1994-12-07 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Special Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber (2nd Floor)
2263 Santa Clara Ave.
Alameda, CA
Wednesday, December 7, 1994
6:00 p.m.
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY:
1) Please file a speaker's slip with the Seer ary, upon
recognition by the Chair, approach the rostruikt and s at ur
name. Speakers are limited to three (3) minute per ite
2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writs g and only a
summary of pertinent points presented yerbally.
3) Applause, signs or demonstrations are p ibit d during Authority
meetings.
Iv
V.
A. Report from the Fecutive Director Recomm ding Approval of a Motion Authorizing the
Exe utive Dire tor to Negotiate and Exec te a Revision to the Consultant Contract with
EDA to Add a Scope of Work and B igetfor the Subconsultant CB Commercial for a
Marke bildy Assessment for the Na ,a1 Air Station Alameda.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- GENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the Go erning Body in regard to any matter over which the Governing
Body has jurisdiction or of w ch it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.)
COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
ADJOURNMENT
Note:
Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Elizabeth
Brydon, ARRA Secretary, at 263-2870 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request
an interpreter.
For persons with hearing difficulty, a FM amplifying system is available in the Council
Chamber.
Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is
available.
Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
Audio and Video Tapes of the meeting are available upon request.
* * * * *
MINUTES
OF THE
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, November 2, 1994
5:30 p.m.
The meeting convened at 5:32 p.m. with Chair Mayor E. William Withrow, Jr. presiding.
I. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmember Ralph Appezzato, City of Alameda;
Alternate for Ellen Corbett, Councilmember Garry Loeffler, City
of San Leandro; Mr. Mark Friedman, Aide to Supervisor Don
Perata, District 3; Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda;
Vice-Mayor Richard Roth, City of Alameda; Chair Mayor E.
William Withrow, Jr., City of Alameda; Ex-officio Member, Gail
Greely, Alameda Unified School District. Absent: Vice-Chair
Sandre Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District;
"Lil" Arnerich, City of Alameda; Councilmember Dezie Woods-
Jones, City of Oakland. (Councilmember Karin Lucas arrived at
5:37 p.m.; Vice-Chair Swanson arrived at 5:35 p.m.)
A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of October 5, 1994
Councilmember Appezzato moved to approve the minutes of the meeting
of October 5, 1994. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Lucas and
carried by a unanimous voice vote.
Chair Withrow began the meeting with Agenda Item III.A & B.
Speakers:
Mr. James Thomas, a representative of the Emergency Services Network (ESN) and of
the Steering Committee of the recently formed Homeless Collaborative, stated that it was
the desire of representatives of the homeless community to work in a cooperative effort
with the Reuse Authorities for Alameda and Oak Knoll to incorporate the needs of the
homeless into the reuse planning process.
Mr. Parker reported that the new revised amendment to Title V of the
McKinney Act provides that homeless interests will be expressed in an organized
fashion through the Community Reuse Plan. He requested that the Reuse
Authority authorize the Executive Director to send a letter to the Secretary of
Defense requesting that all or portions of the Alameda Naval Air Station be
considered for inclusion under the new procedures of the McKinney Title V
process.
Vice-Mayor Roth moved that the Reuse Authority authorize the Executive
Director to send such a letter. The motion was seconded by Councilmember
Appezzato, and passed by a unanimous voice vote.
B. Report from the Executive Director Requesting the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Endorse and Authorize the Executive Director to Submit
the Funding Request for the Combined Alameda Science City/ACET (Alameda
Center for Environmental Technology) Proposal for a "Scoping Study and Strategy
Development Plan". (Science City/ACET Endorsed by the Alameda City Council)
Speakers:
Tim Little of the Rose Foundation stated that some members of the environmental
community would like to support Science City, but they had developed concerns about
the project due to a refusal by the proponents to respond to their questions regarding
regional oversight of proposal, however, he stated his continued support of ACET.
Mr. Parker reported that Science City and ACET was heard at the last
'Reuse Authority meeting of October 5, 1994, at which time an oral report was
given leading to the current request to endorse the funding request for the
combined Alameda Science City/ACET. After reviewing the background of the
proposal, Mr. Parker requested the support of the Reuse Authority in their
funding request for a planning study of 4.6 Million headed up by the University
of California in assisting the Reuse Authority staff to carry out the study. Mr.
Parker introduced Mr. Judd King, Vice Provost for Research from the Office of
the President of the University of California.
Mr. Judd King of the University of California gave a presentation on the
combined planning study for the Alameda Science City and particularly, the
Institute of Technology Development, as well as the initiation of the Alameda
Center for Environmental Technology.
Assistant General Counsel Heather McLaughlin stated that at the next
Reuse Authority meeting, an action can be made to amend the bylaws to include
the new BRAG ex-officio member as well as any future appointments of ex-
officio members.
Chair Withrow then moved to Item III.G of the agenda.
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
G. Oral Report from Mr. Len Bertain Explaining the Scope of Work for a Feasibility
Study of the New Turnaround Proposal.
Mr. Len Bertain and others gave an update report on the New Turnaround
Proposal and stated that the project should get underway as soon as possible.
Conceptual support was requested of the Reuse Authority in order to retain
workers on the base immediately and create new jobs. Funding has already been
allocated as a defense department line item budget in the budget recently passed.
II. AGENDA ITEMS
E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Authorize the Signing of a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Naval Air Station Alameda Describing the Transfer and
Use of Property Parcel Number 144 Known as the "Soccer Field".
Chair Withrow stated that this item was one that he had personally been
working on for about 1-1/2 years with Captain Major, Captain Aldridge,
representatives of the Department of Defense, Congressman Dellum's office, and
stated that the beginning of the "conversion" of Naval Air Station Alameda will
be noted at 2:00 p.m. on Friday, November 4, 1994, at a press conference and
ribbon cutting involving the use of 4.3 acres by the City of Alameda and
surrounding area for soccer.
Mr. Parker stated that the soccer field is being obtained through a
Memorandum of Understanding which will begin the process of making the
transfer of Naval Air Station lands.
Mark Friedman moved, and Councilmember Lucas seconded, a motion to
authorize the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with the Naval Air
Station Alameda describing the transfer and use of property parcel number 144
known as the "Soccer Field". The motion passed unanimously.
5
through identifying the major issues that each of the subcommittees are working
on, including the BRAG itself including of its overriding concerns such as job
generation, environmental aspects, public access, etc., an endorsement of the
revised vision statement, consensus that the base needs a balance of uses,
recognition that all want amenities but that we will have economic development
trade-offs to achieve those amenities; a community survey in conjunction with the
consultant; attendance at EDAW team meetings.
C. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on Reuse
Authority Staff Activities.
Mr. Parker reported on the following activities; consultant completion of
the reconnaissance phase of their work and that the report will be distributed;
interim rules have been published by the Department of Defense and final draft
version copies will be provided to Members upon receipt; negotiations in process
on terms of the Master Lease; completion of the Navy's redline study (boundary
study of the State Land's potential jurisdiction) which is being reviewed by the
City Attorney's office indicating that approximately 65 to 75% of the base might
be affected by State Lands jurisdiction.
D. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on McKinney
Act/Homeless Issues.
Mr. Parker reported that this item was covered under another item of the
agenda.
E. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on the Status
of the AEG Interim Reuse Proposal to Refurbish Bay Area Rapid Transit District's
(BART) Rail Carts at Naval Air Station Alameda.
Mr. Parker reported that bids had been submitted over a month ago with
two bidders, one of which being AEG Leasing, assuming that AEG will have the
opportunity to use 160,000 sq. ft. in the base employing approximately 200
people, many of which hopefully will be former base employees. The bids will
be opened after the new board is constituted (elections over), and AEG believes
was that most likely an announcement can be expected in January of 1995 as to
the award of the bid.
H. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding Next Agenda for Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority.
Mr. Parker reported that the next agenda will include: amendment of the
interlocal agreement; amendment of by-laws regarding ex-officio members; New
Turnaround Proposal for endorsement; conflict of interest code; insurance
procurement; service agreement with the City of Alameda.
7
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inner-Office Memorandum
December 1, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker
Executive Director
SUBJ.:
Background:
Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of a Motion
Authorizing the Executive Director to Negotiate and Execute a Revision to the
Consultant Contract with EDAW to Add a Scope of Work and Budget for the
Subconsultant CB Commercial for a Marketability Assessment for the Naval Air
Station Alameda.
As a result of the work completed in Phase 1, the reconnaissance study conducted by the
EDAW consultant team, and discussions with the ARRA staff, it has been deteiiiiined there is an
immediate need for a more in depth market assessment of the buildings at the Naval Air Station
to support the interim leasing effort this work was not adequately included in the original RFP
nor in the consultants original scope of work.
This additional task was being discussed when the OEA grant was submitted; however, this
additional task was not included in the original grant approved by OEA.
Time is of the essence. It is critical that this work be completed to fit into the work
efforts of the EDAW consultant team in developing the interim reuse strategy. Work on the
building assessment was planned to commence immediately upon approval of the contract
amendment by the ARRA. The decisions on the interim reuse strategy is scheduled to come
before the ARRA for approval in June of next year. However, funding for this additional work is
not immediately available through the approved OEA grant.
Discussion/Analysis:
ARRA staff and EDAW reviewed a number of potential candidates to complete this
additional work, and to add as sub-consultant to the EDAW planning team. ARRA staff and the
EDAW consultant team selected the commercial real estate broker CB Commercial for further
discussions on a scope of work. CB Commercial is an national real estate firm with local offices
in Oakland, California.
The proposed scope of work includes six major tasks (see attached proposed work
program outline) involving a review of buildings and equipment at NAS Alameda for their
marketability for interim and long term reuse potential. CB Commercial would be working as a
Boy
Area
Economics
2550 Ninth Street
Suite 202
Berkeley, CA 94710
510 5i97310
Fax 549-7028
November 3, 1994
ME William Karr
Senior Vice President
CB Commercial
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 100
Oakland, CA 94612
Dear Bill:
I am beginning to define the scope of services for CB Commercial's effort in developing a
Community Reuse Plan for the Alameda Naval Air Station. To this end, I have written the
following task outline. Please review these tasks to be sure they are consistent with your
understanding of the work effort. As we fmalize this list, we can fill in more specific language
for individual task descriptions, develop a final schedule, and formulate a budget.
Preliminary Scope of Services
Task 1: ASSPCS Building Marketability. This task will involve a visual inspection of the major
buildings at NAS Alameda by a team of CB Commercial industrial brokers. The brokers will
provide input on a number of dimensions regarding each building.
Task 2: Identify Key Buildings and Subareas. CB Commercial would assist BAE in making
assumptions about which buildings are likely to lease-up during the first five years following the
date when property will be available for interim lensing. As part of this sarnF, effort, CB
Commercial will assist BAE in determining which subareas of the Base are most marketable and
should receive priority for infrastructure upgrades and environmental clean-up.
Task 3: Profile Target Mnrkets. During this effort. CB Commercial will work with BAE to
develop a profile of industries that are likely prospects for locating at NAS Alameda. This
information will bc used to assess the specific facilities and infrastructure needs associated with
these types of industries.
Task 4: Develop Interim Marketing and Disposition Strategy. CB Commercial will develop
a marketing plan and disposition strategy for property on the Base that will be part of a short-
term, or interim reuse strategy.
CB COMMERCIAL
REAL ESTATE GROUP. INC.
BROKERAGE AND NIANAGIIMENT
BROKERAGE SERVICES
November 22, 1994
Ms. Dena Belzer
Principal
BAY AREA ECONOMICS
25 Fifty-ninth Street, Suite 202
Berkeley, California 94710
Dear Dena:
InICB
COMMERCIAL
Local Perspective Worldwide
I OCNIX:D mks
WILLIAM M. KARR
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
NIANAGING OFFICER
510 874-1939
510 834-9158 FAX
The following is a list by the task numbers identified in your letter to me of November 3, 1994,
with the additional detail that will provide a fairly realistic idea of the scope of work that we are
contemplating in each task. This is not meant on. a limitation on what we are going to do but
rather the fundamental sections that will be completed. _
TASK #1 - ASSESS BUILDING MARKETAMLIIY
The goal of this task will be to visually inspect each building for potential reuse, incorporating
that date which has already been obtained in the Engineering and Architecture survey, and
attempting to organize and quantify these buildings into probable marketability and value for
future decision making. In order to accomplish this the following steps will be taken:
▪ Compile known data on each building to be surveyed, particularly the
Engineering and Architectural survey as well as any other information that can
be gathered time peilnitting prior to a December 6th and 7th inspection.
• Establish an inspection checklist foiiiiat form that will answer questions of
practical and economic relevance.
• Inspection team will consist of the following:
Three First Vice Presidents and two Senior Vice Presidents of CB
Commercial (average years of industrial experience 24) headed up by
experienced industrial and office brokers (Larry Westland, Jim Bohar).
In addition, this group will be accompanied by the head of our
Information System Group as well as a Infonnation Group Researcher.
Also providing input will be the Managing Officer of the Oakland office.
WMKARR\CORRESPNBELZER121/NOV/94:cml
Ms. Dana Belzer
November 22, 1994
Page 3
TASK #5 - AS DESCRIBED laN YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 3, 1994
TASK #6 - CREATE THE FINAL MARKETING PLAN
It is envisioned that this is one of the larger task in the scope of services. It incorporates all of
the available information up to this point, and is essentially the blueprint that we will use for the
further solicitation of additional contractors in the next phase of this project. It should be
detailed enough in scope to provide a blueprint for future marketing to allow for necessary
changes in the marketing direction depending on the makeup and composition of the future
projects.
COST: $9,600
TASK #7 - MASTER LEASE NEGOTIATIONS
The extent of the scope of this work is at this time difficult to envision. It is anticipated that
any negotiations will be conducted by a First Vice President from Brokerage as well as the
Senior Vice President and Managing Officer of the Oakland Office. In addition, we will need
to utilize whatever support, if any, is required of our Financial Services Analytical Division.
