1994-08-08 ARRA MinutesMINUTES
OF THE
SPECIAL MEETING
AL~vIEDA REUSE Ai~D REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Monday, August 8, 1994
5:00 p.m.
The meeting convened at 5 :05 p .m. with Chair Mayor E. William Withrow, Jr . presiding .
I. ROLL CALL: Present : Councilmember Ralph Appezzato, City of Alamed:i :
Councilman Arnerich , City of Alameda, Vice-Mayor Kem Myers.
City of San Leandro ; Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of
Alameda; Vice-Mayor Richard Roth , City of Alameda; Vice -Chair
Sandre Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District:
Chair Mayor E . William Withrow , Jr., City of Alameda. Absenr:
Councilman "Lil" Arnerich (District Director Sandre Swanson
arrived at 5:20 p.m.) Absent : Aide to Supervisor Don Perata .
Mr. Mark Friedman; Oakland City Councilmember Dezie Woods-
Jones .
A . Approval of Minutes -Regular Meeting of July 13, 1994
Councilmember Karin Lucas moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of July
13, 1994 . The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Richard Roth and carried
by a unanimous voice vote .
II. ORAL REPORTS :
A. Workshop/Presentation -Alameda Science City/ACET (Alameda Center for
Advanced Technology)
Don Parker announced that Alameda Science City and Alameda Center for
Environmental Technologies (ACET) had reached agreement on submitting a joint
proposal that would incorporate ACET as the environmental component of
Science City . Mr. Parker explained that since receiving approval from the
Alameda City Council on May 3, 1994, he had been working with the proponents
of Science City and representatives of the University of California on a
budget/planning proposal. As part of the agreement between Science City and
ACET, ACET will be incorporated in the Science City funding proposal .
I. I
I .
L_
D
L
Pre senrarion by Science Ciry :
.\fr . Jim Davis of Alameda Science City reported that s ince the Alameda City
Council approval, the Science City proposal has mo ved int o the University arena
w here it is working its way through their process . After meetings with the
Uni v ersity , beginning with the Provost of the University, meetings have been held
w ith people in Sacramento regarding future expansions of the activity to get
broader sponsorship than just a single government agency , local official s and
community groups . The main emphasis has been on the writing of the proposal.
The milestone agreement with ACET is to be integrated into the Reuse
Authority 's community reuse planning process . This work is leading to a phasing
of the Alameda Science City planning study into two major segments: (1) a
preliminary integrated plan which would be approximately 1/3 of the total cost
of the $1 Om proposal (approximately $3-112 million which should come from
more than one source, i .e ., $2 .5 million from the DoD and another million from
the Department of Commerce). Any future funding would be deferred until after
the preliminary integrated plan is approved by the Reuse Authority and has been
subject to community review; (2) a second parallel path has also been explored
with the private sector to identify at least one or more companies which could be
brought to NAS in the near term. The Science City/ACET Proposal is a strategic
proposal for long term development but interim reuse is being pursued on a
parallel path .
Mr. Davis reported that one of the issues which the Reuse Authority may wish
to address is business incentives . Of the 100 major tax-paying cities in the State
of California, all of them have incentive programs to attract industry in the form
of revenue bonds or free rent resulting in a very competitive environment . If
companies are going to be attracted to Alameda and to the Naval Air Station ,
serious attention should be given to providing business incentives. One
significant proposal on reuse will be presented to the Reuse Authority office
involving the potential for a couple of hundred jobs from a manufacturing
company interested in locating at NAS .
Councilman Arnerich commented on the statement made by Mr. Davis regarding
attracting businesses and working together using the example of a recent article
in the newspaper regarding the City of Fremont providing business incentives and
concessions to attract businesses . He agreed with Mr. Davis that the ARRA
must make every attempt to work to attract potential businesses.
Chair Withrow agreed . He said that this is a market driven process, that the
market determines what the conditions are, and that everything must be done to
promote Alameda's assets and strengths .
2
Vice-Mayor Roth suggested that perhaps sometime in the furure. Mr. Davis could
share with the Authority Members what types of incentives there :ire :ind which I l
ones would be the most effective. ' · 1
Councilman Arnerich swrn:ested that it \VOuld be best for Mr . Davis ro make
presentations through the Executive Direcror and the BRAG process before it
comes before the Reuse Authority .
Councilmember Lucas asked whether there was any potential conflict in the
recruiting process between the Reuse Authority office and Science City/ ACET.
