Tag Archives: Seeno

Bad blood: Seeno family feuds over Bay Area real estate empire

[BenIndy contributor Nathalie Christian: Here’s a real gem from the article below: Concord’s negotiations with Seeno were halted not by “term-sheet specifics or the deal point, but rather [by] accusations that were made through editorial comment that were in the local papers.'” There it is, folks – proof that your letters to the editor and other community-facing actions like making a public comment at a city council meeting, public hearing or study can absolutely change outcomes. They sure did in Concord, no? Never underestimate the value of sharing your opinion with your community. Your community is listening. In the next few days I will be sharing other viewpoints on this important topic. Reach out to us at benindy@beniciaindependent.com if you would like to share yours. – N.C.]

East Bay kingpin Albert Seeno Jr. and his son have long courted controversy. Now they’re fighting each other for the family business

Albert Seeno Jr. (left) and son Albert III

The Real Deal [Real Estate News], by Pawan Naidu, May 1, 2023

For a family that’s spent the last nine decades building a real estate empire spanning thousands of homes in the East Bay, the Seenos have generally tried to keep their business dealings quiet.

“They don’t take the Donald Trump approach and pat themselves on the back,” said Phil Tagami, CEO of California Capital and Investment Group, which partnered with the Seenos on a failed bid to redevelop a former naval base in the region. “They just go onto the next project.”

But the spotlight they’ve avoided for decades does find them occasionally — and not for the right reasons.

For the past year, 80-year-old patriarch Albert Seeno Jr. has been waging a battle for control of the family business with his son Albert III, who he claims mishandled funds and attempted to muscle him and other relatives out. That is only the latest chapter in the Seenos’ decades-long legal history, which is dotted with allegations ranging from political meddling to threats of outright violence.

The Seenos did not respond to interview requests for this story.

The American dream

The family’s Bay Area story began when Albert Jr.’s grandfather Gaetano Seeno came to the U.S. in the early 1900s, one of thousands of Italian immigrants who became ​​fishermen in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and Suisun Bay.

Gaetano later worked in construction, eventually bringing his son Albert Sr. into the business.

Albert Sr. launched his own construction business in 1938, and at the time of his death in 2000, the company had built more than 30,000 homes, dozens of shopping centers, apartment buildings and offices, mostly in eastern Contra Costa County.

“In [the East Bay’s] Pittsburg, you can drive for miles and everything you see is a Seeno project,” Bob Rossi, a company executive, told SFGate in 2000. “[Albert Sr.] loved Pittsburg and took great pride in what he and his sons accomplished here.”

When Albert Sr. retired in the 1970s, he turned his company over to his sons, Albert Jr. and Thomas, who continue to run it as a family business across five companies: ADSCO, Seecon, West Coast Home Builders, North Village Development and Seecon Built Homes.

In 1997, third-generation exec Albert III followed in his father’s footsteps and started his own branch of the family business: Discovery Builders.

The growth that Albert Jr. led didn’t come without controversy, even though some locals have seen him in a different light.

“He’s almost like the pope with these people in town,” Allen Valentine, former Pittsburg Planning Commissioner, told SF Gate in 2002.

Nevertheless, he has been accused on multiple occasions of having improper relationships with local leaders — including allegations that he helped former Pittsburg Mayor Frank Aiello secure a favorable mortgage to buy a Seeno home, raising questions about whether the loan constituted a prohibited gift to an elected official. In 2004, Aiello agreed to pay $20,000 after failing to disclose gifts he’d received from Albert Jr., including Oakland Raiders tickets and trips to a casino in Reno, according to SFGate.

In 2003, former Pittsburg Councilmember Frank Quesada was sentenced to 300 hours of community service after pleading no contest to conflict-of-interest charges stemming from his votes on Albert Jr.’s projects while he owed the developer $370,000 in personal debt.

At a panel discussion ahead of the 2012 Pittsburg City Council election, voters expressed concern about the family’s outsized influence over the body, noting that the Seenos owned 90 percent of the city’s undeveloped land, according to the Mercury News.

Despite the alleged improprieties, the family has sought to maintain a favorable local reputation — and continue developing new projects. Last month, Discovery Builders scored approval to build 1,500 homes on 341 acres just outside Pittsburg after years of pushback from local officials and environmental groups.

But as Albert III tries to move the business forward, the family’s past keeps coming back to haunt him.

Seeno evil

Other far more serious accusations have been levied against the family. In 2012, the Seenos sued influential Las Vegas lobbyist Harvey Whittemore, accusing him of embezzling millions from a joint real estate venture called Wingfield Nevada Group Holding Co.

Whittemore countersued Albert Jr., accusing the father and son of threatening him and his family of failing to repay millions of dollars in alleged debts from a real estate partnership that fell apart in 2011. Whittemore sought $1.8 billion in damages from Albert III and his brother, accusing the Seenos of racketeering, extortion, grand larceny and threats of bodily harm.

