As a pro-business advocate, I can’t help but roll my eyes at some of Alameda’s recent suggestions for the redevelopment of Alameda Point. Citing San Francisco’s Presidio as the prototype for a future Alameda Point, one resident says he’d much rather have several hundred acres of bayside park. Yea, it’d be nice to have free ice cream on Alameda Point too. But that’s not going to happen. (Either way, didn’t the SunCal plan call for 150 acres of parks/open space?)
Here’s how I see it:
There’s an old naval base on Alameda Point. It’s a financial drain on the city. A plan has been developed that the community apparently agrees with (according to the San Francisco Chronicle). It cleans up the bay and brings some jobs. So the City brought in a developer that can carry out the plan.
This is obviously over simplified, but I’m trying to say that, at this point, some Alameda residents seem to be raising issues just to raise issues. The City is in a great place to negotiate, which they should take advantage of, but they should also know a good deal when they see one, which this plan is. (Cue angry Action Alameda comments here)
For me, the demands of residents raise two main concerns:
1. A Measure A compliant plan is not feasible. Four developers have tried, four developers have failed. The proof is in the pudding.
2. Have the City develop Alameda Point. As of now, the City seems to believe they can handle the redevelopment of Alameda Point on their own. However, in July 2007 they hired a master developer citing that the City lacked the skills and equity to develop a project of this size. Why is the City suddenly capable of doing so themselves?
I’m sure Alameda will go back on forth on the issue at least 20 more times. Join me in holding our City officials accountable to make prudent business decisions for our City, led by the City’s best interest, and not politics.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
We Need More than Toxic Waste Cleanup on Alameda Point
As predicted, Measure B did not pass on February 2 and as always, the City’s post election reaction was irrational and implausible.
With all due respect to my fellow East Bay citizens, land issues are not typically placed on the ballot because they’re far too complex for the average joe voter. For these issues, we should rely on our city officials to assess and determine the best option for our community. Isn’t that, after all, what government is intended for? However, with upcoming elections to plan for and let’s call it plain cowardice, the Mayor, the City Council and the City Manager have all shrunk away from their responsibilities, putting the issues on the ballot “so the voters have a choice.”
The Council and, in particular, the City Manager have botched this chance at an amazing plan for Alameda, all because they were too afraid to stand up and take a little criticism. At the end of the day, the Council can move this plan forward if they decide to, whether or not Alameda voters vote Yes or No. Adding a little affordable housing trumps the Measure A density measure (the real reason why Measure B had to go on the ballot) and allows development to continue.
One thing to say about SunCal. They did not follow due process. It should have begun with an Environmental Impact Report, approved terms from the Navy and a Draft Development Agreement. This did cause warranted concern from the city, and should have been enforced by city officials from the get go. The onus was instead passed on to uninformed voters susceptible to rumors and heresy.
The fact of the matter is the community supports the development plan, so did the Mayor and the majority of the Council when it was introduced. Heck, even environmental groups support the plan:
http://www.greenbelt.org/resources/press/releases/release_2010jan20.html
Alameda can hardly develop a golf course, let alone a project such as Alameda Point. We need the equity of SunCal to get this under way.
The City Manger’s solution? Long-term leases. This is the current situation on Alameda Point, and they don’t even cover the cost of maintenance. In addition, her bogus press release and public service announcement against SunCal leads me to believe that she is trying to pass the heat from her poor management onto the developer. Don’t be fooled, Alameda.
This clumsy attempt to handle this development process has ended in unnecessary controversy and millions of taxpayer dollars wasted. We need to get out of our own way, and get some real leadership in city hall.
With all due respect to my fellow East Bay citizens, land issues are not typically placed on the ballot because they’re far too complex for the average joe voter. For these issues, we should rely on our city officials to assess and determine the best option for our community. Isn’t that, after all, what government is intended for? However, with upcoming elections to plan for and let’s call it plain cowardice, the Mayor, the City Council and the City Manager have all shrunk away from their responsibilities, putting the issues on the ballot “so the voters have a choice.”
The Council and, in particular, the City Manager have botched this chance at an amazing plan for Alameda, all because they were too afraid to stand up and take a little criticism. At the end of the day, the Council can move this plan forward if they decide to, whether or not Alameda voters vote Yes or No. Adding a little affordable housing trumps the Measure A density measure (the real reason why Measure B had to go on the ballot) and allows development to continue.
One thing to say about SunCal. They did not follow due process. It should have begun with an Environmental Impact Report, approved terms from the Navy and a Draft Development Agreement. This did cause warranted concern from the city, and should have been enforced by city officials from the get go. The onus was instead passed on to uninformed voters susceptible to rumors and heresy.
The fact of the matter is the community supports the development plan, so did the Mayor and the majority of the Council when it was introduced. Heck, even environmental groups support the plan:
http://www.greenbelt.org/resources/press/releases/release_2010jan20.html
Alameda can hardly develop a golf course, let alone a project such as Alameda Point. We need the equity of SunCal to get this under way.
The City Manger’s solution? Long-term leases. This is the current situation on Alameda Point, and they don’t even cover the cost of maintenance. In addition, her bogus press release and public service announcement against SunCal leads me to believe that she is trying to pass the heat from her poor management onto the developer. Don’t be fooled, Alameda.
This clumsy attempt to handle this development process has ended in unnecessary controversy and millions of taxpayer dollars wasted. We need to get out of our own way, and get some real leadership in city hall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