It is anticipated that we would charge $200.00 an hour for his service.
Sincerely,
CB Commercial
Real Estate Group, Inc.
William M. Karr
WMICARR\CORRESP\BELZER\21/NOV/94:cml
COMMERCIAL
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND OF JAMES B. BOHAR
SENIOR ASSOCIATE
CB COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.
OAKLAND, CA
Jim Bohar has been active in East Bay Industrial and Research & Development real estate
since 1980, representing users and developers in land and building sales as well as leasing in
Alameda and West Contra Costa Counties. Prior to beginning his real estate career, he
served as a naval officer and held various marketing positions with IBM and Raytheon
Corporations. Jim is active in the Rotary Club of Oakland, and West Oakland Commerce
Association. He lives in Piedmont with his wife and two daughters.
SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS SERVED AS LEASING/SALES BROKER:
Corsair Business Park - Hayward, CA
50,000 square feet mixed use project.
Owner: Danilo Piccinnini
4150 Lakeside Drive - Richmond, CA
2 building R&D and office project at Chevron Hilltop Industrial Park.
Owner: Stephen E. Block/C. Overra Company
Central Bay Industrial Park - Hayward, CA
144,000 square foot light industrial and office building, Phase I of 53
acre Industrial Park.
Owner: Union Pacific Realty Company
Hayward/Nimitz Industrial Center - Hayward, CA
400,000 square foot industrial project in 14 buildings.
Owner: T.C.W. Realty Advisors
Sky Park Business Park Hayward, CA
60,000 square foot Phase I of mixed-use project.
Owner: Watt Industries
CB COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE GROUP. INC. • BROKERAGE AND MANAGEMENT • LICENSED REAL ESTATE BROKER
ANCIAL SERVICES
A Division of CB Commercial
This group provides state-of-the-art fmancial analysis and asset management expertise that
enables our clients to make the most informed real estate decisions. The professionals in this
group have extensive experience in the. evaluation of all types of real estate transactions
including: property and poi ifolio valuations; landlord lease comparisons; tenant lease
renegotiations and/or sublease annlyses; lease versus buy evaluations; build-to-suit and other
development pro formas; sale/leaseback analyses; and broker opinions of value. The group
teams up with other CB Commercial servcie providers and has entered into fee-for-services work
with financial institutions, real estate companies, accounting firms, Wall Stret Firms, and public
sector entities. One of the key strengths of this group is the ability to present information for,
and speak the language of, the Chief Financial Officer. The group nationally consists of nine
regional offices staffed with Analysts, Senior Analysts and Vice Presidents. The group is
accessed locally through the Vice President of Financial Services.
The following are brief biographical sketches of the members of this team:
JAMES M. SAYLER
Vice President, Financial Services
Mr. Sayler joined CB Commercial Real Estate Investment Banking in February 1991 as Vice
President, Financial Services in San Francisco. Mr. Sayler's work experience includes over 10
years of asset management and development activity with three large California developers. At
Castle & Cooke Development Company, he was Manager of Commercial & Industrial Properties
for three years in Kern County, California. Prior to that, Mr. Sayler worked six years with
Bedford Properties and its predecessor, Kaiser Development Company. He was the Treasurer
during the Kaiser Acquisition and later the Northwest Regional Manager responsible for Portland
and Seattle development activity. Mr. Sayler's initial work experience was in various line and
staff positions with Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, where he was an Assistant
Treasurer, Director of Corporate Planning, and a Plant Manager. Mr. Sayler's academic
background includes a Master's Degree in Finance from Harvard Business School and an
undergraduate degree in Economics from the University of Cincinnati.
LARRY WES ILAND
Page Two
CORPORATE FACILITY RELOCATIONS (Cont.):
Cost Plus Imports
Crocker Bank
County of Alameda
Dames & Moore
Eastman Kodak Company
The Equitable Life Assurance Society
Fleming Foods
First American Title Insurance Company
General Services Administration (USA)
Imperial Bank
National Railroad Passenger Corp. (AMTRAK)
The Ohio Casuslty Insurance Company
The St. Paul Companies
Southern Pacific Transportation Company
State of California
Sutro & Company
Toyota Tsusho America
OFFICE BUILDING SALES EXPERIENCE:
1994: 1131 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda (Doric), 50,000 s.f.: $2,500,000.
1993: Southshore B&TC (Apartments), Alameda (Cal Fed), 450 units: $21,700,000.
1993: Shellmound Building, Emeryville (Cal Fed), 59,000 s.f.: $2,850,000.
1993: 1151 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda (Cal Fed), 44,000 s.f.: $2,465,000.
1993: Produce Square, Oakland (4th St. Associates), 16,800 s.f.: $1,070,000.
1992: 1201 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda (Cal Fed), 60,000 s.f.: $3,900,000.
1992: Glove Building, Oakland (Cost Plus), 16,800 s.f.: $500,000.
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION:
• U.S. Naval Reserve, Lieutenant Commander, (1965-1976)
• Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce, President (1984-1985)
• City of Benicia, Architectural Review Commission, Chairman (1980-1982)
• Pepperdine University Alumni Association, Director (1981-1984)
• Young Life, Director (1982-1988), Chainnan (1986-1988)
• Oakland Tribune, Advisory Board, Member (1984-1986)
• The Lakeview Club, Oakland, Governor (1985-1989)
• Goodwill Industries East Bay, Director (1987-1989)
• (Oakland) Mayor's Advisory Forum, Member (1986-1988)
• University - Oakland Metropolitan Forum, Member (1987-1988)
• Salvation Army - Oakland Advisory Council, Chairman (1992-1995)
• Business Alliance North Downtown/BAND, Founder (1993 - ).
ILWrcs4:cc
L. " •Y WESTL
Office & Investment Properties Department
CB Commercial Real Estate Group, Inc. - Oakland, California
EDUCATION: B.A., Pepperdine University, 1965
-,-;,.:iPROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
- 1994. First Vice President, CB Commercial .Real Estate Group, Inc., Oakland.
,21-.■71988 - 1991. Associate Director, Cushman & Wakefield of California, Oakland.
1977 - 1988. Principal, McMasters & Westland Commercial Real Estate, Walnut Creek.
1975 - 1977. Salesman, Grubb & Ellis Commercial Brokerage Company, Oakland.
ROFESSIONAL LICENSING: California Real Estate Broker (#00483233)
L.-
EPICE BUILDING , A P TING EXPERIENCE:
993-94: Leasing Co-Director, AMTRAK Station (300,000), Emeryville (Wareham).
I.,..
1993-94: Leasing Co-Director, Aquatic Park Center (575,000), Berkeley (Wareham
Development).
992-94: Marketing Co-Manager, Breuner Building (174,000), Oakland.
1991: Marketing Director, Kaiser Building (753,000), Oakland (Kaiser Center, Inc.).
1990-92: Marketing Director, 1151 & 1201 Harbor Bay Parkway (104,000), Alameda
(California Federal Bank).
989-94: Marketing Manager, 2101 Webster Building (453,000), Oakland (Pankow
Development Corp. and Blue Cross California).
979-83: Marketing Director, Ellinwood Office Park (300,000), Pleasant Hill (Gerson
Bakar & Associates).
978-79: Marketing Director, Montego Executive Center (125,000), Walnut Creek (Daon
Corporation).
• 1977-78: Marketing Manager, Willowick Business Park (125,000), Concord (Koll
Company).
1976-77: Director of Leasing, Oakland City Center: Clorox, Wells Fargo and Crocker
Bank Buildings (787,000), Oakland (Grubb & Ellis Development Company).
1976: Project Manager, Oakport Office Complex (60,000), Oakland (Grubb & Ellis
Development Company).
1975-76: Marketing Manager, Eden Plaza Business Center (100,000), Hayward (Holvick,
deRegt & Koering).
CORPORATE FACILITY RELOCATIONS:
American Management Systems (AMS)
Bank of America
Blue Cross of California
Chicago Title Insurance Company
Chiron Corporation
CivicBanIc of Commerce
Consolidated Freightways
Control Data Corporation
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber (2nd Floor)
2263 Santa Clara Ave.
Alameda, CA
Wednesday, December 7, 1994
5:30 p.m.
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY:
1) Please file a speaker's slip with the Secretary, and upon
recognition by the Chair, approach the rostrum and state your
name. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes per item.
2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a
summary of pertinent points presented verbally.
3) Applause, signs or demonstrations are prohibited during Authority
in eetings.
ROLL CALL
A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of November 2, 1994.
AGENDA ITEMS
A. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Accept the P & D Aviation Report and Discontinue Further
Marketing Studies on Use of the NAS Alameda Airfield as a Civilian Operated, Non-FAA
Funded Enterprise.
B. Report from the General Counsel Requesting Authorization to Obtain Insurance Coverage
for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
C. Report from the General Counsel Recommending Approval of a Resolution Adopting a
Conflict of Interest Code for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
D. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of an Amended Interlocal
Agreement to Allow the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission to Continue
Funding the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Project Planner (Management
Analysis) and Administrative Aide (Secretary) Positions Throughl}ecirnber 1995.
c.°V1/4-St
E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of a Service Agreement with
the City of Alameda.
F. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of Proposed Change to the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Bylaws Regarding the Appointment
of a Member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), Appointed by BRAG,
to be a Non-voting, Ex-officio Member of the ARRA With One Non-voting Alternate to be
Appointed by BRAG and Other Future Non-Voting, Ex-officio Members and their
Alternates' Appointments. (Amendment of bylaws requires the vote of five (5) members,
three (3) of whom must be Alameda City Council Members)
ORAL REPORTS
A. Oral Report from Chair of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) Updating
the Reuse Authority on BRAG Activities.
13. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding the Status of the Request for Coast Guard
Housing.
C. Oral Report from Executive Director Informing the Members of His Resignation from the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
D. Oral Report froin Executive Di-rector U-piating the Reuse Authority on Reuse Atithority
Staff Activities.
E. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding Next Agenda for Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
v.
VL
(Any person may address the Governing Body in regard to any matter over which the Governing
Body has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.)
COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
ADJOURNMENT
Note:
Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Elizabeth
Brydon, ARRA Secretary, at 263-2870 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request
an interpreter.
For persons with hearing difficulty, a FM amplifying system is available in the Council
Chamber.
Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is
available.
Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
Audio and Video Tapes of the meeting are available upon request.
. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
DATE: November 28, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Accept the P & D Aviation Report and Discontinue
Further Marketing Studies on Use of the NAS Alameda Airfield as a Civilian
Operated, Non-FAA Funded Enterprise
Background:
Interim and long term re-use of the facilities at Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda is of
paramount importance. Earlier this year the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
(EBCRC)retained P&D Aviation to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of retaining the
airfield for civilian aviation uses such as aviation support (maintenance and overhaul), air cargo,
general and corporate aviation, value added manufacturing and an aviation museum at NAS. This
study concluded that it is not feasible to retain the airfield for civilian aviation oriented use due
to physical and economic constraints. The Regional Airport System Plan (RASP) has also
completed a planning study covering NAS Alameda and has concluded that there are not
sufficient economic indicators to support passenger or cargo service at NAS Alameda.
Recently the BRAG has been approached by an unsolicited consultant who suggested
additional studies should be undertaken to determine the economic feasibility of aviation uses and
the airfield at NAS Alameda. The BRAG unanimously recommended an additional study on the
market feasibility of aviation uses relying on the airfield. Following this recommendation, the
staff determined the viability of obtaining funding for such a study. The Office of Economic
Adjustment (OEA) has indicated they would fund such a study if it was determined to be
beneficial to the reuse plan for NAS Alameda.
Discussion/Analysis:
The P&D Aviation study examined a number of reuse possibilities at NAS Alameda
including the use cited above. This study concluded that they were unable to recommend further
consideration of any civilian aviation activity requiring the use of the runways at NAS Alameda
due to numerous constraints. A copy of the P&D Aviation report and an oral report was
provided to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority members at an earlier meeting.
1
Honorable Members of the November 28, 1994
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 3
P&D Aviation and the RASP with the conclusion that there is not sufficient economic reward to
reuse aviation facilities dependent on the runways at NAS Alameda. To complete further analysis
on this issue appears to the staff to be redundant and unnecessary; therefore, it is recommended
that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority not direct another study on the reuse of
aviation facilities at NAS Alameda.
Respectfully submitted,
Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Enclosure: (1) Request For Proposal
Market Feasibility Analysis of Aviation Facilities
Naval Air Station Alameda
3
. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
DATE: November 28, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Accept the P & D Aviation Report and Discontinue
Further Marketing Studies on Use of the NAS Alameda Airfield as a Civilian
Operated, Non-FAA Funded Enterprise
Background:
Interim and long term re-use of the facilities at Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda is of
paramount importance. Earlier this year the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
(EBCRC)retained P&D Aviation to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of retaining the
airfield for civilian aviation uses such as aviation support (maintenance and overhaul), air cargo,
general and corporate aviation, value added manufacturing and an aviation museum at NAS. This
study concluded that it is not feasible to retain the airfield for civilian aviation oriented use due
to physical and economic constraints. The Regional Airport System Plan (RASP) has also
completed a planning study covering NAS Alameda and has concluded that there are not
sufficient economic indicators to support passenger or cargo service at NAS Alameda.
Recently the BRAG has been approached by an unsolicited consultant who suggested
additional studies should be undertaken to determine the economic feasibility of aviation uses and
the airfield at NAS Alameda. The BRAG unanimously recommended an additional study on the
market feasibility of aviation uses relying on the airfield. Following this recommendation, the
staff determined the viability of obtaining funding for such a study. The Office of Economic
Adjustment (OEA) has indicated they would fund such a study if it was determined to be
beneficial to the reuse plan for NAS Alameda.
