1997-05-07 ARRA Minutes APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, May 7, 1997
The meeting convened at 5:34 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Vice-Chair Sandré Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District (arrived at
5:37 p.m.)
Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3
Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Henry Chang, Jr./Elihu Harris, Mayor, City of Oakland
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San Leandro
Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda (arrived at 5:39 p.m.)
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Karin Lucas, Councilmember, City of Alameda (arrived at 5:40 p.m.)
Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Ardella Dailey, Ex-officio member, Alameda Unified School District
Absent: Lee Perez, Ex-officio member, Base Reuse Advisory Group
Chair Appezzato introduced Jim Flint, Alameda’s new City Manager.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2-A. Approval of the minutes of the regular and special meetings of March 5, 1997.
2-B. Approval of the minutes of the special meeting of March 15, 1997.
2-C. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of April 1, 1997.
2-D. Recommending the appointment of Ardella Dailey to serve as the AUSD representative to the
BRAG and Chair of the Education Work Group.
2-E. Report from the Executive Director recommending the adoption of a resolution by the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) authorizing the ARRA Executive Director to represent
the ARRA and submit the application for the California Defense Adjustment Matching Grant.
Alternate Leonhardy moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Daysog seconded
the motion, which passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 0. Absent: 2 - DeWitt
and Lucas.
3. ACTION ITEMS
3-F. Report and recommendation by the Executive Director of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelop-
ment Authority (ARRA) for the proposed 1997 budget for ARRA lease revenue.
3-A
_recycled paper 1
Executive Director Miller stated that the significant lease revenues being generated will allow the
ARRA fund implementation activities that OEA and the State will not fund, pay for maintenance and
upkeep of leased buildings, and provide the match money for the $3 million EDA grant for structural
upgrades to eight buildings which can then generate revenue. Member Daysog announced that he
would recuse himself from this discussion and vote. Member DeWitt requested that staff prepare
future budgets using the City’s budget format. Member Kerr stated that the Navy had been paid for
the deconstruction of some buildings on base and asked if staff had put out bids for people to pay
ARRA to deconstruct buildings. Executive Director Miller replied that one of the budget items is for
a deconstruction/demolition demonstration project for $24,000. This model project is being
sponsored by the EBCRC as a model for base closures around the country. Member Swanson added
that the objective of the EBCRC in this project is to prove to the federal government that it can be
done for a specific cost to try and entice the federal government to become a partner with LRAs to
share some of the cost in deconstruction. This investment may provide a return if these projects are
successful. Mr. Swanson stated for the record that when we the conversion effort began it was
forecast that the activities of the base could cost the City treasury up to $10 million. It became clear
that planning and strategies would have to be formulated that would lead to revenue-generating
activities at the base. Now, when the base is just in the preliminary stage of being turned over, the
fact that a budget has been submitted for approval that is based on lease revenues is very impressive.
It requires some pause and consideration that the plan is working and we are on the right track.
Lease revenues will grow and although there are hurdles to be overcome it represents a plan that is
coming together and represents a job well done.
Chair Appezzato stated that it is miraculous what this community has accomplished in the four years
(this summer) since base closure was announced. With minimal staff and despite major
impediments, we have been succeeding. The goal was not to tap the general fund for base
conversion and it has not been necessary to do so to. Many Naval officials he has spoken to say that
Alameda, if not number one in the base conversion process, is definitely tied for that position with
almost any other base conversion in the country. A preliminary budget based on lease revenues is
exciting. He closed with a “well done” to all involved.
Member DeWitt commented that he is very pleased with the budget and the number of leases we
have but is still nervous because the budget still falls approximately $2 million short of what we will
need once the Navy stops helping us. He added that we must be diligent to market and use the
property wisely.
Member DeWitt moved to accept the budget as presented by the Executive Director. Member
Kerr seconded the motion, which passed with a unanimous voice vote: Ayes: 8. Noes: 0.
Recused: 1 - Daysog. Absent: 0.
3-G. Report and recommendation that the ARRA authorize the Executive Director to enter into an
MOU with the CIC—subject to ratification by both CIC and ARRA—to conduct an RFP process to
select a developer to purchase the East housing for development.
