Loading...
1997-09-03 ARRA Minutes APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, September 3, 1997 SPECIAL SESSION The special session was convened at 5:40 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding to address the following: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Property: Alameda Naval Air Station Negotiating parties: ARRA and U.S. Navy Under negotiation: Economic Development Conveyance of property at NAS Alameda Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.8 Chair Appezzato adjourned the special session at 6:15 p.m. Chair Appezzato reconvened the meeting to order at 6:20 p.m. and announced that no action had been taken in the special closed session. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda Roberta Brooks, alternate to Vice-Chair Sandré Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda James Sweeney, alternate to Karin Lucas, Councilmember, City of Alameda Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3 (arrived at 6:24 p.m.) Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San Leandro Ex-officio: Lee Perez, Ex-officio, Base Reuse Advisory Group Absent: Henry Chang, Jr., alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City of Oakland Ardella Dailey, Ex-officio, Alameda Unified School District CONSENT CALENDAR Upon determining that there was a speaker on item 3-C, Chair Appezzato pulled it from the Consent Calendar. Member DeWitt moved approval of items 3-A, 3-B, and 3-D of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Alternate Ornelas and passed unanimously - 8. Absent 1 - Chang. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.] *3-A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of May 7, 1997. *3-B. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of June 4, 1997. 3-B _recycled paper 1 *3-D. Report and recommendation from the Executive Director to amend the applicable sections of the NAS Alameda Community Reuse Plan to include a 525-acre Wildlife Refuge as a federal transfer as requested by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and make corresponding technical language changes. 3-C. Approval of the summary report of the Restricted-Use Airfield Workshop of July 28, 1997. Speaker: Richard P. Neveln, Nimitz Airfield Society, stated that the summary report on the Restricted Use Airfield Workshop was not available to the public and could not be reviewed by him before the board approved it. Executive Director Miller explained that the report had been available at the August 6 meeting. Chair Appezzato requested that a copy be made available to Mr. Neveln. Member Daysog inquired if the request was to approve the summary minutes or any particular recommendations within the summary? Executive Directory Miller explained that the vote was just to accept the summary minutes that were provided by the EBCRC, who financed the workshop. Alternate Brooks moved acceptance of the summary report [minutes] of the Airfield Workshop. Member DeWitt seconded the motion, which passed unanimously: 8. ACTION ITEMS 4-E. Report and recommendation from the Executive Director that the governing body authorize ARRA staff to negotiate and execute a contract for a property manager to renovate, lease, and manage a part of the available units in West Housing. Executive Director Miller stated that this recommendation covers Phase 1 of the request for proposals for West Housing. Phase 1 includes all of the Big Whites and single-family units, as well as six adjacent townhouses. Of the four firms that bid, the selection committee unanimously recommends the firm of Gallagher & Lindsey, a local Alameda firm, to be the property managers for the aforementioned units for a term of one year. The report also recommends that individual unit metering be done on a phased basis with a surcharge added to the rental income to cover utility costs. Chair Appezzato suggested that they only vote on the 44 Big Whites and single-family units, with Gallagher & Lindsey and ARRA staff to return at a later date with a recommendation on the six townhouses. Executive Director Miller stated that it had been an arbitrary decision to include the two townhouse units containing 3 townhouses each. This had been done because the units are contiguous to the single-family area and because the footprint proposed includes a neighborhood park. It was felt that the boarded-up townhouses would negatively impact the neighborhood and its marketability. Speakers: None. After discussion, Alternate Friedman moved approval of the recommendation with the restriction on the six townhouses until Gallagher & Lindsey and ARRA staff can come back to the governing body with a recommendation. Member DeWitt seconded the motion, which passed unanimously: 8. 