Discussion/Analysis:
The P&D Aviation study examined a number of reuse possibilities at NAS Alameda
including the use cited above. This study concluded that they were unable to recommend further
consideration of any civilian aviation activity requiring the use of the runways at NAS Alameda
due to numerous constraints. A copy of the P&D Aviation report and an oral report was
provided to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority members at an earlier meeting.
1
Honorable Members of the November 28, 1994
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 3
P&D Aviation and the RASP with the conclusion that there is not sufficient economic reward to
reuse aviation facilities dependent on the runways at NAS Alameda. To complete further analysis
on this issue appears to the staff to be redundant and unnecessary; therefore, it is recommended
that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority not direct another study on the reuse of
aviation facilities at NAS Alameda.
Respectfully submitted,
Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Enclosure: (1) Request For Proposal
Market Feasibility Analysis of Aviation Facilities
Naval Air Station Alameda
3
DRAFT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
MARKET FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS OF AVIATION FACILITIES
NAVAL AIR STATION ALAMEDA
INTRODUCTION
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) is seeking qualified consulting'
firms to prepare a market feasibility analysis of aviation facilities located at Naval Air Station
Alameda (NAS) and at Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) (referred to jointly herein as NAS). The
decommissioned base consists of 1,734 acres of land and 958 acres of water. All of the base,
except for approximately 38 acres, is within the City of Alameda. The area outside of Alameda
is within the City and County of San Francisco and is largely made up of wetlands.
The City of Alameda has full land use and zoning jurisdiction over the entire site. A Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA) between the City of Alameda and the County of Alameda has been
formed that is the basis of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA). The
ARRA is composed of nine members: five City Of Alameda Council Members, the Mayors of
Oakland and San Leandro, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors member representing the
Third District, and the United States House of Representatives member representing the Ninth
District (currently Congressman Ron Dellums). The ARRA is legal entity which will be receiving
property at NAS from the Federal Government as the base closes.
The ARRA has retained EDAW as the lead consultant to produce an interim reuse plan and
a final reuse plan for property and facilities at NAS. This plan is scheduled to be completed in
December 1995. Earlier this year the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
retained P&D Aviation to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of retaining the airfield for
civilian use at NAS. The airfield at NAS is composed of two runways. The north/south (31/13)
runway is 8000' long and 200' wide and the east/west runway is 7200' long and 200' wide. The
P&D Study concluded it is not feasible to retain the airfield for civilian aviation use due to
physical and economic constraints.
SCOPE OF WORK
The ARRA is submitting this Request For Proposal (RFP) in order to receive qualified
proposals to complete a market analysis of the economic feasibility for the use of facilities and
property at NAS to be used for aviation maintenance or aviation related industries. The analysis
will assess the short and long-term market demand for the aviation related property and facilities
at NAS. Any use of the runways would be private and not funded by the FAA. Some of the
facilities which should be considered, include but are not limited to, are the aircraft painting
hangar; the corrosion control hangar; engine repair building; and a 900,000' square foot hangar
AFT
presently containing a machine shop, aircraft production line and administrative spaces. Aviation
related industries to be considered include but need not be limited to aviation maintenance and
repair, air cargo services, engine repair and manufacturing, instrument repair. The consultant will
have available existing studies and work by others in addressing this issue.
The analysis should first consider the overall aviation industrial and business markets and
their projected future trends. This would include a literature search of other sites and their success
or failure. Second, the analysis should determine if the projected industrial and business aviation
markets are compatible with the existing facilities at NAS.
The consultant should consider the following as part of the analysis:
M KET ISS S
•
Prepare an overview of national aviation maintenance and other aviation related
markets.
• Analyze the regional market for aviation maintenance and related industries.
• Analyze the potential for regional growth in these industries.
Determine the potential for absorption at NAS Alameda given the facilities
available.
TABILITY OF FACILITIES
• Survey of companies to determine industry needs regarding the following:
Size of facility
Type of equipment
Special infrastructure
Special permits
Need for an airfield
• Summarize assessment prepared by others of existing conditions of facilities and
infrastructure at NAS Alameda regarding the following
Code Compliance
Seismic condition
Environmental condition
Utilities condition
Roads and access
Available environmental permits and emission reduction credits
Establish competitive strengths and weaknesses of the facilities at NAS Alameda
2
D T
in aviation maintenance or related industries. Specifically, address the need for
continued use of the airstrip to make this facility marketable in aviation
maintenance or related industries.
FEASIBILITY
• Establish public and/or private investments required to attract aviation related
industries to NAS and the potential return from required public and/or private
investments.
Determine airfield operational costs and the ability of proposed aviation business
activities to become self-sustaining including funding for airfield costs.
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
• Outline the job skills required and the number of people likely to be employed by
projected aviation related uses.
Products: Administrative draft report, followed by the public review draft report and an
executive summary of the report. The report will be presented for hearing by the ARRA. Once
the report is adopted, a final report is to be provided incorporating changes made by the ARRA.
Draft input for public review should be completed by February 28, 1995.
Deliverables- Twenty (20) copies of the administrative draft report are required. Following
approval by the staff of ARRA, fifty (50) copies of the public review draft and fifty (50) copies
of the final report are required. One unbound copy of both the draft report and the final report
suitable for duplication plus a computer disk copy containing all information are to be provided.
PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
Proposal should be single spaced and organized as follows: ("Boilerplate" materials are
not encouraged; if submitted, they must be bound separately from the proposal itself.)
Executive Summary - Demonstrate grasp of RFP; summarize the proposal.
• Scope of Work - Identify services and or other services to be delivered.
• Work Program and Schedule - Give details on how work will be performed.
• Organization and Personnel - Identify responsible parties and explain how work
would be managed; resumes of key people including client references with phone
numbers and fax numbers.
3
DRAFT
• Cost Proposal.
• Qualifications - Describe and indicate the relevance of background experience and
capabilities; include client references with phone and fax numbers for relevant
work and cost of services delivered.
PROPOSAL DUE DATE AND DELIVERY
Ten complete copies of the proposal will be received at the following address no later than
4:00 p.m., December 9, 1994. Proposals will not be accepted after this time. Proposals shall be
addressed as follows:
Dave Louk
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Building 90, NAS Alameda
Alameda, CA 94501
Hand carried proposals will be accepted in Building 90, Naval Air Station Alameda,
California.
LIST OF AVAILABLE EXHIBITS
The following list of exhibits is available for review at the ARRA office located at Building
90, NAS Alameda.
A. Aviation Study by P&D Aviation.
B. Description of buildings at NAS which contains building dimensions, utilities and floor
plan.
C. Utility information.
D. Digitized base map description produced by Towill, Inc.
E. Technical information and studies.
F. Sample Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Consultant Contract Form.
PROJECT MANAGE
4
NT
General Qualification:
1. Non-Discrimination
Consistent with the ARRA's policy that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable
employer/employee conduct, the Consultant agrees that harassment or discrimination directed
toward a job applicant, an ARRA employee or a citizen by the Consultant or Consultant's
employee or subcontractor n the basis or race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry
handicap, disability, marital status, pregnancy, sex, age, or sexual orientation will not be
tolerated. Consultant agrees that any and all violations of this provision shall constitute a material
breach of the Agreement.
Consultant shall also comply with all federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination of
any type. Such laws include, but are not limited to, laws prohibiting discrimination in
employment or accommodation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 109 of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, and the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
Please be advised that we encourage participation of Local Business Enterprises, Minority
business Enterprises, Women's Business Enterprises, Disabled Veteran Business Enterprises, and
Small Business Enterprises in the award of federally assisted contracts. We also support efforts
by contractors and subcontractors to take affirmative
2. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Reuse Authority, officers and
employees from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses
whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees, regardless of the merits of outcome of any such
claim or suit arising from or in any manner connected to Consultant's negligent performance of
services or work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement.
Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Reuse Authority, officers and
employees from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses
whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees, accruing or resulting to any and all persons,
firms or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, equipment or supplies
arising from or in any manner connected to the consultant's negligent performance of services or
work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement.
3. Insurance
On or before the commencement of the term of an Agreement, the Consultant shall furnish
5
the reuse Authority with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered,
effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with this paragraph.
Such certificates, which do not limit Consultant's indemnification, shall also contain substantially
the following statement: "Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be
canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage
shall provide (30) days' advance written notice to the Reuse Authority c/o City of Alameda
by certified main, Attention: Risk Manager". It is agreed that Consultant shall maintain in force
at all times during the performance of this Agreement all appropriate coverage of insurance
required by this Agreement with an insurance company that is acceptable to the Risk Manager and
licensed to do insurance business in the State of California. Endorsements naming the Reuse
Authority, City and County as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.
a) Consultant shall maintain the following insurance coverage:
A 1 1 11 1 • 1 . 11,
Statutory coverage as required by the State of California.
Commercial general liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury: $500,00 - each occurrence
$1,000,00 - aggregate - all other
Property Damage: • $100,000 - each occurrence
$250,00 - aggregate
If submitted, combined single limit policy with aggregate limits in the amount of
$1,000,000 will be considered equivalent to the required minimum limits shown above.
1 11 1 *
Comprehensive automotive liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury:
Property Damage:
or
$500,000 - each occurrence
$100,000 - each occurrence
Combined Single Limit: $500,000 - each occurrence
b) Subrogation Waiver:
Consultant agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has
agreed to provide comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance, that Consultant shall
look solely to its insurance for recovery. Consultant hereby grants to the Reuse Authority, on
6
behalf of any insurer providing comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance to either
Consultant of Reuse Authority with respect to the services of Consultant herein, a waiver of any
right to subrogation which any such insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the reuse
Authority by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
c) Failure to Secure:
If Consultant at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain
the foregoing insurance, the Reuse Authority shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in the
Consultant's name or as an agent of the Consultant, and shall be compensated by the Consultant
for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from
the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.
d) Additional Insured:
The Reuse Authority, officers, and employees shall be named as an additional
insured under all insurance coverages, except any professional liability insurance, required by this
Agreement. The naming of an additional insured shall not affect any recovery to which such
additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not named as such additional insured. An
additional insured named herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible portion of
any loss, or expense of any nature on this policy or an extension thereof. Any other insurance
held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss of
expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy.
e) Sufficiency of Insurance:
The insurance limits required by the Agreement are not represented as being
sufficient to protect Consultant. Consultant is advised to confer with Consultant's insurance
broker to determine adequate coverage for Consultant.
Permits and T,icenses-
Consultant, and all sub-consultants, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during
the teen of this Agreement, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses including, but not
limited to, a City Business License that may be required in connection with the performance of
services hereunder.
Repons•
Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, computer reports/file and other
document, hereinafter collectively referred to as "Report: reproduced, prepared or caused to be
prepared by Consultant pursuant to or in connection with this Agreement shall be the exclusive
7
111
RAFT
property of the Reuse Authority. Consultant shall not copyright any Report required by this
Agreement. Any Report, information and data acquired or required by this Agreement shall
become the property of the Reuse Authority, and all publication rights are reserved to the Reuse
Authority.
All Reports prepared by Consultant may be used by the Reuse Authority in execution or
implementation of:
a) The original Project for which Consultant was hired;
b) Completion of the original Project by others;
c) Subsequent additional to the original project; and/or
d) Other Reuse Authority projects as appropriate.
No report, infomiation nor other data given to or prepared or assembled by Consultant
pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available to any government entity, individual or
organization by Consultant without prior approval by the executive Director of the Reuse
Authority.
Consultant shall, at such time and in such form as the Reuse Authority may require,
furnish reports concerning the status of services required under this Agreement.
Records.
Consultant Shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs,
expenses, receipts and other such information required by the Reuse authority that relate to the
performance of services under this Agreement.
Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to
permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible.
Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of the Reuse Authority or its designees
at all proper times to such books and records, and gives the reuse Authority the right to examine
and audit same, and to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to allow inspection of all
work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records,
together with supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and
shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.
Restriction op T
The Agreement will be subject to 24 CFR 87 which prohibits the payment of Federal funds
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence, any public officer or employee in
connection with the award, making, entering into, extension, continuation, renewal, amendment,
or modification. of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or agreement.
8
Community Redevelopment Law
California Community Redevelopment law requires that contracts for work performed in
connection with any redevelopment project shall be awarded, to the greatest extent feasible, to
business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part, by persons residing in the
redevelopment area. There is also an employment preference for people residing in the
redevelopment area. Subsequent to the formation of a redevelopment area which includes the
Project Area, the consultant shall be required to abide by these provisions for any subcontracts
awarded or contract amendments.
Sithcontractor Approval
Unless prior written consent from the Reuse Authority is obtained, only those people and
subcontractors whose names and resumes approved, in writing, by the Reuse Authority shall be
used in the performance of the Agreement.
In the event that Consultant employs subcontractors, such subcontractors shall be required
to furnish proof of workers' compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general,
professional and automobile liability insurance in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried
by Consultant. In addition, any work or services subcontract hereunder shall be subject to each
provision of the Agreement.
CONDITIONS OF REQUEST
The Reuse Authority also reserves the right to cancel or reject all or a portion or portions
of the request without notice. Further, the Reuse Authority makes no representations that any
agreement will be awarded to any firm submitting a proposal.
The Reuse Authority reserves the right to reject any and all proposals submitted in response
to this request or any addenda thereto. The Reuse Authority also reserves the right to reject any
sub-consultant or individual working of a consultant team and to replace the sub-consultant or
individual with a mutually acceptable replacement.
Any changes to the proposal requirements will be made by written addendum.
The Reuse Authority shall not be liable for any costs incurred in response to this request
for proposals. All costs shall be borne by the person or organization responding to the request.