No criminal charges were filed, and the lawsuits were settled confidentially in 2013, months before Whittemore was sentenced to two years in prison for illegal campaign contributions to Senator Harry Reid.

“[Whittemore] filed a frivolous, baseless lawsuit that went nowhere and was dropped,” Louis Parsons, president of Seeno-affiliated Discovery Builders, told The Real Deal.

But Whittemore wasn’t the only one to make accusations of intimidation against a member of the Seeno family. In 2017, Ayman Shahid, a high school friend of Albert III and former president of Discovery’s sales arm, alleged that the younger Seeno issued him a “chilling death threat,” according to court documents. The alleged threat had to do with Shahid agreeing to assist the FBI in a probe into alleged mortgage fraud tied to the family business.

“Hey [expletive]. You’re going down! I’m going to kill you!” Shahid accused Seeno III of saying, according to court filings.

The charges were ultimately dismissed due to lack of evidence of a credible threat.

“There is no evidence that Shahid was ever in any actual danger,” federal prosecutor John Hemann wrote to the court. “Though totally and completely inappropriate and potentially retaliatory in nature, it appears that his former boss was venting anger rather than actually threatening death or harm to Shahid.”

The FBI’s investigation into mortgage fraud started in 2010 and ended in 2017, with a federal raid of the Seeno family’s headquarters in Concord. Investigators alleged that Seeno companies misled bank underwriters about the true value of homes, according to an FBI spokesperson. The alleged misconduct took place between 2006 and 2008 when Discovery took steps to avoid losing its position in the market, according to court documents.

The filings revealed that Discovery incentived new homebuyers by funding their down payments and subsidizing their mortgage payments. The company’s employees and others worked to ensure these incentives were not disclosed on mortgage loan applications.

While no member of the Seeno family was charged, Shahid pleaded guilty to bank fraud and Discovery Sales was fined $8 million and ordered to pay $3 million in restitution. Albert III denied any involvement.

“The U.S. attorney’s office confirmed after years of investigation and interviewing hundreds of people that there was no evidence that Albert Seeno III or other leadership knew or participated in the actions by rogue [former] employees,” Parsons told TRD.

Even though Shahid cooperated with the federal investigations, he still received a 46-month prison term in 2017.

“It’s important to me that white collar defendants believe if they act this way they will suffer serious custodial sentences,” Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rodgers said at the sentencing.

Throughout the various accusations, it has always been the Seenos on the same side. But a new lawsuit between father and son has changed that.

Daddy issues

The recent lawsuit filed by Albert Jr. claims that Albert III was terminated as CEO of two of the family companies: Seecon and Seecon Built Homes. It was a role Albert III was elevated to in July of 2020. Albert Jr. claims he attempted to fire his son in February and March of last year, but his son did not comply. Albert III instead argues that there is language in his employment agreement that states he can only be terminated if he commits a felony that affects his father’s businesses.

Albert Jr., however, claims his succession plan was to promote his son without immediately ceding his own control over the companies. The lawsuit also alleges that the younger Seeno, along with Parsons, retained attorneys to draft an employment agreement with language that could force his father and other shareholders out.

Not long after the agreement was drafted, Albert III allegedly began “coercing, intimidating and then bullying” his father into fulfilling the contract, according to the lawsuit.

“Seeno III intimidation tactics included, but were not limited to, attempting to bully and denigrate his father. When these tactics failed, Seeno III resorted to pressuring Seeno by telling him that if he did not sign the employment agreement, Seeno would never see his three grandsons again,” the filing reads.

Albert Jr. has also accused his son of blocking him from accessing company records and using Seeno Companies employees for Discovery Builders projects.

In one example, the lawsuit alleges that Discovery Builders used the Seeno Companies’ name and trademarks on a project to bring 252 single-family homes to Brentwood.

Albert III has denied all of the allegations in the lawsuit, according to Parsons.

“This is reflective of some natural tensions with succession planning that are often typical, unfortunately, and in my opinion, hardly newsworthy,” he said.

Albert III countersued his father in October, disputing claims of roughly $100 million of debt allegedly owed by Albert III and Discovery Builders.

Albert III alleges that funds from a trust his parents set up were used to pay down Albert Jr.’s debts without his permission. Albert III also accused his father of attempting to interrupt operations at Discovery Builders in the lawsuit.

The family feud has not only pitted father against son, but it also sent a warning shot across the Bay and played a role in killing a major project for the firm.

A partnership between Discovery, Lewis Group & Cos. and California Capital and Investment Group was selected to transform a former naval station in Concord into 16,000 new homes and more than six million square feet of commercial space. The partnership known as Concord First Partners was approved by the Concord City Council in a 3-2 vote in August 2021.

