5 thoughts on “California Supreme Court Refuses Jobs Appeal, Jackling House Saved! – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. I don’t understand why anyone cares about this house. I’d understand it if Jobs wanted to put up an Apple store, or sell the land to Wal-Mart, or something equally as hideous. But it’s a house. Not my cup of tea, but there’s something out there for everyone. And “because it’s old” is not a good enough reason to keep something around. If the “hysterical” preservationists love it so much, why don’t thet raise the money to have it moved?

  2. Mike,

    At least three offers have been made to Jobs to move the house. Jobs has stubbornly refused to negotiate with them thus far, thinking he could win through the courts. Now that is done with… He lost through the courts, so now it’s time for him to meet with the preservationists and work on getting one of the three offers made into a done deal.

  3. If the “hysterical” preservationists love it so much, why don’t thet raise the money to have it moved?

    For many reasons, primary of which is that this would cost $6 million and Uphold Our Heritage is made up of individuals doing this on a volunteer basis for the love of architectural heritage. Second, because UOH is asking Steve Jobs to obey California law by preserving the house. UOH is under no obligation to do the work for Jobs. It is not in the business of physically preserving & restoring historic homes. It has one purpose & that is to ensure that this home is not tossed in the junk heap by Steve Jobs. The group has found individuals who would take the house off his hands by moving it. But Jobs doesn’t want that. He wants it torn down. And finally, Jobs hasn’t offered the House to UOH. He could’ve if he wanted to but he hasn’t.

  4. Whilst it is true that Jobs cannot demolish the house, he is under no legal requirement to preserve or restore the house. UOH’s own attorney, Doug Carstens, states: ” … no one has imposed an obligation on Appellant Jobs to restore the House.”

    My suspiscion is that Jobs will do nothing for another few years and then make a more thorough and convincing case that the house is beyond economic restoration. Another option would be to sell the property but it could prove difficult to find a buyer willing to take on the $6 million restoration charge and it would mean abandoning his plan to build a new home on the property. Finally, he could try to cut a deal to have the house moved – this seems unlikely to me as it essentially means admitting defeat, which is not in Jobs’ character.

  5. What Jeff says is entirely true. And many of us in the preservation community fear that given his previous recalcitrant behavior around the House that he would take precisely this tack. I would think that if he holds onto the property for a few more yrs. and refuses to negotiate in good faith with Gordon Smythe, who is interested in moving the House to another location, that Jobs will be hard pressed to make a more credible case in court that he’s acting in good faith than he’s already made.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *