Tikun Olam-תקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

I’m incredibly gratified by some of the wonderful response I’ve gotten to my article in Haaretz last Friday. For that and other reasons, my site traffic has gotten a delightful boost in the past week or so. No doubt that’ll come down to earth all too soon. Bloggers and authors have written telling me about their new projects. They even ask me for advice as if I’m the eminence grise of the blog world. Here I can’t get a publisher interested in my book proposal and people are asking me about improving their blogs and securing funding for video projects. Heady stuff. And the nasty trollish stuff in the Haaretz Talkback thread has been pretty tame. Except for the one who surmised that my self-hate must mean that I “married out” (I haven’t, not that it’s anyone business), nothing too brutish, thuggish or assaultive.

Politics can be so all-engrossing that it’s good to remember there are other wonderful things in life like children, family, friends, and FOOD. That’s where Semifreddis comes in. I’ve known Mike Rose, one the owners, since he was an undergrad at UC Berkeley back in the 1970s, where I was pursuing a PhD in Comparative Literature. Mike had a huge impact on my life. We’re both enthusiasts at heart and he imparted several of his to me.

Until I met Mike and his wife Barb I knew precious little about food. But after many, many wonderful meals at their home I slowly but surely absorbed a food ethos and consciousness. And this was even before they bought a small bakery in Kensington and turned it into the mega-boutique (is that a contradiction in terms) bakery that it has become.

When Mike moved from Berkeley to a Craftsman home in Oakland’s Grand Lake neighborhood, he began educating me about the joys of Craftsman architecture. I must admit that I was covetous of such a beautiful home. As a then single person living on a very limited income I couldn’t dream that one day I might be able to share the joy of living in such a home.

But (I’m not religious so pardon me for saying this) thank God, I met a wonderful woman who became my wife. We moved to Seattle and have had three children and live in a lovely 1906 Craftsman which we’ve been able to furnish with some wonderful Tom Stangeland pieces. Life can be good sometimes.

I’ve been waiting for years for Mike and his partners to create a website so I could feature it here. Some time ago they did just that. So here’s to you, Mike. You’ve meant a lot to me as I know your wonderful business does to so many of its customers in the Bay Area. I shouldn’t sign off here without mentioning how incredibly generous a person Mike has been to me as well.

A tip: You’ve NEVER had real biscotti till you’ve had a Semifreddi’s almond biscotte. They’re just out of this world.

tags michael-rose, semifreddis-bakery

When last we saw our hero, Steve Jobs he had lost a Superior Court case attempting to demolish historic Jackling House in Woodside, California created by famed architect George Washington Smith (designer of many Santa Barbara Spanish Revival buildings). Steve, never one to accept anything that stands in the way of realizing his ambitions, asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. This week it refused. This means that Jobs has exhausted his legal remedies and must find someone to take the House and relocate it if he [Jobs] still wishes to build his dream house on the property.

Uphold Our Heritage, the preservation group established to save the house has always advocated for a resolution that would allow Jobs to build his new home while preserving Jackling House. Unfortunately, he has persevered in demanding his right to destroy it. The preservation group has found several preservation-minded individuals interested in negotiating with Jobs about relocating the home. Let’s hope that Jobs will see reason and begin negotiations in earnest with one of these potential buyers and the UOH attorney, Doug Carstens.

It never needed to come to this. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal fees, thousands of hours of staff time by the city of Woodside and various judicial venues that heard the case. I guess when you’re Steve Jobs the world marches to your rhythm rather than the other way around.

I get a lot of people coming to these posts who tell me in their infinite wisdom as ‘architectural historians’ that Jackling House looks like a load of rubbish. To them I’ll add a few quotes from the Uphold Our Heritage site:

The Jackling House [is in] the California Register of Historic Places for its association with an historic figure, copper baron Daniel Jackling, and for its exemplary design and materials, the work of master architect George Washington Smith, known as the “Founding Father” of Spanish Revival architecture in this country.