But after a two-hour special meeting on Jan. 28 of this year, the council voted to cut ties with the group, citing concerns over the Seeno family feud and why it wasn’t disclosed sooner.

“Where’s the integrity, where’s the information to let us know?” Concord Mayor Laura Hoffmeister said during the meeting. “We had to read about it in the newspapers, that’s not what I’m looking for in a partnership arrangement.”

The development team believes the city’s decision to halt negotiations was misguided.

“A lot of the questions are personal and aimed at personalizing the issue,” Capital California’s Tagami said. “It didn’t have to do with the term-sheet specifics or the deal point, but rather addressing accusations that were made through editorial comment that were in the local papers.”

It’s another issue the father and son duo will have to sort through as the future of one of the last family-run development firms in the Bay Area hangs in the balance. While the court can settle their business dispute, it’s up to Albert Jr. and Albert III to squash their personal differences. Otherwise, it will be an awkward Thanksgiving for the Seeno family.


CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
BENICIA BACKGROUND:
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:

CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

BENICIA ALERT 4/20/23 – Seeno / North Area Study Community Open House

City of Benicia Consultants guiding us to accept housing plan in Seeno property

Seeno owned property (Google Earth, 2008) with inset of Benicia’s “North Study Area” (2022) – click to enlarge

By Larnie Fox, April 20, 2020

Good Morning all ~

Bodil and I went to the North Study Area (Seeno) “Community Open House” last night at Northgate Church. There is a Zoom equivalent tonight that you may want to attend:

Online Community Open House
April 20, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.
Zoom Link
Passcode: 322062

I have to say it was less of an “open house” and more of a consultant-led workshop ~ the consultant leading us towards agreeing to build housing up there.

The elephant in the room was Seeno’s dismal record of not fulfilling promises and constant litigation. The Benindy has an excellent archive HERE.

To make anything happen there, we will have to amend the General Plan. Personally, I like the plan the way it is: the area is currently zoned for light industrial use with a little bit of commercial use on the Eastern end.

What I don’t want to see up there is more automobile-centric suburban sprawl ~ but it feels like that is where we are headed.

Onward?
=+=
Larnie


CITIZEN BACKGROUND:

CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

Seeno vs. Seeno feud casts shadow over huge East Bay land deal

Borenstein: Seeno v. Seeno becoming building empire’s ‘War of the Roses’

Revelations from family legal feud should concern Concord council with Naval Weapons Station project on the line

Mercury News, by Daniel Borenstein, January 5, 2023

Albert D. Seeno Jr., left, has sued his son alleging that Albert D. Seeno III, after his appointment in July 2020 as chief executive officer of his father and uncle’s businesses, improperly spent money and tried to shut them out from their own companies.

As Albert D. Seeno III seeks to strike a deal with Concord officials to lead the Bay Area’s largest development project, his father is trying to fire him as CEO of five companies in the family’s building empire.

In a stunning public airing of the internal fight for control of the businesses, Albert D. Seeno Jr., 78, has sued his son alleging that Seeno III, after his appointment in July 2020 as chief executive officer, improperly spent money and tried to shut out his father and uncle from their own companies.

While this court battle may seem like an internal business and family dispute, the allegations about Seeno III’s behavior and finances should concern members of the Concord City Council as they consider whether to partner with him for 40 years to develop the Concord Naval Weapons Station site.

Seeno Jr. says his son previously had taken hundreds of millions of dollars without permission from his father and his father’s companies, has debt of over $100 million, bullied his father to hire him as CEO under threat that he would otherwise never see his grandchildren, and has been abusive and misogynistic toward employees.

“Your anger is out of control, you need anger management, counseling and medication. The way you treated multiple … employees is unlawfull (sic), malicious, vindictive, mean spirited and outright wrong,” the father says in a handwritten note to his son contained in the court file…. [By request of the author, this article is continued only on the Mercury News / East Bay Times website, requiring subscription. Go to Mercury News / East Bay Times ]


CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
BENICIA BACKGROUND:
AND, here’s current information from the City of Benicia website, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

North Study Area

The North Study Area visioning project aims to solicit public input on potential future land use options for the North Study Area property. Community input, together with an economic analysis and evaluation of the property conditions, will be used to develop several mixed-use concepts for further public review. Once completed, the landowner may determine whether to move forward with initiating land use applications which must include a “Master Plan” (i.e., Specific Plan) as required by the Benicia General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

The study area is a 527-acre undeveloped property in the northeast corner of the city. The property is within the City’s urban growth boundary and fronts on Lake Herman Road and East Second Street.  Although a number of site development proposals have been considered over the years, most recently in 2016, none have come to fruition. The property is currently zoned Limited Industrial (IL) and General Commercial (CG).