4-F. Report from the Executive Director recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize negotiations and execute a 15-year interim lease with United Indian Nations, Inc. _recycled paper 2 Executive Director Miller briefly outlined the history of the homeless accommodation. In reliance on the reuse plan and with the expectation that the Record of Decision (ROD) would be received by this year, several of the homeless providers had applied to HUD for funds to begin the rehabilitation of their units. United Indian Nations must demonstrate site control in order to receive those funds and HUD is willing to accept a 15-year lease—actually the term will be the remainder of the 15-year lease which the ARRA signed a few months ago with the Navy—as evidence of site control. Per Chair Appezzato’s request, ARRA staff checked with HUD to see if there is any possibility of deferring the funding until after the ROD. HUD replied that under a statutory requirement, they cannot extend the funding and site control must be demonstrated. Under the proposed lease, UIN will only occupy the units for rehabilitation and caretaking; no actual occupancy will occur until after the Record of Decision. This prototype lease will also be proposed for one other agency that has sought HUD funds and needs to demonstrate site control—the San Leandro Women’s Shelter (which will be known at Alameda Point as the Bessie Coleman Project) situated in the Navy Lodge. This will be a “no-cost” lease, however they are aware that they will be charged a common services fee. Alternate Friedman moved approval of the recommendation. Member DeWitt seconded the motion, which passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 1 - Kerr. Absent: 1 - Chang. 4-G. Recommendation regarding interim leasing and long-term use of the “campus area” of Alameda Point. Executive Director Miller explained that staff was ready to go forward with leasing some of the buildings in the campus area. Last month, however, the BRAG made a recommendation that a moratorium be placed on leasing campus area properties in order to conduct a comprehensive marketing outreach for a single campus-user for the property. A listing was provided that outlines the prospective tenants for individual properties, including one proposed user—the University of Northern California—who is requesting 200 acres. Speakers: Dr. Donald Haight, Vice President for University Relations of University of Northern California (UNC), introduced Dr. Wai King Lu, President of UNC and Walter Bates, UNC Director of Development. He explained that UNC is a not-for-profit institution that is established, has student enrollment and a graduated class. They operate on a 194-acre campus in Northern Marin County with classrooms, libraries, dormitories, cafeteria, learning center, and offices. They offer bachelors, masters, and Ph.D. programs that are approved by the California Council of Private, Post-Secondary, and Vocational Education. Their speciality is biomedical engineering, languages, and linguistics. They are not yet accredited but they are in the lengthy process. While they would be satisfied with 65 acres, he suggested that there is an advantage to the ARRA’s appointing them as the caretaker of the 200 acres. This magnet campus would oversee the development of the entire campus area through community involvement in a collaborative effort which would include appointing the Mayor and City Manager to their board of directors along with the Chamber of Commerce. They are aware that this is Tidelands Trust land and they are prepared to make negotiated lease payments and would not be a burden on the City. UNC derives its funds as a research institution from various sources, including research contracts, tuition, and fund-raising. They cannot compete with developers but their proposal is for the future of the children of the community and the community itself. They are now looking for a central location for a comprehensive curriculum and Alameda Point would be perfect for their expansion. As soon as they get a sign of serious intent on behalf of the commission _recycled paper 3 they are prepared to move expeditiously. Chair Appezzato emphasized that ARRA would not make a decision on any proposal at this meeting. Speakers: Ann Mitchum, Alameda resident, stated her preference that the campus include many interesting organizations rather than a single user. Lee Perez, BRAG Chair, stated that the BRAG has been very intensely involved in the academic aspect of the base and future steps need to be carefully thought out and very aggressively marketed. BRAG feels strongly that it is necessary to have an academic campus that brings in a well-established educational institution or an umbrella that encompasses many schools that fit in with high-tech industry and other clean, incubator-type businesses. He suggested that Congressman Dellums’ office or the County Economic Development offices or a combination might provide support directly or the leverage for some funding for a marketing outreach effort. Alternate Brooks explained that the only source of federal money that she is aware of is OEA (Office of Economic Adjustment), which is funding the base reuse effort—but OEA does not fund marketing studies. Alternate Friedman stated that he had checked with Assemblyman Perata’s office and Fort Ord in Monterey was able to get a large state grant for their academic institution but our chances of getting a similar grant are nil. Pattianne Parker, BRAG Reuse Working Group Chair, stated that the BRAG formed a Task Force to cross the Land Use, Economic Development, Reuse, and