…George Washington Smith is one of only NINE great California estate designers acknowledged in “The Garden Book” (Phaidon, 2002). Smith gets a full page in the book, along with the world’s most important designers of palaces, châteaux, country houses, including Thomas Jefferson, Frank Lloyd Wright, and the designers of the Alhambra, the Imperial Palace and Gardens in Tokyo, and Versailles!

In her book on “The Santa Barbara Style” (Rizzoli, New York, 2001) author Kathryn Masson lauds:

Smith’s masterful interpretation of the architectural vocabulary of vernacular buildings in Andalusian Spain. His use of authentic materials and command of architectural forms convey a romantic Mediterranean atmosphere. Traditional Spanish design is authenticated by thick stuccoed walls that allow for deep window and door openings, heavy overhangs with carved wooden corbels that throw structured shadows back onto the gleaming wall surfaces, and design elements such as hidden gardens, colonnaded porches, and multi-leveled building units with varying rooflines.

On a related subject, I noted that the NY Times business columnist Joe Nocera (TimesSelect required) wrote today about Steve Jobs and the current Apple options backdating scandal. Some of his observations of Jobs’ personality and behavior are amazingly pertinent to his actions in the Jackling House case:

Now let’s look at the other [second] grant–the 7.5 million options to Mr. Jobs himself…

Consider, first, Mr. Jobs’s desire to replace the 20 million options [which were "under water"] with the 7.5 million options. What he was really trying to do was reprice his options without actually admitting that — because repricing would entail an accounting expense. To avoid the expense, he was supposed to wait six months and a day after the cancellation of the first package before Apple gave him the new package.

But he was Steve Jobs, and he wasn’t about to go optionless for six months and a day…

You get the strong impression that nobody dared to say no to Mr. Jobs, a notoriously difficult and abrasive chief executive. One imagines the trepidation of the compensation committee members — or Ms. Heinen [corporate counsel] — in telling him that he couldn’t get a low option price because the stock had risen during the negotiations.

So instead, they found a date in October that approximated the stock price in August — and an underling created phony board minutes.

What is particularly galling is the double standard. You hear from lots of sophisticated investors that it would be terrible if Mr. Jobs were forced out at Apple. How, they say, would that help Apple shareholders?

But lots of other chiefs have lost their jobs because of options backdating, and several have even been indicted. However indispensable he may be, the notion that Mr. Jobs can’t be touched because he’s Steve Jobs is something terribly corrosive.

If the S.E.C. is coming to the view that options backdating is just a peccadillo, as Silicon Valley has claimed all along, it should say so. But if it believes this is serious stuff, then it shouldn’t be making excuses for Steve Jobs, as it appears to be doing.

As for Mr. Jobs, as hard as he’s worked to convey the image of an above-the-fray visionary, that’s not quite the reality, is it? I recently stumbled across this comment from him, circa 1985: “I’m at a stage where I don’t have to do things just to get by. But then I’ve always been that way, because I’ve never really cared about money.”

Yeah, right.

What Nocera notes, and the Jackling House episode confirms, is that Steve Jobs could have close to what he wants, but not quite the whole echilada, if he would just compromise a wee bit with reality in the form of corporate securities law (the stock options) or the California code (preserving Jackling House). But he won’t do it–on self-serving principle. And that’s where he gets himself into trouble. In the case of Jackling House, it isn’t a matter that will bring his empire down like a house of cards. In the case of the options scandal, it probably should but it won’t. Again, Steve Jobs lives a charmed life–one that isn’t earned. And that, as Nocera correctly note, is “something terribly corrosive” of societal values.