The person or organization responding to the request shall hold the Reuse Authority hairnless from
any and all liability, claim or expense whatsoever incurred by or on behalf of that person or
organization.
No prior, current or post-award verbal agreements(s) with any officer, agency of employee
of the Reuse Authority shall affect or modify any terms or obligations of this request for
9
proposals or any contract or, option resulting from this process.
All proposals must be valid for at least 90 days.
The selected lead consultant will be required to assume responsibility for all services
offered in the proposal whether or not they possess them within their organization. The selected
lead consultant will be the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters, including
payment of any and all charges resulting from the contract.
10
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter- Office Memorandum
November 16, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Heather C. Mc Laughlin
Assistant General Counsel
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
RE: Request for Authorization to Obtain Insurance Coverage
for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Background:
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ("ARRA") is a
joint powers authority organized pursuant to California Government •
Code section 6500 et seq. To date it has not had any insurance
coverages since its employees were covered by other entities such
as the City of Alameda and since it had no property. As.ARRA hires
its own employees and obtains property from the base, it should
obtain insurance to protect it from possible losses, claims, and.
lawsuits and to comply with state law.
Discussion/Analysis:
Public entities which enter into a joint powers agreement are
permitted to obtain insurance for the joint powers authority.
Government Code section 990.8 authorizes such insurance to be
provided by any of the methods specified in Government Code section
990.4, including:
(1) Self-insurance;
(2) Insurance in any insurer authorized to
such insurance in California;
(3)
Insurance secured through Insurance Code
1760 et seg. (surplus line brokers); or
transact
section
(4) A-combination of the above.
After consulting with the City of Alameda's Risk Manager,
was determined that ARRA will likely need the following types
insurance at this time:
Workers' compensation;
General liability; and
Automobile.
it
of
Members of the Alameda November 16, 1994
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2
Unless self-insured, public entities must purchase workers'
compensation insurance through the State Compensation Insurance
Fund. General liability and automobile liability insurance are
typically procured from an outside insurer. Since ARRA has not
been in existence long and there is no loss history, it is
difficult to join a joint insurance pool. It is recommended,
therefore, that ARRA purchase insurance via an insurance broker.
After approximately one year, staff will reevaluate ARRA's
insurance needs and determine if it would be more cost-effective to
join an insurance pool.
Fiscal Impact:
Since funds were not budgeted for insurance needs a mid-year
budget adjustment will be needed. Pending the Office of Economic
Adjustment approval of the adjustment, existing funds can be used
to cover the expense of insurance.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority, by motion, authorize the Executive
Director to obtain insurance coverage for the Authority and to
apply for a mid-year budget adjustment from the Office of Economic
Adjustment.
Respectfully submitted,
Heather C. Mc Laugh in
Assistant General Counsel
2\arra.ins
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
November 16, 1994
TO
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Heather C. Mc Laughlin
Assistant General Counsel.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
RE: Adoption of a Conflict of Interest Code for Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority
Background:
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ("ARRA") is a
joint powers authority organized pursuant to California Government
Code section 6500 et seg. California Government Code Section
87300, part of the Political Reform .Act of 1974, requires state and
local government agencies to adopt conflict of interest codes.
ARRA qualifies as a local government agency.
Discussion/Analysis:
The purpose of conflict of interest regulations is to prohibit
public officials from taking actions which may affect the
official's financial interests. Government Code Section 87100
states:
"No public official at any level of state of local government
shall make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use
his official position to influence a governmental decision in
which he knows or has reason to know he has a financial
interest."
In order to implement this rule the Fair Political Practices
Commission ("FPPC"), the body charged with enforcing the Political
Reform Act, has implemented a number of regulations. These
regulations, along with the Government Code sections, attempt to
define who is a public official, what making a decision is, and
what is a financial interest. To further assist in determining
whether public officials have a conflict of interest, agencies are
required to adopt conflict of interest codes. These codes are
required to designate specific positions within the agency and to
specify the financial interests the designated officials must
disclose. The codes must also specify when the public officials
must disqualify themselves from participating in a decision.
Disqualification is required when it is reasonably foreseeable that
a designated official's financial interest will be materially
affected.
Agencies may develop their own code or may adopt by reference
the model code drafted by the FPPC. Since the model code
automatically incorporates any changes to the law, it is
recommended that ARRA adopt the attached code which is based on the
model code. In conformance with the regulations, the model code
has been tailored to ARRA by describing the positions and
disclosure categories relevant to ARRA.
Once ARRA has adopted the code, the secretary must send the
code to the code reviewing body for review and approval. In ARRA's
case the code reviewing body is the Alameda County Board of
Supervisors.
For your information, a brief guide to the conflict of
interest provisions of the Political Reform Act is attached. The
guide discusses the types of decisions that may give rise to a
conflict of interest. It is important for designated Board Members
and staff to recognize when their financial interests may be
impacted. Although staff tries to be aware of when Board Members
or staff may have a conflict of interest, responsibility for a
preliminary determination that a conflict may exists rests with the
individual Board Member or staff. Questions regarding conflicts
should be addressed to the General Counsel's Office or directly to
FPPC.
Fiscal Impact:
There will be no significant financial impact from the
adoption of this code beyond the staff time for such matters as
preparing and forwarding the necessary forms to the designated
employees and answering conflict of interest questions and
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority, by resolution, adopt a conflict of
interest code.
Respectfully submitted,
/FP'
Heather C. Mc Laughlin
Assistant General Counsel
Attachments: A Guide to the Political Reform Act of 1974
Resolution
2/arra.coi
A G UE TO T POL1f1CAL REFO -ACT-OF 1974
California's Conflict of Interest Law for Public Officials
(Other Than Members of the Legislature,
Constitutional Officers and the Insurance Commissioner)
CALIFORNLA F 1' POLITICAL PRACTICES CO 1 1 SSION
428 J Street, Suite 800
P.O. Box 807
Sacramento, California 95804
(916) 322-5901.
September 21, 1994
A GUIDE TO THE POLITICAL REFO ' ACT OF 1974
CALIFO' IA'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAW FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
(Other Than Members of the Legislature,
Constitutional Officers and the Insurance Commissioner)
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this pamphlet is to provide a brief overview of the conflict of interest
provisions of the Political Reform Act.1J
The Political Reform Act requires public officials at all levels of government to publicly
disclose their private economic interests and to disqualify themselves from participating in
decisions in which they have a financial interest. This pamphlet is intended to help public
officials understand and abide by the laws concerning disclosure and disqualification. It is also
intended as a guide for members of the public who are concerned about maintaining impartial
government decisionmaking.
The pamphlet commences with an introduction to the Fair Political Practices Commission
and the Political Reform Act. It then summarizes the disclosure and disqualification
requirements for public officials, and explains how to seek assistance from the Fair Political
Practices Commission concerning conflict of interest questions. The pamphlet concludes with a
brief description of Government Code Section 1090 and other laws which relate to conflicts of
interest, and suggests methods of obtaining additional information about those laws.
The discussion in this pamphlet is necessarily general. It will answer most of the basic
questions about the conflict of interest provisions of the Political Reform Act. If you have
specific questions or problems, you should consult the statutes, regulations, court decisions and
the opinions of the Fair Political Practices Commission. The Fair Political Practices
Commission will provide assistance with specific questions about the Political Reform Act. You
also may wish to refer the matter to the attorney for the agency in question or to a private
attorney for consultation on specific requirements of the law.
FAIR POLITICAL P
CTICES COMMISSION
The Fair Political Practices Commission consists of five members, including a full-time
chairperson. No more than three may be from the same political party.
The chairperson and one member, who must be from different political parties, are
appointed by the Governor. The three remaining commissioners are appointed, respectively, by
the Attorney General, the Secretary of State and the Controller. Commissioners serve four-year
terms and may not be reappointed once they have completed a full term.
The Fair Political Practices Commission has primary responsibility for the impartial,
effective administration of the Political Reform Act. The Commission adopts regulations to
implement and clarify the Political Reform Act. These regulations are found in Title 2 of the
California Code of Regulations, Section 18000 et seq. The Commission also issues opinions and
advice letters, conducts seminars, prescribes forms, publishes manuals, issues reports, and
enforces the requirements of the Political Reform Act.
THE POLITICAL REFO
ACT
The Political Reform Act was enacted by the people of the State of California by an
initiative, known as Proposition 9, in 1974. This initiative statute was enacted to accomplish the
following purposes:
(a) Receipts and expenditures in election campaigns should be fully and truthfully
disclosed in order that the voters may be fully informed and improper practices may be inhibited.
(b) The activities of lobbyists should be regulated and their finances disclosed in order
that improper influences will not be directed at public officials.
(c) Assets and income of public officials which may be materially affected by their
official actions should be disclosed and in appropriate circumstances the officials should be
disqualified from acting in order that conflicts of interest may be avoided.
• (d) The state ballot pamphlet should be converted into a useful document so that voters
will not be entirely dependent on paid advertising for information regarding state measures.
(e) Laws and practices unfairly favoring incumbents should be abolished in order that
elections may be conducted more fairly.
(f) Adequate enforcement mechanisms should be provided to public officials and private
citizens in order that this title will be vigorously enforced.2/
This pamphlet is a guide to the conflict of interest provisions of the Political Reform Act.
HOW DOES THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT PREVENT CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST?
1. By Disclosure: The Political Reform Act requires every public official to disclose all
economic interests, such as investments, interests in real estate (real property), or sources of
income or gifts, which the official may possibly affect by the exercise of his or her official
duties. Disclosure is made on a form called a "statement of economic interests."3/
2. By Disqualification: If a public official has a conflict of interest, the Political Reform
Act may require the official to disqualify himself or herself from making or participating in a
governmental decision, or using his or her official position to influence or attempt to influence a
governmental decision.4/
0 ST FILE STATE NTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS UNDER T
POLITICAL REFO • ACT?
The Governor, members of the Legislature, elected state and local officials, judges and
commissioners of courts of the judicial branch of government, and all high ranking state and
local officials must file statements of economic interests.5/ Other officials or employees of state
and local government agencies also must file statements of economic interests if they are
"designated" in a conflict of interest cbde adopted by the agency for which they work.6/ Each
agency must adopt a conflict of interest code which designates all its officials or employees who
make or participate in governmental decisions which could cause conflicts of interest.7/ Unpaid
members of boards and commissions and consultants to state or local government agencies also
may be required to file statements of economic interests if they make or participate in making
governmental decisions which could affect private financial interests.8/
The disclosure required by a particular designated official or employee must be narrowly
drawn to include only the kinds of economic interests he or she could significantly affect through
the conduct of his or her office.9/ For example, the executive officer of an agency with extensive
regulatory powers, through the exercise of his or her official position, could affect a broad range
of private economic interests. The executive officer would thus be required to disclose all
investments, interests in real property, sources of income, and business entities in which he or
she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any position of management.
In contrast, an employee of the same agency whose duties are limited to reviewing
contracts for supplies, equipment, materials, or services provided to the agency would be
required to report only those interests he or she holds which are likely to be affected by the
agency's contracts for supplies, equipment, materials, or services. The employee would report
sources of income and business entities in which, he or she has an investment or is a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any position of management, if the business entity or
source of income is of the type which within the previous two years has provided supplies,
equipment, materials, or services to the agency.
Each government agency has a list of all agency officials and employees who must file
statements of economic interests.10/ Anyone may inspect the conflict of interest code and this
list. The Commission's Technical Assistance Division provides assistance to public officials
who have questions regarding the forms for disclosure of economic interests. Questions about
3
the adoption or amendment of an agency's conflict of interest code may also be addressed to the
Commission's Technical Assistance Division.
ARE STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC?
Statements of economic interests are public records. Any member of the public must be
permitted to inspect and copy any statement during nomial business hours. No more than 10
cents per page may be charged for copies. In addition, a $5 retrieval fee per request may be
charged for statements which are five or more years old. A request for more than one report or
statement at the same time is considered a single request. No other conditions may be imposed
on inspection and copying. No one may be required to identify himself or herself or sign
anything in order to be permitted to inspect or copy statements.11/
Statements of economic interests must be kept on file by the official's or employee's
agency and made available upon request.12/ Statements of certain officials, including elected
state officials, members of the Legislature, judges, court commissioners, most high ranking state
officials, many elected local officials, planning commissioners, city and county chief
administrative officers, city managers, city attorneys, county counsel and city and county
treasurers are also available at the office of the Fair Political Practices Corrunission.13/
WHO MAY BE DISQUALIFIED UNDER THE POLITICAL REFO • ACT?
The disqualification requirements of the Political Reform Act apply to all elected state
and local government officials, to all appointed state or local government officials, and to all
governmental agency employees, except judges and court commissioners.14/ Unpaid members
of boards or commissions and consultants to state or local government agencies who, on an
ongoing basis, play a significant role in the decisionmaking process may also be required to
disqualify themselves under the Act when faced with a decision that could affect their private
economic interests.15/
WHAT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
A public official or employee has a conflict of interest when all of the following occur:
1. The official makes, participates in, or uses his or her official position to influence a
governmental decision;
2. It is foreseeable that the decision will affect the official's economic interest;
3. The effect of the decision on the official's economic interest will be material;
4. The effect of the decision on the official's economic interest will be distinguishable
from its effect on the public generally.
Participation in a Governmental Decision: The first component of a conflict of interest
is whether the official makes, participates in, or uses his or her official position to influence a
governmental decision. Generally speaking, a governmental decision is any decision made by a
government body or by a government official or employee in his or her official capacity.
Governmental decisions include: decisions on ordinances, regulations and resolutions; decisions
on contract awards, purchases and leases; decisions on hiring, firing and personnel actions;
decisions on land use, zoning, redevelopment plans, permits and variances; and decisions on any
other matter which may come before a state or local government agency. 16/
A public official makes a governmental decision when he or she, acting within the
authority of his or her office, does any of the following:
Votes on a matter.