Visioning Process

The City wants to partner with the community to envision the future of this area, which is the last remaining large tract of privately-owned undeveloped land within Benicia.

There will be a variety of opportunities to learn more about this effort and to provide feedback over the coming year. The City will solicit public input through a series of community meetings, public events, and on-line engagement opportunities. To receive the latest updates, you can sign up for project email notifications here.  The City expects to complete the visioning process by late 2023.

The North Study Area Community-Led Visioning Process is divided into the following primary tasks:

  • Existing Conditions Review: Review of background materials and existing conditions information relevant to the visioning process.
  • Economic Analysis: Analysis of real estate market conditions, financial feasibility of land use alternatives, and net annual fiscal impacts of land use alternatives.
  • Issues and Options: Evaluation of key issues and options associated with development options.
  • Mixed-use Concepts: Consideration of alternative land use concepts for the property.
  • Summary Report: Summary of public input received and areas of consensus that emerged from the visioning process.

Advisory Group

The City has formed an advisory group for the North Study Area project to help distribute information about the project, provide feedback on project materials, and to bring together diverse community perspectives. The advisory group consists of one representative selected by each of the following City committee/commissions and community organizations.  Meetings are open to the public.

City Committees/Commissions:

  • City Council Subcommittee for the North Study Area (2 members)
  • Economic Development Board
  • Community Sustainability Commission
  • Committee United for Racial Equity
  • Planning Commission

Community Organizations:

  • Benicia Chamber of Commerce
  • Benicia Industrial Park Association
  • Matthew Turner Elementary Parent Teacher Group
  • Sustainable Solano
  • Benicia Unified School District
  • Housing First Solano

Project Documents

Community Meetings
Workshop #1 – November 2022

Advisory Group Meeting
Advisory Group #1 – November 2022
Agenda
Memorandum
Presentation
Existing Conditions Maps
Priorities

Background Documents

Adopted City Plans and Policies

Studies and Reports

Other Materials 

Seeno attorneys request new trial – Save Mount Diablo says motion “Should be denied”

Seeno’s attorneys request new trial following Save Mount Diablo legal victory against Faria project in Pittsburg hills

The Pittsburg hills where the Faria project has been approved for construction, as seen from the San Marco neighborhood in Pittsburg. Photo: Scott Hein
607-acre, 1,650-home development next to planned Thurgood Marshall Regional Park – SMD leader says motion for new trial “should be denied”

Contra Costa Herald, by Allen D. Payton, March 3, 2022

Last Friday, Feb. 25, 2022, attorneys representing Discovery Builders and their Faria new home development requested a new trial for the lawsuit by Save Mount Diablo, following a judge’s decision in favor of the environmental group to stop the project. As previously reported, on March 30, 2021, Save Mount Diablo filed a lawsuit challenging the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the 1,650-unit Faria project, on the ridgeline between Pittsburg and Concord. According to the agenda item documents, the master plan overlay district encompasses approximately 607 acres of land. (See related article)

The motion for a new trial was filed “on the basis that the Court’s decision is not supported by the evidence and controlling legal authorities. Specifically…that there were several portions of this Court’s February 10, 2022, Statement of Decision that may not have fully considered evidence in the administrative record.” In addition, the motion asks that the “Court vacate its Statement of Decision and enter a new decision denying SMD’s motion” and “conduct a new hearing”. Faria project Motion for New Trial Parsons Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial      Raskin Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial    Faria project new trial Proof of Service

A hearing date on the motion for a new trial has been set for April 14, 2022.

The now named Thurgood Marshall Regional Park is directly adjacent to the Pittsburg City Council approved Faria project. Herald file graphic. Credit: Save Mount Diablo/Google Earth.

On the day of the decision, Save Mount Diablo issued the following press release about their legal victory: [Previously published here on BenIndy, see Save Mount Diablo Wins Major Legal Victory Against Seeno to Protect Pittsburg’s Hills.]

Save Mount Diablo Says Motion for New Trial “Should Be Denied”

Asked about the motion for a new trial, Save Mount Diablo Executive Director, Ted Clement responded, “Regarding the Seeno companies/Pittsburg request for a new trial, the Court has already rejected their arguments for reasons fully set forth in its decision. Their Motion for New Trial does not question the adequacy of the administrative record on which the Court properly based its decision (and which the City itself prepared) or suggest there was any other irregularity or unfairness in the hearing. Instead, they seek a second bite of the apple.”

“Their Motion reargues issues that were fully briefed and addressed in the Court’s Decision,” he continued. “They also seek to introduce irrelevant and improper extra-record evidence, violating black letter law that CEQA actions must be decided on the record that was before the agency when it made its decision.”

“Because their Motion provides no basis for this Court to order a new trial solely on the issues decided adverse to them, it should be denied,” Clement concluded.