Jobs’ behavior concerning both Jackling House and the options scandal betrays his egomania and vanity. What he really wants to do regarding the house is tear it down so he can outdo his other Silicon Valley tycoon rivals who’ve built sumptuous palaces as monuments to their own egos. The irony here is that it’s possible that might’ve been Daniel Jackling’s own motive in originally building the house, since he himself was a copper baron trying to make his mark in the 1920s with an architectural statement. But regardless of whether there was vanity or ego involved in the original creation of this landmark, it has withstood the test of time in its 90 years of existence and is worthy of preservation.

tags george-washington-smith-architect, historic-preservation, jackling-house-saved, steve-jobs-loses-appeal-to-demolish-historic-home, uphold-our-heritage

Steve Jobs, who wishes to demolish the historic Jackling House in Woodside, CA, has filed papers asking the California State Supreme Court to accept an appeal of a lower court ruling which forbade him from doing so. In my last report on this case, I expressed the hope that Jobs would finally–after losing decisively in two lower court rulings–accept the will of the judiciary and agree to preserve Jackling House. There are several potential owners who’ve stepped forward and are willing to accept the house if it’s moved to another site, which would allow Jobs to build the new home he wants on

the current property. But Jobs persists in his wish to tear down the home which was built by famed California architect, George Washington Smith (who was responsible for the Spanish colonial revival style popular in southern California).

It is the mark of a very stubborn, very rich, and very petulant person–one used to getting his way in everything–to carry on with this case. The papers he has filed basically restate Jobs’ previous arguments which were solidly rejected by both the Superior Court and Court of Appeals (in a unanimous decision). As in the past, Uphold Our Heritage and its attorney, Doug Carstens, will oppose Jobs.

The intrepid Patty Fisher of the San Jose Mercury News wrote a nice human interest story about the House recently:

At the age of 89, Gladys Woodhams’ passion for preservation is still contagious.

Last week she called to tell me how delighted she was that a state appeals court had again foiled Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ plans to tear down his historic house in Woodside.

“I think it’s wonderful,” she said. “Just wonderful.”

After failing to get permission from the court to demolish the 17,000-square-foot mansion he bought in 1984, Jobs will have to find someone to dismantle the house and rebuild it somewhere else. Several people have expressed interest, and Woodhams would like him to hurry up and make a deal…

“If you have something worth moving and you have the money to do it, well, it’s worth the effort,” she said…

The problem with Silicon Valley, she says, is that people have too much money and too little respect for the past.

“Most of the money is in the hands of people who have bad taste,” she said. “And they don’t even know what they are spending it on.”

I can’t speak for the quality of Jobs’ taste, but he clearly has little or no respect for the past–at least the architectural past.

tags california-supreme-court, patty-fisher-san-jose-mercury-news, steve-jobs-jackling-house

For the latest update on Steve Jobs’ failure to gain a review by the California Supreme Court in his effort to destroy Jackling House, see this post.

Just after Steve Jobs lost his bid to demolish Jackling House, Christopher Lloyd visited the blog and wrote me a fascinating story about his personal bond to the House. In the early 1970s, a close relative owned the property and invited Christoper and his family to visit. They did and he had an enchanting stay. His father took these images and I reprint them here with Christopher’s kind permission. Should anyone visiting, wish to use these images you must contact him for permission. Clotilde Luce of Uphold Our Heritage, a former resident of the House herself, says these images fill a gap in the historical documentation of the House. So I reprint them here with pleasure.

Most of the previous photos I’ve seen have been in black and white and have not shown many exterior details of the house and its landscaping. What I like about Christoper’s images is that they show wonderful exterior details; and they also show how the House ‘lived’ in its surroundings. For those who know the northern California landscape, these pictures will remind you of the wonderfully lush understory of stately California oaks. The House here looks nothing like a manicured museum like Filoli, another historic home in the area. Jackling House here is lovingly maintained, but it is most of all lived in. It looks like it is being used, but used well. It would make George Washington Smith, its architect proud.

Now for something completely different. I love the dripping sarcasm of this column in the San Jose Mercury News by Patty Fisher:

Howard Ellman, Steve Jobs’ attorney, sounded pretty annoyed when I called him last week to ask about the Jackling House.

I wanted to know how Jobs had reacted when a state appeals court ruled Thursday that he couldn’t tear down his 30-bedroom historic mansion in Woodside.