Appoints a person.
Obligates or commits his or her agency to any course of action.
Enters into any contractual agreement on behalf of his or her agency.
Determines not to act in any of the ways described above, unless that determination is
made because the official has disqualified himself or herself due to a conflict of
interest.17/
For example, a public official makes a governmental decision when he or she votes as a
member of a board, commission or council on any governmental decision, regardless of the
outcome of the vote. Whether the official votes for or against the action, or for or against his or
her economic interest, the official makes a governmental decision when he or she votes on the
decision.
In addition, public officials, including heads of departments, directors of agencies, and
employees of state or local government agencies, make governmental decisions when they take
or authorize any official action on behalf of their agencies. A determination that an agency will
not take a particular action is also a governmental decision.
A public official participates in a governmental decision when he or she responds to
comments, takes part in discussions, advises or makes recommendations to a decisionmaker,
whether or not the decisionmaker ultimately follows the official's advice.18/ A consultant who is
hired under contract with a government agency to prepare a report or analysis or to directly
advise the decisionmaker may be participating in a governmental decision.19/ Whether a
consultant participates in a governmental decision depends on the duties of the consultant.
Specific questions on this subject should be addressed to the Commission staff
5
A public official who negotiates on behalf of his or her agency with any other public or
private agency or with any person outside his or her agency concerning a governmental decision
participates in that decision.20/ An official whose actions are solely ministerial, secretarial,
clerical or manual does not make or participate in governmental decisions.21/
A public official influences or attempts to influence a governmental decision when the
official appears before any governmental agency in his or her official capacity and urges that a
particular governmental decision be made. Contacts with any individual within a government
agency for the purpose of urging a particular decision or result are also considered influencing or
attempting to influence a governmental decision.22/
A public official can sometimes influence a governmental decision when acting in a
private, as well as in an official capacity. For example, an official who appears as the
representative of a third party before the official's own agency is influencing or attempting to
influence a governmental decision. This would also be true if the official appears before an
agency subject to the appointive or budgetary control of the official's agency to represent a third
party.23/
The following actions by an official are not considered influencing or attempting to
influence a governmental decision:
• Appearing before any agency, including his or her own agency, in the same manner as
any other member of the general public, to represent only himself or herself on a matter
affecting real property or a business entity.wholly owned by the official, his or her spouse
or dependent children.24/
• Appearing as a private citizen before an agency that is independent of the appointive or
budgetary control of the official's own agency. The official must not act or purport to act
as the representative of his or her own agency, or use his or her agency's official
stationery in any communications.25/
Communicating with the general public or the press.26/
Foreseeability: The second component of a conflict of interest is whether it is
foreseeable that the decision will affect the official, the official's immediate family, or the
official's economic interest. For example:
The decision affects the official's personal financial status, or that of his or her spouse or
dependent children.27/ This does not apply, however, to decisions which affect the
official's own government salary. It applies to any decision which affects the government
salary of an official's spouse only if the decision is to hire, fire, promote, demote or
discipline the spouse, or to set a salary for the spouse that is different from salaries paid to
other employees in the same job classification or position.28/
6
The decision affects a business entity located in, doing business in, owning real property
in, or planning to do business in the official's jurisdiction, and the official, or his or her
spouse or dependent child has an investment in the business worth $1,000 or more.29/
Investments in a business entity include: ownership of stock, bonds, or commercial
paper; a general or limited partnership interest; or any other form of ownership interest in
a business entity. Investments do not include: b. accounts; interests in mutual funds,
money market fluids, or insurance policies; or government bonds or securities.30/
Business entities include: corporations; partnerships; joint ventures; sole proprietorships;
and any other type of enterprise operated for a profit. A nonprofit organization is not a
business entity.31/
The decision affects real estate (real property) located in the official's jurisdiction and the
official, or his or her spouse or dependent child, has an interest of $1,000 or more in that
real estate.32/ Interests in real property include: ownership (equity); deeds of trust
(mortgages); leaseholds; options to buy; and joint tenancies.33/ A month-to-month lease
is not an interest in real property.34/
The decision affects a person, business entity, or nonprofit entity located in, doing
business in, owning real property in, or planning to do business in the official's
jurisdiction from which the official has received income of $250 or more, or the official's
spouse has received income of $500 or more, in the past 12 months.35/ With certain
exceptions, income includes: salaries; commissions; rents; payments received for goods
or services (including payments for sale of a home, automobile or investment); loans
(including loans previously made but still outstanding); and all other types of
payments.36/ Income means gross income or payments received, rather than net income,
profits or taxable income. Income does not include: the official's own government
salary; inheritances; dividends, interest or premiums from publicly_traded stock, mutual
funds, bank accounts, credit unions or insurance policies; alimony or child.support; loans
of $10,000 or less from banks, credit unions, or credit cards on terms generally available
to the.public; mortgages on a principal residence on terms generally available to the
public; loans from family members; or most pensions.37/
The decision affects a person, business entity, or nonprofit entity from whom the official
has received gifts of $250 or more in the past 12 months.38/ This includes gifts from
sources inside and outside the official's jurisdiction, except for gifts from specified family
members.39/ Gifts provided to the official's spouse or children may be considered gifts
to the official under some circumstances.40/
The decision affects a business entity, other than a nonprofit organization, in which the
official is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds a position of
management.41/
7
In order to create a conflict of interest, the effect of a governmental decision on an
official's economic interest must be reasonably foreseeable.42/ An effect on an official's
economic interest is foreseeable when there is a substantial likelihood that it will ultimately
occur as a result of a governmental decision. Even during the preliminary phases of a decision,
an official must consider whether the end result of a decision is likely to affect his or her
economic interests. An effect does not have to be certain to be foreseeable; however, if an effect
is a mere possibility, it is not foreseeable.43/
Materiality: The third component of a conflict of interest is whether the effect of the
decision on the official's economic interest will be materia1.44/
It is usually necessary to estimate the dollar value of the effect of a decision on the
official's economic interest to determine whether the effect is material. Specific circumstances
under which an effect is material are set forth in the Commission's regulations.45/
An effect of $250 or more on the personal income, assets (other than real estate), or
out-of-pocket expenses of the official, or of his or her spouse or dependent children, is
materia1.46/ For purposes of determining whether there is a conflict of interest, it does not matter
whether the financial effect increases or decreases the personal income, assets, or expenses.
When an official has an investment in, or receives income from, a business entity, it is
necessary to consider how governmental decisions would affect the business entity. An official
may be disqualified from participating in a decision even though the decision would not affect
the value of his or her investment or the amount of income he or she receives.47/ Whether an
effect on a business entity will be considered material depends on the financial size of the
business entity.48/ For example, an effect of only $10,000 on the gross revenues or assets of a
small business is materia1,49/ while a $1 million effect on the gross revenues or assets of a
Fortune 500 company is materia1.50/ Similar dollar tests apply to individuals and nonprofit
entities which have been a source of income or gifts.51/
A similar dollar test also applies to effects on real property when the property is not
directly affected by the decision. Whether an effect on such real property will be considered
material depends on its distance from the property which is the subject of the decision and the
dollar amount of the effect. For example, property within 300 feet of the property which is the
subject of the decision is materially affected unless there is no financial effect. Property located
within a 300 - 2500 foot radius of the property which is the subject of the decision is materially
affected if its fair market value is increased or decreased by $10,000, or if its rental value is
increased or decreased by $1,000 per 12 month period.52/
The effect of a decision on an official's leasehold interest in real property is material if it
will increase or decrease the amount of rent by $250 or 5 percent during any 12 month period, or
if the decision will significantly affect the use or enjoyment of the property or its legally
allowable use.53/
Sometimes it is difficult to give a dollar value to the effect of a governmental decision.
In such cases, it is necessary to consider whether the decision could significantly affect the
official's economic interests.54/ For example, the effect may be material if the official's receipt
of income from a private source is directly related to the decision.55/
In special situations, an effect is considered material regardless of its dollar value. These
situations include the following:
• A person or business entity in which the official has an investment interest worth $1,000
or more, or which is a source of income of $250 or more to the official in the last 12
months, is directly involved in a decision before the official's agency.56/ A person or
business entity is directly involved in a decision before an official's agency if it is the
subject of the proceeding or initiates the proceeding by filing an application, claim,
appeal or similar request.57/
• The decision would affect the zoning, annexation, sale, lease, actual or permitted use of,
or taxes or fees imposed on real property in which the official has an interest of $1,000 or
more.58/
The decision is to designate the survey area, select the project area, adopt the preliminary
plan, form a project area committee, certify the environmental document, adopt the
redevelopment plan, add territory to the redevelopment area, or rescind or amend any of
these decisions; and the official has an interest in real property in the boundaries, or the
proposed boundaries of the redevelopment area.59/
The "Public Generally" Exception: The fourth component of a conflict of interest is
whether the effect of the decision on the official's economic interest will be distinguishable from
its effect on the public generally.60/ An official does not have a conflict of interest if the effect
of a governmental decision on the official or his or her economic interest is indistinguishable
from the effect on the public generally. For the "public generally" exception to apply, a
decision must affect the official's interests in substantially the same manner as it would affect a
significant segment of the public.
Regulation 18703 sets out two types of tests to determine what constitutes a "significant
segment" of the public generally. Under the percentage test, ten percent of the population,
property owners, or home owners in the jurisdiction (or the district the official represents) is
considered a significant segment.61/ In the alternative, the exception will apply if the decision
will affect 50 percent of all businesses in the jurisdiction or the district the official represents, so
long as the segment is composed of persons other than a single industry, trade, or profession.
Regulation 18703 also contains a raw-number standard. If the decision will affect 5,000
individuals, it will'affect a significant segment.
9
In September 1993, the "public generally" exception was expanded to include a variety
of new exceptions, each dealing with a different factual situation.
Regulation 18703(b) codifies a special rule for rates, assessments, and similar
decisions.62/ The exception allows public officials whose economic interests are subject
to rates, assessments, etc., to participate in decisions setting or modifying the rate or
assessment so long as the changes have a uniform or proportionate financial effect
throughout the jurisdiction or throughout a significant segment of the jurisdiction.
Regulation 18703(c) provides an exception applicable to states of emergency. The
financial effect of a governmental decision on an official subject to a state of emergency
is indistinguishable from its financial effect on the public generally if the decision will
affect the official's interests in substantially the same manner as other persons subject to a
state of emergency.63/
Regulation 18703.2 provides an exception for decisions affecting industries, trades or
professions, under some circumstances. For example, where an industry, trade, or
profession is a predominant industry, trade, or profession in the official's jurisdiction, the
"public generally" exception may apply.
• Regulation 18703.3 provides an exception for persons appointed to represent specific
economic interests such as election districts, homeowners, tenants, etc., so long as
specific criteria are met.64/ This exception has been applied to some local private
industry councils and mobile home rent control boards.
Public Generally Rule for Small Jurisdictions: Additionally, in small jurisdictions
(population of 25,000 or less and geographic area of 10 square miles or less) the effect of a
decision on an official's principal residence is deemed to be no different from its effect on the
public generally if all the following requirements are also met:
• The public official is required to reside within the jurisdiction.
The public official, if he or she is an elected officer, has been elected in an at-large
election.
• The decision does not have a direct effect (as provided in Regulation 18702.1 (a) (3)) on
the public official's principal residence.
• The principal residence is more than 300 feet from the boundaries of the property which
is the subject of the decision.
10
The principal residence is located on a parcel of land of one quarter acre or less, or a
residential lot not larger than 125 percent of the median residential lot size for the
jurisdiction.65/
In surnmary, there are four questions to ask in determining whether an official has a
conflict of interest:
1. Will the official make, participate in, or use his or her official position to influence a
governmental decision?
2. Is it reasonably foreseeable that the decision will affect the official, the official's
immediate family, or an economic interest of the official?
3. Will the effect of the decision on the official's economic interest be material?
4. Will the effect of the decision on the official's economic interest be distinguishable
from its effect on the public generally?
The answer to each of these four questions must be "yes" for the official to be
disqualified from a decision because of a conflict of interest.
WHAT SHOULD A PUBLIC OFFICIAL 0
S A CONFLICT OF EREST DO?
When a public official determines that a particular governmental decision will
foreseeably and materially affect his or her economic interest, in a manner that is different from
the effect on the general public, the official has a conflict of interest. The official is not counted
for purposes of establishing a quorum, and must not vote on, make, participate in any way in, or
attempt to influence the decision.66/ This is called disqualification. When an official
disqualifies himself or herself from a governmental decision because of a conflict -of interest, the
reason for the disqualification must be announced (in the case of a member of a voting body), or
disclosed in writing (in the case of all other officials).67/
IS A GOVE MENTAL DECISION VALID IF IT WAS
1
WHO • 1 A CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
E BY OFFIC
•
A governmental decision is not automatically invalidated by the participation of an
official who had a conflict of interest. However, it may be set aside by a court if the court
determines that an official who made the decision had a conflict of interest, that without that
official's actions the decision would not have been made, and that setting aside the decision will
not cause injury to innocent persons.68/
11
MAY A PUBLIC OFFICIAL EVER MAKE A DECISION IN WHICH HE OR SHE HAS
A DISQUALIFYING FINANCIAL INTEREST?
The law recognizes a type of "rule of necessity" for those rare situations in which a
public official is legally required to make or participate in a decision, even though the official has
a disqualifying financial interest.69/ This rule is different from the common law "rule of
necessity." It applies only when: (1) no one else has the legal authority to make or participate in
the decision,70/ (2) the existence and nature of the official's financial interest is put on the public
record, and (3) the official does not try to influence the decisions of others outside of a public
meeting.71/ In such a case, the Political Reform Act allows the official to make or participate in
the decision.