other Work Groups in order to initiate progress and proactively look for opportunities for the historic campus core. The image and character of Alameda Point is going to be determined by the users that are brought in and BRAG wants to be more proactive in bringing those opportunities to the base. After discussion among the ARRA governing body, the consensus was that it is inadvisable to impose a moratorium and that, while the concept of one educational institution taking over the entire campus area can be pursued if a funding source is located, the concept of a variety of educational institutions, either under the umbrella of a consortium or magnet campus to oversee the development of the area is also exciting. It was also agreed that a flexible process should be utilized and immediate, aggressive action taken to focus on reliable institutions that can provide detailed financial information that demonstrate fiscal strength. Alternate Brooks motioned acceptance of the report. The motion was seconded by Alternate Friedman and passed by unanimous voice vote: 8. ORAL REPORTS 5-H. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities. BRAG Chair Lee Perez commented that (1) Parks & Recreation are working to integrate the plans of the Alameda Recreation & Park Department, East Bay Regional Parks Department, golf course, and other users into one recreational plan; (2) the Airfield Task Force has concluded but concern remains as to what the ultimate benefit is to Alameda Point; (3) the BRAG has begun discussions on how to eventually be melded seamlessly back into City departments, commissions, and boards and what other community input will be needed; and, (4) the term “supportive services” needs to be substituted for “homeless” to eliminate negativity. Member Kerr asked if BRAG was looking at the Estuary Park since it appears the Coast Guard doesn’t want title and will probably lease back. Mr. Perez answered that the Estuary Park is included as part of the Parks & Recreation Work Group’s planning. Mr. deHaan added that the report from that work group will be available within the next month or two. _recycled paper 4 5-I. Written report from the Executive Director. Executive Director Miller summarized the items contained in the written report, including the proposed airfield demonstration project; transfer of property and refuge management responsibilities to U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the development of a management plan for the refuge; recent grant awards to ARRA; and the upcoming BCDC vote on the port priority designation. Speaker: Richard Neveln, Nimitz Airfield Society, stated that at the last ARRA meeting the stated consensus of the board was that a more restricted airfield was better. This was not an item agendized for action, although it constituted an “action taken” under his reading of the Brown Act. Further, the airfield demonstration project information states that a two-month testing period will begin in mid- November, yet the decision on the airfield will be in the November/December time frame. The demonstration project should be moved along more quickly and include not only noise but complete compatibility tests as well as some review for other users. The study must move toward economic and environmental sustainability for the airfield. 5-J. Oral report from the Executive Director (non-discussion items). None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Morten W. Wellhaven, an Alameda resident, stated that he hopes nothing goes forward on the airport and there is never an Alameda airport. Industries that have been interested in Alameda Point would no longer be interested if there was an airfield because of the noise and the communication traffic. Also, if we OK an Alameda airfield it will be more difficult to oppose the expansion of the Oakland Airport on the basis of noise.Kurt Bohan, Alameda citizen, stated that the BRAG attempted to violate the Brown Act with a secret meeting of the Airfield Task Force, although it failed. On August 6, there was another Brown Act violation, which is not isolated but has been consistent over the past two years in a prejudice against the airfield. A real demonstration project needs to be held that will generate all the needed facts. M. J. Dunlap, Alameda resident, had left the meeting and did not speak. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Alternate Sweeney stated that he has requested the National Transportation Safety Board to send him information about air show accidents before the workshop. They have now sent him detailed information from 1983 until present with fatalities, deficiencies, etc. that contributed to accidents. He gave the packet to Executive Director Miller for reproduction for members of the board and to have available to the public. Member Kerr also asked that a copy be sent to the public library and the City Clerk’s office. She inquired into the future of the television coverage. Chair Appezzato stated that the meeting was live. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 8:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Margaret E. Ensley _recycled paper 5 ARRA Secretary _recycled paper 6