Didn’t I understand how busy Mr. Jobs was? Ellman asked me. Didn’t I read my own newspaper?

Indeed, I understand. What with Macworld, Cisco Systems’ trademark lawsuit over the iPhone and those sticky questions about backdated options, Apple’s iconic chief executive had more pressing things on his mind than some drafty old house.

Not that the house has ever been a pressing issue for Jobs. Since 2000, he has neglected it, hoping it would fall down so he could build a smaller and spiffier house in its place.

Jobs is good at making things smaller and spiffier.

She notes that Gordon Smythe, a local venture capitalist, is very interested in taking on the house and moving it to a suitable local site. But Jobs, alas, hasn’t taken his interest seriously even though it would seem, after his two court losses, to be the only way Mr. Jobs’ Dream House will get built on the Jackling site:

Smythe wants to seal the deal, but Jobs is a tough guy to get a meeting with these days. Considering they live in the same neighborhood, I suggest Smythe stroll by with his baby and knock on Jobs’ door.

Kids grow up so quickly. If Jobs wants to build his own dream house before his kids leave home, he might want to move this project to the top of his to-do list.

After all, one thing we know about a cool gadget like the iPhone (or the Appletalker or CisNO or whatever the lawyers decide to call it) is that it becomes obsolete in a nanosecond. Someone — probably Jobs — will always design something even smaller and spiffier.

A house, on the other hand, can last for generations.

Or not, if Steve Jobs could have his way. Thank God, two California courts have told him he can’t.

UPDATE: Several commenters below have incorrectly claimed that when Jobs bought the House the law under which he is currently forbidden from demolishing it was not in effect. In their view, Jobs bought the building assuming he could do with it as he wished and then the State changed the rules on him thereby punishing him unfairly. This is not the case. Jobs bought the property in 1984 and the California Environmental Quality Act was passed in the 1970s.

tags california-environmental-quality-act, filoli, gordon-smythe, historic-preservation, jackling-house, patty-fisher-journalist, photos-of-historic-homes, san-jose-mercury-news, steve-jobs, uphold-our-heritage

Today brings news of a major legal victory for historic preservationists in their effort to preserve the historic Jackling House, currently owned by Steve Jobs. For over a year, Jobs’ has inveigled to circumvent California preservation ordinances which call for significant attempts to preserve historic homes before demolishing them. Jobs proposed demolishing the home to replace it with a newly constructed residence.

First, the Superior Court ruled unequivocally that he had not exhausted such efforts (actually, that he hadn’t even pursued any such remedies). Here’s how UOH’s attorney, Douglas Carstens characterized the victory:

January 2006 Superior Court Judge Marie Weiner decided unequivocally in favor of Uphold our Heritage. Judge Weiner found Mr. Jobs and the Town Council had sought to evade required provisions under the California Environmental Quality Act. Judge Weiner concluded that there was not evidence to support a finding that there were no feasible alternatives to demolishing this historic resource.

After losing the first round, instead of negotiating in good faith with the three serious offers from potential buyers, Jobs chose to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Today, this Court ruled unanimously that Jobs hadn’t a legal leg to stand on. Again, UOH’s attorney said:

The Court of Appeal upheld the mandate of the California Environmental Quality Act that projects with significant adverse impacts must be denied if there are feasible alternatives.

The San Francisco Chronicle story covering the ruling characterized one portion of the ruling of the three judge court:

The court cited estimates by the town’s Planning Commission staff that the house would cost $4.9 million to rehabilitate and another $4.1 million to add living quarters, office space and a fitness area. Jobs’ estimate was higher, but he failed to provide any information about the cost of building his proposed new home on the site, the court said.

Without that information, “it is not possible to determine whether the cost of renovating the existing historic structure is reasonable or feasible,” Justice Stuart Pollak said.

Although Jobs can’t be forced to restore the mansion, Pollak said, the town can’t allow him to tear down the historic structure as long as preservation remains a realistic alternative.