Executive Director Miller stated that the March 15 workshop on cash flow analysis indicated that the
best mechanism to maximize early revenues to the ARRA for East Housing would be to sell the
property to a developer for redevelopment. Sitting as the CIC, Councilmember Kerr had asked the
CIC staff to look at the possibility of issuing a Phase 2 RFP to the FISC developers to also redevelop
the East housing. As the property in East Housing would come through the Economic Development
_recycled paper 2
Conveyance to the ARRA (since it is not a part of an existing City redevelopment project area), the
only way the CIC could move forward was if they were requested to do so by the ARRA. That is the
action being requested this evening. Ms. Miller continued that by adopting the budget earlier, the
ARRA authorized $75,000 of lease revenue proceeds to be transferred to the Community
Development staff to develop an RFP and begin a developer selection process for the East Housing.
Member Daysog stated his preference that East Housing be integrated with the FISC development
and limited to the three FISC developers for efficiency in the perspective of both the developer in
matching East Housing to the FISC development to ensure appropriateness and efficiency in
administering the development process. A thorough discussion followed of the pros and cons of
limiting the RFP to the three FISC developers versus opening it up to other residential developers to
provide the broadest field of concepts and proposals.
Member Daysog moved to accept the recommendation with an addendum to limit the RFP for
East Housing to the three FISC groups: Martin, Catellus, and Lincoln Properties. Member
Kerr seconded the motion. Chair Appezzato asked the General Counsel if this motion would
require the vote of three councilmembers or a simple majority of the ARRA. General Counsel
Carol Korade answered that a simple majority of ARRA would carry the motion. The motion
failed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 3 - Daysog, Kerr, Lucas. Nays: 4 - Appezzato, DeWitt,
Ornelas, Swanson. Abstain: 2 - Chan, Leonhardy.
Member DeWitt made a motion to accept the recommendation with the change that the RFP
should be available to all qualified developers, not just residential developers. Alternate
Ornelas seconded the motion, which passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 6 - Appezzato,
Chan, Daysog, DeWitt, Ornelas, Swanson. Chan. Noes: 2 - Kerr, Lucas. Abstain: 1 -
Leonhardy.
3-H. Report from the Executive Director on the background and current status of the Pan Pacific
University (PPU) use proposed for a 65-acre site at NAS Alameda and recommendation that the PPU
use proposal be terminated and an alternative use be found for the 65-acre site.
After a short introduction from Executive Director Miller, Member Lucas stated that she was glad
this had finally come to the ARRA board. She further stated that PPU was not financially qualified
and was proposing a non-accredited school which would have been second-rate. She agreed with the
staff report recommendations and proposed to expand recommendation #2 to insure that In the
campaign to find other users, the following parameters should be followed: (1) Financial
qualifications should be required at the outset to ensure there is financial stability; (2) Ensure the
plan submitted by the applicant is for a first-rate accredited school. (3) The idea of a school is
good—look at nationally accredited schools and open it up for a national bid.
Member Chan asked where we are in the issue of the Tidelands Trust. Executive Director Miller
replied that the Tidelands Trust was not only a problem for PPU but would be for any user in that
area. If we have another university we will be faced with the same issue of having to free it from the
trust. Many other users would have the same kind of restriction. ARRA staff and State Lands have
jointly selected an appraiser to look at properties that we would propose to trade into the trust as well
as properties to be freed from the trust. Once the appraisal is completed there will be an idea of the
cost to other users to free the property from the trust for non-trust uses. Member Chan asked if a
scaled-down request had been received from PPU. Ms. Miller referred to a letter from PPU’s
_recycled paper 3
attorney expressing interest in a scaled-down campus to lease the BEQ, the kitchen, the BEQ 2 and
BEQ 4, beginning with about 800 students in undergraduate programs. They have not yet submitted
a proposal but they have been advised that financial viability, programs, and accreditation questions
would still apply to the scaled-down campus.
