply. Let them build it and let the people who live there decide if they want to stay in their new and improved neighborhood or move on.
Posted by mark | January 25, 2008 09:04 AM
I worked for Lennar believing all the hype until I purchased one of their homes. 2 years later and I am still dealing with the lawyers. I am not for sale and my story will be told.
Posted by Bill | February 18, 2008 02:04 AM