Pursuant to this rule, an official is not legally required to make or participate in a decision
simply because the official's vote is needed to break a tie, or because the official is needed for a
quorum as a result of some other official's absence.72/ However, if so many members of an
agency are disqualified because of conflicts of interest that no decision is possible because a
quorum of qualified members cannot be convened, there is a procedure for allowing some
officials who have a disqualifying financial interest to vote. In that case, the additional number
of officials necessary to constitute a quorum may be selected by drawing lots, or through some
other method of random selection.73/ The officials selected may vote and make statements or
ask questions during a public meeting.74/
WHAT ARE THE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST
PROVISIONS OF THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT?
The Fair Political Practices Commission can bring an administrative action against an
official who has violated the disclosure or disqualification requirements of the Political Reform
Act, and may impose administrative penalties of up to $2,000 for each violation.75/ An official
who violates the Act may be subject to a civil lawsuit, in which a court may impose a fine.76/ A
willful violation of the Act is also a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine and/or by imprisonment;
it also may result in the official being ineligible to run for public office for four years.77/ The
fine for a willful conflict of interest violation may be up to $10,000; the fine for willfully failing
to disclose an economic interest may be up to $10,000 or three times the amount not disclosed,
whichever is greater.78/ These penalties apply to violations of the disclosure requirements of the
Act by any public officia1.79/ However, they do not apply to violations of the disqualification
provisions of the Act by the Governor, other constitutional officers or members of the
Legislature.80/ They do apply to disqualification violations by all other public officials.
HOW CAN A PUBLIC OFFICIAL FIND OUT IF HE OR SHE HAS A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST?
When a public official suspects that he or she may have a conflict of interest in an
upcoming decision, the attorney for the official's agency should be consulted. The official can
12
also ask the Legal Division of the Fair Political Practices Commission for advice. Requests for
written advice are generally answered within 21 working days,81/ although written or telephone
advice may be given more quickly in urgent situations. If an official poses a question which is
unusually complex, significant or unique, the full Commission may issue an opinion, although
this process takes longer.82/ The Commission provides advice only about the Political Reform
Act; the Commission will not answer questions about Government Code Section 1090 or other
laws which are not part of the Political Reform Act.
If the Commission advises an official in writing that disqualification is not necessary, and
the official has truthfully provided all material facts, the official is provided with immunity
against any administrative action brought by the Commission arising from the same conflict of
interest charges. Reliance on the written advice also serves as evidence of good faith conduct in
any civil or criminal proceeding based on the same charges.83/
The Commission may only issue opinions or give advice regarding conflicts of interest to
the official who may have to be disqualified, or to the official's authorized representative.84/
Advice about specific situations will not be given to members of the public, or to other persons
who are interested in whether or not an official should be disqualified from the specific decision.
In addition, the Commission will not issue an opinion or provide advice about an
official's past conduct. These questions are referred to the Enforcement Division of the Fair
Political Practices Commission. Whether a public official has committed a violation of the
Political Reform Act is determined after investigation by the Commission's Enforcement
Division.
All Commission regulations, opinions and enforcement decisions are published by the
California Continuing Education of the Bar. Virtually all advice requests and advice letters are
public records.85/ Opinions, significant advice letters and enforcement cases are summarized in
the Commission's Bulletin which is distributed regularly. Copies of opinions, advice letters and
enforcement decisions can be obtained from the Commission.
AT SHOULD YOU DO IF YOU SUSPECT T • T A PUBLIC OFFICI HAS
VIOLATED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROVISIONS OF THE POLITIC
REFO • ACT?
Complaints concerning violations of the conflict of interest provisions of the Political
Reform Act should be made to the local district attorney or the Enforcement Division of the Fair
Political Practices Commission.
C • PAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
GOVE • NTAL DECISION KING.
The Political Reform Act also contains Government Code Section 84308, a provision
which deals specifically with conflicts of interest and campaign contributions. Government
13
Code Section 84308 is discussed in detail in a pamphlet entitled "A Guide to Government Code
Section 84308--Conflicts of Interest and Campaign Contributions. This pamphlet is available
from the Fair Political Practices Commission.
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 1090 AND OTHER LAWS.
Government Code Section 1090 and other laws not included in the Political Reform Act
apply to specific situations where public officials may have conflicts of interest. For example,
Government Code Section 1090 applies to conflicts of interest involving contracts made by
officials of public agencies, and Health and Safety Code Section 33130 applies only to certain
redevelopment situations. The Fair Political Practices Commission has no authority to advise
public officials about the application of these laws, or to enforce them. That responsibility
belongs to city attorneys, county counsel other public agency attorneys, district attorneys, and the
State Attorney General.
14
NOTES (All statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise specified.
Commission regulations appear at 2 California Code of Regulations, Sections 18000-18954.)
1/ Sections 81000-91015.
2/ Section 81002.
3/ Art. 2 (commencing with Section 87200), Art. 3 (commencing with Section 87300), and Art.
5 (commencing with Section 87500), Ch. 7, Title 9, govern disclosure.
4/ Art. 1 (commencing with Section 87100), Ch. 7, Title 9, governs disqunlification.
5/ Section 87200.
6/ Art. 3 (commencing with Section 87300), Ch. 7, Title 9.
7/ Section 87300.
8/ See, Commission on Cal. State Gov. Organization v. Fair Political Practices Com. (1977)
75 Cal.App.3d 716; In re Siegel (1977) 3 FPPC Ops. 62; In re Leach (1978) 4 FPPC Ops. 48.
9/ Regulation 18730(b)(3); Hays v. Wood (1979) 25 Cal.3d 772.
10/ Section 87302(a).
11/ Section 81008.
12/ Section 81009.
13/ Section 87500.
14/ Sections 82048 and 87100.
15/ Section 82019; Regulation 18700; In re Maloney (1977) 3 FPPC Ops. 69.
16/ Section 87100; Sections 18700 and 18700.1.
17/ Regulation 18700(b).
18/ Regulation 18700(c).
19/ Regulation 18700(c)(2).
15
20/ Regulation 18700(c)(1).
21/ Regulation 18700(d).
22/ Regulation 18700.1.
23/ Regulation 18700.1.
24/ Regulation 18700.1 (b)(1).
25/ Regulation 18700.1 (c).
26/ Regulation 18700.1 (b)(2).
27/ Section 87103.
28/ Section 82030(b)(2); Regulation 18702.1(c)(1).
29/ Section 87103(a).
30/ Section 82034.
31/ Section 82005.
32/ Section 87103(b).
33/ Section 82033.
34/ Regulation 18233.
35/ Section 87103(c).
36/ Section 82030(a).
37/ Section 82030(b).
38/ Section 87103(e).
39/ Sections 82028 and 82030(a).
40/ Regulation 18944.
41/ Sections 87103(d) and 82005.
16
42/ Section 87103.
43/ In re Thomer (1975) 1 FPPC Ops. 198; Witt v. Morrow (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 817;
Downey Cares v. Downey Community Development Commission (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 983.
44/ Section 87103.
45/ Regulations 18702 through 18702.6.
46/ Regulation 18702.1(a)(4).
47/ Witt v. Morrow (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 817.
48/ Regulation 18702.2.
49/ Regulation 18702.2(g).
50/ Regulation 18702.2(a).
51/ Regulations 18702.5 and 18702.6.
52/ Regulation 18702.3.
53/ Regulation 18702.4.
54/ Regulation 18702(b).
55/ Regulation 18702.1(d).
56/ Regulation 18702.1(a)(1) and (2).
57/ Regulation 18702.1(b).
58/ Regulation 18702.1(a)(3).
59/ Regulation 18702.1(a)(3).
60/ Section 87103; Regulation 18703; In re Legan (1985) 9 FPPC Ops. 1.
•9
61/ The exception may be applied against an election district rather than the jurisdiction as a
whole. For example, 10 percent of the official's election district would be considered a
significant segment.
17
62/ Regulation 18703(b); Hick ling Advice Letter, No. A-94-192.
63/ Regulation 18703(c); Kohn Advice Letter, No. A-93-447.
64/ Regulation 18703.3; Larsen Advice Letter, No. 1-94-110.
65/ Regulation 18703.1
66/ Section 87100; In re Biondo (1975) 1 FPPC Ops. 54.
67/ Regulation 18700(b)(5).
68/ Section 91003(b); Downey Cares v. Downey Community Development Commission
(1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 983.
69/ Section 87101.
70/ Affordable Housing Alliance v. Feinstein (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 484; In re Hudson
(1978) 4 FPPC Ops. 13.
71/ Regulation 18701; In re Brown (I 978) 4 FPPC Ops. 19.
72/ Section 87101; Regulation 18701(c).
73/ In re Hudson (1978) 4 FPPC Ops. 13.
74/ Regulation 18701 (b)(4).
75/ Section 83116.
76/ Sections 91005(b) and 91005.5.
77/ Sections 91000 and 91002.
78/ Section 91000(b).
79/ Section 91013 also imposes late filing fees on officials who fail to file timely statements of
economic interests.
80/ Section 87102.
81/ Section 83114(b); Regulation 18329.
18
82/ Section 83114(a); Regulations 18320-18326.
83/ Section 83114(b).
84/ Section 83114; Regulations 18320 and 18329.
85/ Sections 6250-6265.
19
APPENDIX A
DESIGNATED POSITIONS and DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
DESIGNATED POSITIONS DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Governing Board Member •Other requirements apply
Mayor, City of Alameda (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board Member Other requirements apply
Vice Mayor, City of Alameda (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board Member Other requirements apply
Councilmember, City of Alameda (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board Member Other requirements apply
Councilmember, City of Alameda (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board Member Other requirements apply
Councilmember, City of Alameda (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board. Member Other requirements apply
Mayor, City of Oakland (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board. Member Other requirements apply
Mayor, City of San Leandro (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
Governing Board Member A through H-3
9th U.S. Congressional District
Governing Board Member Other requirements apply
Alameda Co. Board of Supervisors, (Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
District 3
Governing Board Alternates
Executive Director
A through H-3
A through H-3
General Counsel Other requirements apply
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
APPENDIX A - cont'd
Assistant General Counsel A through H-3
Secretary
A through H-3
Finance Director
Facilities Manager
Management Analyst
Planner
Consultants*
Other requirements apply
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87200)
A through H-3
A through H-3
A through H-3
* Consultants shall be included in the list of designated positions
and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in
the code subject to the following limitation:
The Executive Director of the Authority may determine in
writing that a particular consultant, although a "designated
position," is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in
scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure
requirements in this section. Such written determination shall
include a description of the consultant's duties and, based upon
that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure
requirements. The Executive Director's determination is a public
record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same
manner and location as this conflict of interest code.
APPENDIX B
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
A business investment, interest in real property, or
source of income or gift is reportable if the business entity in
which the investment is held, the interest in real property, or the
source of income or gift may foreseeably be affected materially by
any decision made or participated in by the designated employee or
officer by virtue of the employee's or officer's position.
A business investment, interest in real property, or
source of income or gift does not have a foreseeable material
effect on an economic interest of the designated employee or
officer unless the business, real property or source of income or
gift may foreseeably require legislative action or permits from the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority or may foreseeably enter
into contracts or leases with or make sales of real property or
goods or services to or be sold to the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority.
In general, that which a reasonable person would predict,
anticipate, or expect beforehand, can be said to be "foreseeable."
The term requires the application of reasonable judgment to assess
the degree of likelihood that a decision made or participated in
will as financial interest. Where the likelihood is sufficiently
great that a reasonable person would predict or anticipate an
effect on a financial interest, the effect of the decision is
foreseeable. Clearly, in the context of designating positions
within a Conflict of Interest Code, "foreseeable" means greater
probability than "conceivable," yet less probability than
"certainly."
The following disclosure categories may .apply to
designated positions:
CATEGORY A: INVESTMENTS
Any investments of the designated employee or officer in
a business entity, including any parent, subsidiary or related
business, either (1) located in the City of Alameda or (2) doing
business in the City of Alameda, and aggregating $1,000 or more
during the reporting period.
CATEGORY B: INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY
Any interests of the designated employee or officer in
real property located in the City of Alameda, and aggregating
$1,000 or more during the reporting period.
APPENDIX B - cont'd
CATEGORY C-1: INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY HELD BY BUSINESS
ENTITIES OR TRUSTS
Any interests in real property held by a business entity
or trust where (1) the designated employee or officer has a 10% or
greater interest in the business entity or trust which holds the
interest in real property, (2) the designated employee or officer
has a pro rata share of $1,000 or more in the interest in real
property, and (3) the interest in real property is located in the
City of Alameda.
CATEGORY C-2: INVESTMENTS HELD BY BUSINESS ENTITIES OR TRUSTS
Any investments held by a business entity or trust where
(1) the designated employee or officer has a 10% or greater
interest in the business entity or trust which holds the
investment, (2) the designated employee or officer has a pro rata
share of $1,000 or more in the investment, and (3) the investment
is in a business entity either located in or doing business in the
City of Alameda.
CATEGORY D: INCOME (OTHER THAN GIFTS AND LOANS)
Any gross income of the designated employee or officer
from any source either located in or doing business in the City of
Alameda, and aggregating $250 or more during the reporting period.
CATEGORY D-1: INCOME (TRAVEL PAYMENTS)
Any payments, advances, or reimbursements for travel,
including actual transportation and related lodging and
subsistence, received by the designated employee or officer during
the reporting period.
CATEGORY E: INCOME (LOANS)
Any loans received by the designated employee or officer
which are (1) received or outstanding during the reporting period,
(2) from a source located in or doing business in the City of
Alameda, and (3) aggregating $250 or more during the reporting
period.
CATEGORY F: INCOME (GIFTS)
Any gifts to the designated employee or officer from any
source, and aggregating $50 or more during the reporting period.
CATEGORY G: BUSINESS POSITIONS
Names of any business entity and job title or position in
any firm in which the designated employee or officer is a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any management position.