Member Chan clarified that the recommendation would not preclude PPU from pursuing a scaled-
down proposal and Ms. Miller agreed that their proposal would be entertained along with any other
user. In response to a question from Member Swanson, Executive Director Miller explained that
PPU originally came through the Public Benefit Conveyance process, similar to the museum and the
school district. When the delineation of the Tidelands Trust area and its implications became clear
there were two PBCs—the museum and PPU— that were impacted. Given that information, the
Department of Education determined that they could not convey Tidelands Trust property through a
PBC process to PPU. Now that PPU has proven non-viable, the property can be leased and will
produce revenue. The Community Reuse Plan designates the area as mixed-use, therefore a change
is not required except to delete the references to Pan Pacific University as a lessee under no-cost
conditions.
Alternate Leonhardy respectfully requested that the item be tabled for one month to give Pan Pacific
University time to respond and submit an alternative plan for their finances. Member Lucas pointed
out that two of PPU’s sponsors withdrew their support, they had not met their fundraising deadline,
and apart from the promise of the $3.5 million, there is no evidence that it exists. Member Swanson
stated that although he originally supported the project, the ability to perform has not been
demonstrated. The ARRA has been fair and has a fiduciary responsibility and so it is time to move
on. If PPU comes forward with a credible, fully-financed proposal, it will be discussed.
Member Daysog moved that the Pan Pacific use proposed for a 65-acre site at NAS Alameda be
terminated and an alternative use be found for the 65-acre site, with the Member Chan’s
proviso that they can resubmit a scaled-down proposal without prejudice. Chair Appezzato
clarified that the motion included all the recommendations, with Supervisor Chan’s proviso
plus the additional financial scrutiny proposed by Member Lucas. The motion was seconded
by Member Lucas and passed by a unanimous voice vote: Ayes: 9. Noes: 0.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4-I. Briefing by Rajappan & Meyer on transportation access limitations and impacts on development
potential.
D. Paul Tuttle stated that the financial workshop included a discussion of the limitation in
development of the site due to the traffic conditions through the tubes. In response to a request by
the ARRA governing body for a presentation by the traffic engineering firm, Keith Meyer of
Rajappan & Meyer, would present the results of the detailed street improvement plan they had been
developing for the entire site. Mr. Meyer stated that Alameda Point is a unique site with immense
recreational and commute possibilities. He presented a brief background of their study and an
overview of the transportation constraints and possibilities. Their comprehensive transportation plan
includes transit, bikeways, roadways, and the need and potential alignment for a new estuary
crossing. It also considered transportation alternatives such as auto, bus, bike, transit ferry/water
taxi, amphibious bus, electric shuttle, and light rail.
_recycled paper 4
Member DeWitt moved to accept the report. The motion was seconded by Member Daysog
and passed by a unanimous voice vote: Ayes: 9. Noes: 0.
4-J. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
Doug deHaan, representing Chair Lee Perez, recognized the outstanding efforts of Diane
Lichtenstein and her Community Involvement Work Group and other BRAG members for all their
work on the decommissioning ceremony for NAS Alameda. He reported that the Airfield Task
Force is in the process of finalizing their recommendation and the Recreation Task Force is finishing
their work on the Sports Complex. BRAG has had an initial meeting with East Bay Regional Parks.
A recommendation on the museum is being worked on. The Environmental Work Group has been
concerned about the refuge during the transition period between the Navy’s decommissioning and
before Fish & Wildlife takes over; the BRAG group is actively pursuing their questions. Docent
training for the wildlife refuge will be held this Saturday, May 9. The Educational, Technology and
Business Consortium is now in place; they have their temporary officers and their second meeting
will take place on Friday. He added that this is an important step in marrying the businesses coming
to the base with the education and technology sectors.
4-K. Written report from the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
(1) Airfield workshop on June 4; (2) BCDC Port Priority designation; (3) Alameda Naval Air
Museum application; (4) ARRA move to Building #1; (5) Housing lay-up; (6) Leaseback of housing
to Coast Guard; (7) MARAD/Trident contracts consummated; (8) EDA grant funding; (9) Economic
Development Conveyance negotiations; (10) Update on the Hornet Foundation; (11) NAS
Commissary closing July 26; (12) Refuge management plan; and, (13) NAS Alameda post closure
gate access and security plans.