Reading between the lines, I’m wondering whether Judge Pollak is saying that if Jobs has presented a realistic cost for his new dream house that it would’ve been a multiple (given the enormous sums spent by the high tech Mr. Blandings when they build their dream houses) of the $9-million proposed cost of restoring Jackling House. Thus, the court would’ve been able to say to Jobs that restoring Jackling House is NOT infeasible compared to the cost of building his new dream house. Since Jobs didn’t present this cost to them, they have no way of judging whether $9 million is a reasonable number or not.

I don’t yet have the actual written ruling. But when I do I will quote it here.

A sweet victory. Jackling House is saved. So California justice has thankfully ruled that celebrities and the God awful powerful are subject to the same laws as you or I. Now, let’s hope that the Justice Department will take a page from California justice and not deem a popular high tech CEO above the law regarding his backdating of company stock options.

Mr. Jobs, a piece of unsolicited advice, there are three serious offers on the table. Instead of appealing this all the way to the State Supreme Court, see reason and sit down and talk with the three potential buyers. We’ve had enough of the noblesse oblige approach. Try abiding by the law and making a good faith effort to preserve the House. If you can satisfy the preservationists with a proposal to move Jackling to a satisfactory alternate site, you might still get to building your dream house. But you don’t get to back out of your obligation to preserve a valuable architectural legacy.

tags California-court-of-appeals-denies-steve-jobs-appeal-to, historic-preservation, uphold-our-heritage

Steve Jobs apparently made a smashing success of his annual Apple presentation at the MacWorld Trade Show this year while introducing the new iPhone and AppleTV products. But as tech media analysts note, he almost had to hit a home run because of the deep scrutiny he is facing from the Justice Department regarding his role in backdating stock options for himself and other senior executives. Many of these same analysts note that while Jobs should lose his job for his involvement (many chief executives have recently lost theirs for precisely the same infractions that he appears guilty of), he likely won't. Why? Because everybody loves Steve: ...Three recent articles argue that the options issue should ...

Steve Jobs lost a State Superior Court ruling last year which prevented him from demolishing the historic Jackling House in Woodside, CA. In the interim, the preservationists opposing Jobs have presented to him a serious proposal from Gordon Smythe, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, that would involve moving the house to a new location and preserving it. Uphold Our Heritage has been generally supportive of Smythe's proposal. After the group ironed out most of its issues with the potential buyer, Jobs refused to conclude a deal with him. Jobs prefers appealing the ruling to State Court of Appeals in a ...

I just had to add that exclamation point at the end of my title even though most of the rest of the world will find this post ho-hum. I've been blogging for four years and using the Times as a media source almost every day. I've never been linked at the Nytimes.com site, ever. Here's how Tikun Olam found itself linked there. Tikun Olam in the Times I helped create a historic preservation group, Uphold Our Heritage, which is fighting to preserve Jackling House. This is the house that Steve Jobs has been fighting for four years to demolish. The group won a major legal battle ...

Daniel Jackling House, Woodside, CA. (photo: Woodside History Committee) On January 27th, California Superior Court Judge Marie Weiner rendered a final judgment against Steve Jobs in his bid to demolish the historic Jackling House. Uphold Our Heritage, a group I've supported even before its formal inception, led the battle to preserve the home when the Town of Woodside essentially capitulated to Jobs' demand that the house must go. Daniel Jackling, founder of Utah Copper Company (photo: NN.Railfan.net) The house was built by Daniel Jackling, a western mining magnate who revolutionized the copper industry at the turn of the century. ...

My blown shot at a national news scoop You remember the old saw: what if a tree fell in the forest and nobody heard it? Well, today I'm asking the question: what if you're a blogger who publishes a national news scoop and nobody knows? I don't normally consider myself a blogger who creates hard news stories. But last week, I published a post here which was a scoop: Steve Jobs Loses Fight to Demolish Historic Landmark. On December 28th, a California Superior Court judge turned down Steve Jobs application to tear down the Daniel Jackling House, a historic residence in Woodside, CA. ...