APPENDIX C
INCOMPATIBLE ACTIVITIES
No officer or employee shall engage in any employment,
activity, or enterprise for compensation which is inconsistent,
incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to his/her duties as an
officer or employee or with the duties, functions or
responsibilities of his/her appointing power or the agency. No
officer or employee shall perform any work, service or counsel for
compensation outside of his/her employment where any part of
his/her efforts will be subject to approval by any other officer,
employee, board of commission of his/her employing body.
An employee or officer's outside employment, activity or
enterprise is prohibited if it:
(1) Involves the use for private gain or advantage of his/her
departmental time, facilities, equipment and supplies;
the badge, uniform, prestige or influence of the
departmental office or employment;
(2) Involves receipt or acceptance by the officer or employee
of any money or other consideration from anyone other
than the City for the performance of an act which the
officer or employee, if not performing such act, would be
required or expected to render in the regular course or
hours of his/her employment as a part of his/her duties
as a local agency officer or employee;
(3) Involves the performance of an act in other than his/her
capacity as an officer or employee which act may later be
subject directly or indirectly to the control,
inspection, review, audit or enforcement of any other
officer or employee of the department by which-he/she is
employed;
(4) Involves such time demands as would render performance of
his/her duties as an officer or employee less efficient.
This Appendix C shall apply to all designated positions
covered by this conflict of interest code.
This Appendix C does not incorporate by reference the
definitions of the Political Reform Act of 1974 and the regulations
adopted pursuant thereto. Interpretations of Government Code
section 1126 are applicable and interpretations of the Political
Reform Act of 1974 may apply.
APPENDIX B - cont'd
CATEGORY H-1: COMMISSION INCOME
Names of sources of commission income received by the
designated employee or officer as a broker, agent, or salesperson,
where the pro rata share of the gross commission income amounts to
$10,000 or more from a single source during the reporting period.
CATEGORY H-2: INCOME AND LOANS TO BUSINESS ENTITIES OR TRUSTS
Names of individuals or entities which (1) are located in
or doing business in the City of Alameda, and (2) are a source of
income to a business entity or trust in which the designated
employee or officer and/or spouse own an aggregate interest of 10-96
or more, provided that the pro rata share of such income is $10,000
or more during the reporting period.
CATEGORY H-3: INCOME FROM RENTAL PROPERTY
Names of individuals or entities which (1) are located in
or doing business in the City of Alameda, and (2) are a source of
rent payments from a rental property in which the designated
employee or officer and/or spouse own an aggregate interest of 1096
or more, provided that the pro rata share of such rent payments is
$10,000 or more during the reporting period.
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO.
ADOPTING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF
THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT OF 1974
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act of 1974, Government
Code section 81000 et seq., requires local agencies to adopt and
promulgate conflict of interest codes; and
WHEREAS, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority is
considered a local agency for purposes of the Political Reform Act
of 1974;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Governing Body of
the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority that:
Section 1. Purpose.
The Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code
section 81000 et seq., requires local agencies to adopt an
promulgate conflict of interest codes.
Section 2. Adoption of Conflict of Interest Code.
The Political Reform Act (Government Code section 81000,
et seq., requires state and local governmental agencies to adopt
and promulgate conflict of interest codes. The Fair Political
Practices Commission has adopted a regulation (2 Cal.Code of Regs.
18730) which contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest
code. After public notice and hearing it may be amended by the
Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the
Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 California Code of
Regulations Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by
the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by
reference. This regulation and the attached Appendices designating
officials and employees and establishing disclosure categories,
shall constitute the conflict of interest code of the Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority.
Section 3. Filing Conflict of Interest Statements.
Designated employees shall file their statements which
the Secretary of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
which will make the statements available for public inspection and
reproduction. (Gov. Code Section 81008). Statements for all
designated employees will be retained by the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority.
Section 4. Code Reviewing Body.
Pursuant to Government Code section 02011(c) the code
reviewing bOdy for the Conflict of Interest Code of the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority shall be the City Council of the
City of Alameda.
The Secretary of the Authority is hereby authorized and
directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to the
Alameda County Board of Supervisors, the code reviewing body, for
approval and filing.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
November 30, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of an Amended
Inter local Agreement to Allow the the Bay Conversion and Reinvestment
Commission to Continue Funding the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority Project Planner (Management Analyst) and Administrative Aide
(Secretary) Positions Through June 1995
Background:
Included in the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) amended grant agreement (#CL
9405-93/94-01A) with the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission (EBCRC) has
been funding for the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Project Planner (Management
Analyst) and Administrative Aide (BRAG Secretary) positions. The previous interlocal
agreement provided authority for funding these positions through December 1994. The new
amended interlocal agreement provides funding for these positions through June 1995.
Discussion/Analysis:
The previous interlocal agreement was between the EBCRC, the County and City of
Alameda. In that interlocal agreement, the City of Alameda assigned authority for the
implementation of the agreement to the then newly formed Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority (ARRA).
The previous interlocal agreement included funding for these two positions and provisions
for the implementation of Alameda's OEA conversion planning grant awarded through the
EBCRC. The amended interlocal agreement relates only to the two staff positions as this fiscal
year's OEA planning grant was awarded directly to the ARRA.
These positions receive no beneifts. The level of funding for these two positions was
significantly less than the salary paid/advertised by the City of Alameda; therefore, the money
allocated by EBCRC/OEA for benefits has instead (with OEA's approval) been used to make
up the difference in salary. The amended interlocal agreement does include a 3% annual cost
of living for both positions provided by OEA effective on the employee's anniversary date of
employment. The budget/grant submittal previously approved by the ARRA, included an OEA
provided 3% cost of living increase for the other ARRA staff positions.
Honorable Members of the November 30, 1994
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page Two
Fiscal Impact:
OEA has provided no funding to the A for these positions; therefore, at this time
the only source of funding for these positions is the OEA grant to the EBCRC. The ARRA is
responsible for the 25% match.requirement for these positions.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA approve the amended interlocal agreement with the
EBCRC to provide for continued funding through June 1995 for the ARRA Project Planner
(Management Analyst) and Administrative Aide (BRAG Secretary) positions.
Res
ec fully submitted,
Don Parker,
Executive Director
Attachment
ATTACHMENT FOR II.D.
NT TO T . i, RLOCAL AGREE 1 NT
TO BE DIS 1 s; UTED AT AL DA REUSE • t REDEVELOP 1; NT
A 0 1 E G DECE ER 7, 1994
DR
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
MARKET FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS OF AVIATION FACILITIES
NAVAL AIR STATION ALAMEDA
INTRODUCTION
FT
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) is seeking qualified consulting
firms to prepare a market feasibility analysis of aviation facilities located at Naval Air Station
Alameda (NAS) and at Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) (referred to jointly herein as NAS). The
decommissioned base consists of 1,734 acres of land and 958 acres of water. All of the base,
except for approximately 38 acres, is within the City of Alameda. The area outside of Alameda
is within the City and County of San Francisco and is largely made up of wetlands.
The City has full land use and zoning jurisdiction over the site. A Joint Powers
Agreement (JPA) between the City of Alameda and the County of Alameda has been fanned that
is the basis of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA). The ARRA is
composed of nine members: five City Of Alameda Council Members, the Mayors of Oakland and
San Leandro, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors member representing the Third District,
and the United States House of Representatives member representing the Ninth District (currently
Congressman Ron Dellums). The ARRA is legal entity which will be receiving property at NAS
from the Federal Government as the base closes.
The ARRA has retained EDAW as the lead consultant to produce an interim reuse plan and
a final reuse plan for property and facilities at NAS. This plan is scheduled to be completed in
December 1995. Earlier this year the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
retained P&D Aviation to conduct a study to detennine the feasibility of retaining the airfield for
civilian use at NAS. The airfield at NAS is composed of two runways. The north/south (31/13)
runway is 8000' long and 200' wide and the east/west runway is 7200' long and 200' wide. The
P&D Study concluded it is not feasible to retain the airfield for civilian use due to physical and
economic constraints.
SCOPE OF WORK
The ARRA is submitting this Request For Proposal (RFP) in order to receive qualified
proposals to complete a market analysis of the economic feasibility for the use of facilities and
property at NAS to be used for aviation maintenance or aviation related industries. The analysis
will assess the short and long-term market demand for the aviation related property and facilities
at NAS. Any use of the runways would be private and not funded by the FAA. Some of the
facilities which should be considered, include but are not limited to, are the aircraft painting
hangar; the corrosion control hangar; engine repair building; and a 900,000' square foot hangar
1
DAFT
presently containing a machine shop, aircraft production line and administrative spaces. Aviation
related industries to be considered include but need not be limited to aviation maintenance and
repair, air cargo services, engine repair and manufacturing, instrument repair. The consultant will
have available existing studies and work by others in addressing this issue.
The analysis should first consider the overall strategic aviation industrial and business
market and its projected future trends. This would include a literature search of other sites and
their success or failure. Second, the analysis should determine if the projected strategic industrial
and business aviation market is compatible with the existing facilities at NAS.
The consultant should consider the following as part of the analysis:
• The physical condition of the facilities including code compliance, seismic
condition, environmental conditions (asbestos & lead base paint) based on
information completed by others including confirmation of specific facilities which
would be most likely to attract private sector aviation industry users.
Infra-structure including utilities, roads, and access to major highways based on
information completed by others.
• Environmental permits and emission reduction credits currently available to be used
by firms locating at NAS (i.e., potential requirements of aviation users).
• Public and/or private investments required to attract aviation related industries to
NAS and the potential return from required public and/or private investments.
• Competitive strengths and weaknesses of NAS in the aviation business market.
• The job skills required and number of people likely to be employed by projected
aviation related uses
Airfield operational costs and the ability of proposed aviation business activities to
become self-sustaining including funding of airfield costs.
Products- Administrative draft report, followed by the public review draft report and an
executive summary of the report. The report will be presented for hearing by the ARRA. Once
the report is adopted, a final report is to be provided incorporating changes made by the ARRA.
Draft input for public review should be completed by February 28, 1995.
Deliverables- Twenty (20) copies of the administrative draft report are required. Following
approval by the staff of ARRA, fifty (50) copies of the public review draft and fifty (50) copies
of the final report are required. One unbound copy of both the draft report and the final report
suitable for duplication plus a computer disk copy containing all information are to be provided.
2
DR FT
PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
Proposal should be single spaced and organized as follows: ("Boilerplate" materials are
not encouraged; if submitted, they must be bound separately from the proposal itself.)
• Executive Summary - Demonstrate grasp of RFP; summarize the proposal.
Scope of Work - Identify services and or other services to be delivered.
• Work Program and Schedule - Give details on how work will be performed.
• Organization and Personnel - Identify responsible parties and explain how work
would be managed; resumes of key people including client references with phone
numbers and fax numbers.
• Cost Proposal
Qualifications - Describe and indicate the relevance of background experience and
capabilities; include client references with phone and fax numbers for relevant
work and cost of services delivered.
PROPOSAL DUE DATE AND DELIVERY
Ten complete copies of the proposal will be received at the following address no later than
4:00 p.m., December 9, 1994. Proposals will not be accepted after this time. Proposals shall be
addressed as follows:
Dave Louk
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Building 90, NAS Alameda
Alameda, CA 94501
Hand carried proposals will be accepted in Building 90, Naval Air Station Alameda,
California.
LIST OF AVAILABLE EXHIBITS
The following list of exhibits is available for review at the ARRA office located at Building
90, NAS Alameda.
A. Aviation Study by P&D Aviation.
LTr-
B. Description of buildings at NAS which contains building dimensions, utilities and floor
plan.
C. Utility information.
D. Digitized base map description produced by Towill, Inc.
E. Technical information and studies.
F. Sample Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Consultant Contract Form.
PROJECT AGEMENT
General Qualification•
1. Non-Discrimination
Consistent with the ARRA' s policy that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable
employer/employee conduct, the Consultant agrees that harassment or discrimination directed
toward a job applicant, an ARRA employee or a citizen by the Consultant or Consultant's
employee or subcontractor n the basis or race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry
handicap, disability, marital status, pregnancy, sex, age, or sexual orientation will not be
tolerated. Consultant agrees that any and all violations of this provision shall constitute a material
breach of the Agreement.
Consultant shall also comply with all federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination of
any type. Such laws include, but are not limited to, laws prohibiting discrimination in
employment or accommodation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 109 of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, and the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
Please be advised that we encourage participation of Local Business Enterprises, Minority
business Enterprises, Women's Business Enterprises, Disabled Veteran Business Enterprises, and
Small Business Enterprises in the award of federally assisted contracts. We also support efforts
by contractors and subcontractors to take affirmative
2. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Reuse Authority, officers and
4
AT
employees from and against any and all loss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses
whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees, regardless of the merits of outcome of any such
claim or suit arising from or in any manner connected to Consultant's negligent performance of
services or work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement.
Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Reuse Authority, officers and
employees from.and against any and all loss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses
whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys' fees, accruing or resulting to any and all persons,
firms or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, equipment or supplies
arising from or in any manner connected to the consultant's negligent perfounance of services or
work conducted or perfouned pursuant to this Agreement.
3. Insurance
On or before the commencement of the term of an Agreement, the Consultant shall furnish
the reuse Authority with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered,
effective dates and dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with this paragraph.
Such certificates, which do not limit Consultant's indemnification, shall also contain substantially
the following statement: "Should any of the above insurance covered by this certificate be
canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage
shall provide thirty (30) days' advance written notice to the Reuse Authority c/o City of Alameda
by certified main, Attention: Risk Manager". It is agreed that Consultant shall maintain in force
at all times during the perfounance of this Agreement all appropriate coverage of insurance
required by this Agreement with an insurance company that is acceptable to the Risk Manager and
licensed to do insurance business in the State of California. Endorsements naming the Reuse
Authority, City and County as additional insured shall be submitted with the insurance certificates.
a) Consultant shall maintain the following insurance coverage:
Workers!Carapensatiam.