Chair Appezzato stated that copies of the written report were available and he invited
comments/questions by exception. Executive Director Miller clarified that on item 1—Airfield
Workshop, the June 4 date is not viable. Therefore, the regular meeting of the ARRA will be held on
June 4. She asked that the ARRA governing body hold June 19 as a possible alternate date for the
workshop. Also, item 12—Refuge Management Plan stated that the plan would be forthcoming
soon. Fish & Wildlife, however, is now projecting mid-June as the earliest they can have the draft
plan available.
4-L. Oral report from the Executive Director (non-discussion items).
None.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Neil Patrick Sweeney, an interested citizen, stated how proud he was that Ardella Dailey had been
appointed that night as the Alameda Unified School District representative to the BRAG and Chair
of the Education Work Group, as she has worked hard since day one with the NAS Alameda
conversion. He added that yesterday, May 6, was National Teacher’s Day and Ardella Dailey along
with all teachers, deserve support and we must show them that we appreciate their help.
Merry Bates , Island Cats Rescue Association, spoke against the trapping/killing of feral cats on base,
urging a nonlethal solution such as trap/test/alter to reduce the feral and stray cat population.
Terry Walters read a letter from Mimi Cary, chair of the Berkeley Humane Commission urging the
ARRA and Navy to meet with the many private groups such as CC4C (Community Concern 4 Cats)
that trap, test, vaccinate, alter, and adopt/relocate cats, to explore a less antiquated method of solving
_recycled paper 5
the abandoned cat problem. Karolyn May Lount, an Alameda citizen and owner of 18 cats, stated
that it is time that we, as a community, take a stand and enforce existing laws against [relocating
military families] abandoning pets. Bill Smith, interested citizen, discussed a two-way monorail and
electric water taxis. He suggested that East Housing is an excellent place for people on welfare and
discussed the merits of employee ownership of businesses. Richard Neveln, a concerned citizen,
shared his vision of a limited use airfield hosting international air shows that would return a half-
million dollars or more for a few days of discomfort. He suggested that ARRA research/contact
communities that have hosted successful air shows.
6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
Member Kerr stated that she wanted to make a brief comment for Vice-Chair Swanson’s benefit.
An overriding concern is that cats that are trapped are able to be brought into City shelters so that
adoptable animals can be identified and not killed before the determination is made. The Alameda
Humane Society has a fine shelter and a dedicated group of people and Island Cat Rescue is spending
their own time and money on spaying and neutering.
Member Swanson stated that Fish & Wildlife is going to have to provide a specific explanation of
what they plan to do with strays in their management plan .
In response to a request by Member DeWitt, Member Daysog motioned to reopen 4K.5—Housing
lay-up. The motion was seconded by Member Kerr and passed by unanimous voice vote: 9.
Member DeWitt requested that the Executive Director proceed with the feasibility study for leasing
of West Housing, which includes the “Big Whites” and the single-family homes aboard the base.
Member Kerr stated that during a redevelopment conference she had attended in Monterey, they
had discussed the concept of a Project Area Committee—which is now required under certain
circumstances where people live in a redevelopment area. If the timing of the redevelopment area
formation is right, the people living within the redevelopment area have a say in electing people to
the Project Area Committee. There might be a liability there because people who have only a
temporary interest in the City might become the people who elect representatives to the Project Area
Committee. The Project Area Committee opinions stand unless they are overridden by a 2/3rds vote
of the redevelopment authority—the CIC in this case. The power would be very real and could even
make the BRAG somewhat superfluous. She suggested that in planning for any temporary leasing of
housing that be considered.
A motion to accept the report [4K.5] was made by Member Daysog, seconded by Member
Kerr, and passed unanimously: 9.
Member Daysog stated that he wants to emphasize that East Housing must be developed to highest
and best use and that will be his Holy Grail for the following months.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 8:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Margaret E. Ensley
ARRA Secretary
_recycled paper 6