Statutory coverage as required by the State of California.
Commercial general liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury: $500,00 - each occurrence
$1,000,00 - aggregate - all other
Property Damage: $100,000 - each occurrence
$250,00 - aggregate
If submitted, combined single limit policy with aggregate limits in the amount of
$1,000,000 will be considered equivalent to the required minimum limits shown above.
5
FT
Alittornotive:
Comprehensive automotive liability coverage in the following minimum limits:
Bodily Injury:
Property Damage:
or
$500,000 - each occurrence
$100,000 - each occurrence
Combined Single Limit: $500,000 - each occurrence
b) Subrogation Waiver:
Consultant agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has
agreed to provide comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance, that Consultant shall
look solely to its insurance for recovery. Consultant hereby grants to the Reuse Authority, on
behalf of any insurer providing comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance to either
Consultant of Reuse Authority with respect to the services of Consultant herein, a waiver of any
right to subrogation which any such insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the reuse
Authority by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
c) Failure to Secure:
If Consultant at any time during the term hereof should fail to secure or maintain
the foregoing insurance, the Reuse Authority shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in the
Consultant's name or as an agent of the Consultant, and shall be compensated by the Consultant
for the costs of the insurance premiums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from
the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid.
d) Additional Insured:
The Reuse Authority, officers, and employees shall be named as an additional
insured under all insurance coverages, except any professional liability insurance, required by this
Agreement. The naming of an additional insured shall not affect any recovery to which such
additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not named as such additional insured. An
additional insured named herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible portion of
any loss, or expense of any nature on this policy or an extension thereof. Any other insurance
held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss of
expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy.
e) Sufficiency of Insurance:
The insurance limits required by the Agreement are not represented as being
6
sufficient to protect Consultant. Consultant is advised to confer with Consultant's insurance
broker to determine adequate coverage for Consultant.
Permits and Licenses.
Consultant, and all sub-consultants, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during
the term of this Agreement, all appropriate permits, certificates and licenses including, but not
limited to, a City Business License that may be required in connection with the performance of
services hereunder.
Re nrts.
Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record, computer reports/file and other
document, hereinafter collectively referred to as "Report: reproduced, prepared or caused to be
prepared by Consultant pursuant to or in connection with this Agreement shall be the exclusive
property of the Reuse Authority. Consultant shall not copyright any Report required by this
Agreement. Any Report, information and data acquired or required by this Agreement shall
become the property of the Reuse Authority, and all publication rights are reserved to the Reuse
Authority.
All Reports prepared by Consultant may be used by the Reuse Authority in execution or
implementation of:
a) The original Project for which Consultant was hired;
b) Completion of the original Project by others; ,
c) Subsequent additional to the original project; and/or
d) Other Reuse,Authority projects as appropriate.
No report, information nor other data given to or prepared or assembled by Consultant
pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available to any government entity, individual or
organization by Consultant without prior approval by the executive Director of the Reuse
Authority.
Consultant shall, at such time and in such form as the Reuse Authority may require,
furnish reports concerning the status of services required under this Agreement.
Rec rds:
Consultant Shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs,
expenses, receipts and other such information required by the Reuse authority that relate to the
performance of services under this Agreement.
Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to
7
permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible.
Consultant shall provide free access to the' representatives of the Reuse Authority or its designees
at all proper times to such books and records, and gives the reuse Authority the right to examine
and audit same, and to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to allow inspection of all
work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records,
together with suppoiting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents and records and
shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.
el III •lle
The Agreement will be subject to 24 CFR 87 which prohibits the payment of Federal funds
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence, any public officer or employee in
connection with the award, making, entering into, extension, continuation, renewal, amendment,
or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or agreement.
Community Redevelnpment Law
California Community Redevelopment law requires that contracts for work performed in
connection with any redevelopment project shall be awarded, to the greatest extent feasible, to
business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part, by persons residing in the
redevelopment area. There is also an employment preference for people residing in the
redevelopment area. Subsequent to the formation of a redevelopment area which includes the
Project Area, the consultant shall be required to abide by these provisions for any subcontracts
awarded or contract amendments.
• Of ,:1111 •
Unless prior written consent from the Reuse Authority is obtained, only those people and
subcontractors whose names and resumes approved, in writing, by the Reuse Authority shall be
used in the perfoimance of the Agreement.
In the event that Consultant employs subcontractors, such subcontractors shall be required
to furnish proof of workers' compensation insurance and shall also be required to carry general,
professional and automobile liability insurance in reasonable conformity to the insurance carried
by Consultant. In addition, any work or services subcontract hereunder shall be subject to each
provision of the Agreement.
CONDITIONS OF REQUEST
The Reuse Authority also reserves the right to cancel or reject all or a portion or portions
of the request without notice. Further, the Reuse Authority makes no representations that any
agreement will be awarded to any firm submitting a proposal.
8
The Reuse Authority reserves the right to reject any and all proposals submitted in response
to this request or any addenda thereto. The Reuse Authority also reserves the right to reject any
sub-consultant or individual working of a consultant team and to replace the sub-consultant or
individual with a mutually acceptable replacement.
Any changes to the proposal requirements will be made by written addendum.
The Reuse Authority shall not be liable for any costs incurred in response to this request
for proposals. All costs shall be borne by the person or organization responding to the request.
The person or organization responding to the request shall hold the Reuse Authority harmless from
any and all liability, claim or expense whatsoever incurred by or on behalf of that person or
organization.
No prior, current or post-award verbal agreements(s) with any officer, agency of employee
of the Reuse Authority shall affect or modify any teims or obligations of this request for
proposals or any contract or option resulting from this process.
All proposals must be valid for at least 90 days.
The selected lead consultant will be required to assume responsibility for all services
offered in the proposal whether or not they possess them within their organization. The selected
lead consultant will be the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters, including
payment of any and all charges resulting from the contract.
9
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber (2nd Floor)
2263 Santa Clara Ave.
Alameda, CA
Wednesday, December 7, 1994
5:30 p.m.
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY:
1) Please file a speaker's slip with the Secretary, and upon
recognition by the Chair, approach the rostrum and state your
name. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes per item.
2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a
sommolly of pertinent points presented verbally.
3) Applause, signs or demonstrations are prohibited during Authority
meetings.
I.
ROLL CALL
A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of November 2, 1994.
AGENDA ITEMS
A. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Accept the P & D Aviation Report and Discontinue Further
Marketing Studies on Use of the NAS Alameda Airfield as a Civilian Operated, Non-FAA
Funded Enterprise.
B. Report from the General Counsel Requesting Authorization to Obtain Insurance Coverage
for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
C. Report from the General Counsel Recommending Approval of a Resolution Adopting a
Conflict of Interest Code for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
D. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of an Amended Interlocal
Agreement to Allow the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission to Continue
Funding the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Project Planner (Management
Analysis) and Administrative Aide (Secretary) Positions Throughpedrnber 1995.
E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of a Service Agreement with
the City of Alameda.
F. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of Proposed Change to the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ( • ' • ) Bylaws Regarding the Appointment
of a Member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), Appointed by BRAG,
to be a Non-voting, Ex-officio Member of the • ' • • With One Non-voting Alternate to be
Appointed by BRAG and Other Future Non-Voting, Ex-officio Members and their
Alternates' Appointments. (Amendment o b laws re uires the vote o ve 5 members
three 3 o whom must be Alameda
A.
REPORTS
Oral Report from Chair of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) Updating
the Reuse Authority on BRAG Activities,
B. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding the Status of the Request for Coast Guard
Housing.
C. Oral Report from Executive Director Informing the Members of His Resignation from the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
D. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on Reuse AUthority
Staff Activities.
E. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding Next Agenda for Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority.
O COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the Governing Body in regard to any matter over which the Governing
Body has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.)
COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVE ' ING BODY
. ,
ADJOU ' MENT
* * * * *
Note:
Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Elizabeth
Brydon, ARRA Secretary, at 263-2870 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request
an interpreter.
For persons with hearing difficulty, a FM amplifying system is available in the Council
Chamber.
*
available.
Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is
Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
Audio and Video Tapes of the meeting are available upon request.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
November 29, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending Approval of Proposed Change
to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Bylaws Regarding
the Appointment of a Member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group
(BRAG), Appointed by BRAG, to be a Non:voting, Ex-officio Member of the
ARRA With One Non-voting Alternate to be Appointed by BRAG and Other
Future Non-Voting, Ex-officio Members and Their Alternates' Appointments
Background:
On November 2, 1994, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA)
adopted a motion to authority the appointment of a representative of the Base Reuse Advisory
Group (BRAG) to be a non-voting, ex-officio member of the ARRA with one non-voting
alternate, also to be appointed by the BRAG. It was also requested at this meeting that the
bylaws be changed to include possible future non-voting, ex-officio appointments to the ARRA.
Discussion/Analysis:
The General Counsel's office has drafted the following proposed amendment to section
1.03 of the ARRA Bylaws to add two new sections 1.03(b) and 1.03(c) to read as follows:
(b) A member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), who shall be
appointed by the BRAG, shall be a non-voting, ex-officio member of the
Authority. If this person is unavailable, the other members appointed by the
BRAG shall act as his or her proxy.
(c) Other non-voting, ex-officio members and their proxies may be appointed from
time to time by motion of the members of the Governing body.
Non-voting, ex-officio members of the Board shall be entitled to participate in the
discussions and meetings of the Authority and shall conduct themselves according
to the rules of the Authority except that they are not entitled to vote on matters
before the Authority and are not entitled to fees for attending meetings.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
November 29, 1994
Page 2
Amendment of the bylaws requires the vote of five (5) members, three (3) of whom must
be Alameda City Council Members.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that ARRA adopt the proposed amendments to the Bylaws appointing
a member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), to be appointed by BRAG, to
be a non-voting, ex-officio member of the " with one non-voting alternate, to be appointed
by BRAG, and other future non-voting, ex-officio members and their alternates' appointments.
Re ectfully submitted,
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP:eb
Attachment: Copy of revised section of Bylaws
Section 1.03.2. Non-Voting, Ex-officio Members.
A. The President of the Alameda Board of Education of the
Alameda Unified School District shall be a non-.voting, ex-
officio member of the Authority. If the President of the
Alameda Board of Education is unavailable, his or her proxy
shall be the Vice President of the Alameda Board of Education.
B. A member of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group
("BRAG"), who shall be appointed by the BRAG, shall be a non-
voting, ex-officio member of the Authority. If this person is
unavailable, the other members appointed by the BRAG shall act
as his or her proxy.
C. Other Non-voting, ex-officio members and their proxies
may be appointed from time to time by motion of the members of
the Governing body.
D. Non-voting, ex-officio members of the Board shall be
entitled to participate in the discussions and meetings of the
Authority and shall conduct themselves according to the rules
of the Authority except that they are not entitled to vote on
matters before the Authority and are not entitled to fees for
attending meetings.
CORRESPONDENCE
S' 0 SEP lq"
3 0 sE°
11011
From: Commandant
To: Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command (141-AS)
Subj: EXCHANGE FACILITIES AT NAVAL AIR STATION, ALAMEDA, CA
Ref: (a) COMDT COGARD (G-ECV) ltr 11011 of 12 Jul 94
1. This is to advise you that the Coast Guard hereby withdraws
interest in the Naval Air Station Alameda Exchange facilities
that were addressed in reference (a). It has been determined
that the Exchange does not have the infrastructure to support our
needs.
2. We sincerely appreciate your cooperation and support in all
our real property transactions.
BLIND Copy: G-PXM
G-CPP
MLCPAC (sr)t,/
G-ECV-4C G-ECV-4
'44.0 4
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Naval Air Station
Postal Directory, Bldg. 90
Alameda, CA 94501-5012
510-263-2870
FAX 510-521-3764
November 7, 1994
Mr. Robert Brauer
Special Counsel
House Armed Services Committee
2117 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Bob:
I have enclosed four copies of the Alameda Science City Executive Summary for their
planning study proposal which was endorsed for funding support by the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority on November 2, 1994. As you know, Chris Aldridge of your office
had requested a copy of this summary. I would appreciate it if you could pass one of the copies
on to him.
Timing for the planning study is critical since it must coincide with the community reuse
plan and the ARRA's request for an economic development conveyance. I have included a copy
of our planning schedule that will graphically give you an indication of the our working time
frames. Some elements of the planning study must coincide with the alternative analysis studies
that extend from February through July of 1995.
Your help would be greatly appreciated in directing us to the appropriate person to whom
we should submit the application for the "earmarked" planning funds within the Defense
Authorization Act. Thank you for your support in the past and we look forward to your critical
help in the future with Science City.
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/eb
Attachment: Executive Summary (4) Copies
Project Work Plan and Schedule
cc: Judd King, University of California
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Members
John Petrovsky, EDAW
EXHIBIT A
City shall provide general municipal services including, but
not limited to services currently provided by or available from the
City by the following departments: City Manager; City Attorney;
City Clerk; Finance; Personnel; Public Works; Recreation and Parks;
Planning; Community Development; Police; Fire and Bureau of
Electricity.
Provision of Services excludes those services normally offered
to the public at a charge such as electrical service.
10
19. CAPTIONS. The captions in this Agreement are for
convenience only, are not a part of the Agreement and in no way
affect, limit or amplify the terms or provisions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the Agreement to
be executed on the day and year first above written.
City of Alameda,
a municipal corporation
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority, a joint powers
authority
By By
Title: City Manager Title: Executive Director
APPROVED AS Te FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i'5+ Orr ; r
4' •1
Ar y A tor.a Outside Counsel
2\arra.k
9