Mr. Davis reported that all potential business proposals presently go through the
Reuse Authority office process and he is in continual communication with the
ARRA Executive Director.
Mr. Parker added that Mr. Davis (Science City) has been approved by the Base
Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG). and worked especially close with the Reuse
Subcommittee.
Councilmember Appezzaro asked Mr. Davis what he was going to present to the
Reuse Authority at the next meeting . Mr. Davis reported that a planning budget
proposal will be presented to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
for funding to initiate the Alameda Science City/ ACET planning srudy.
Vice-Chair Swanson , who arrived after the presentation, asked Mr. Davis about
the joining of the Science City/ ACET proposal process. In summary, Mr. Parker
stated that the two proposals have been merged from a planning standpoint and
from a funding request standpoint.
Presentation by Alameda Center for Environmental Technology (ACET):
Mr. Rob Johnson of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory reported that the labs and the
University are involved in the process from the public service aspect, attempting
to bring the technical resources and planning capabilities of the labs to the service
of the community . Mr. Johnson reported that bylaws have been written, articles
of incorporation are ready to go, ACET is to be a 501.C3 non-profit corporation
strucrure, members of the Board of Directors have been identified , and
organizationally, ACET is primed and ready to begin its work . A series of
meetings are scheduled later in the month to develop the detailed business plan
that will fold in with the type of planning requests and funding requests which
will come before the Reuse Authority .
Mr. Mike Lakin, of ICF Kaiser Engineers discussed the matter of business
climate in the environmental marketplace stating that his company has been
looking at the environmental marketplace as a regular part of their business, and
3
n
D
LJ
have worked in conjunction with ACET for approximately 1-112. years . He
reported that his company felt that there is a very large environmernal
marketplace, particularly in the Pacific Rim which includes California. This
Pacific Rim area as well as Germany are the two largest expanding markets .
California is ideally situated to play into the market because existing California
regulations are preceding most federal regulations and environmental regulations
in the international marketplace : therefore. most of the activity going on locally
presents an excellent training ground for most of the new emerging markets
around the world . Current size estimates of the marketplace through the
Department of Energy are $500 Billion over the next five to ten years and DoD
is approximately $250 Billion over the same time period. Environmental private
sector marketplaces places parallel these sizes. The marketplace is expanding
very rapidly so the timing is right. the location is right , and ACET is attempting
to fit into that marketplace .
Mr. Bruce Kern reported that some materials had been submitted to .!\-Ir. Parker
which put into more derail the numbers which Mike Lakin referred to regarding
the size of the market.
After several organizational questions regarding the structure of both Science City
and ACET. Mr. Davis reported along with Mr. Kem that they had agreed to not
create a structure which would be incompatible with a merger of Science City and
ACET .
After discussion by the Members regarding funding, Vice-Chair Swanson reported
that the significance of this process will be exactly what happens to a conference
process in the Congress , i .e ., there are monies in the bill for demonstration
projects, technology centers, such that this project would qualify under and apply
for. How the conference turns out between the House and Senate on that
question will determine exactly what monies are available . Within the next
couple of weeks there will be more word regarding this bill, perhaps in
September, there will be more of an idea of how these monies will be made
available.
Chair Withrow concluded the discussion by stating that he appreciates the
opportunity to have the kind of talents that Science City and ACET bring to
participate in the development of a new Alameda and a new economic engine for
not only the City of Alameda, but the entire East Bay. He added that the region
is indeed privileged to have this kind of talent available .
Speakers:
Neal Patrick Sweeney, a resident of Alameda,. requested that more information
about this particular program be delivered to the Alameda Times Star and
Alameda Journal.
4
III .
B. Oral Repon from Executive Director Regarding Nexr Agenda for Alameda Reu se
and Redevelopment Awhoriry
Mr. Parker previewed the anticipated agenda for the next Alameda Reuse anu
Redevelopment Authority to be held on September 7, 1994 . including: ( l J
Presentation of the proposed Reuse and Redevelopment Authority. budget being
submitted to the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) with funding from
November 1, 1994 to October 31, 1995; (2) As part of the budget presentation .
Report to the Reuse Authority on the process of establishing the Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority's own fiscal agent ; (3) Report on the planning
study/joint effort by Alameda Science City with inclusion of ACET into the
planning study and endorsement of the request being submitted to DoD or other
bodies for funding; (4) Workshop to hear a j oint proposal for parks, recreational.
and educational uses of the Naval Air Station being sponsored by the City of
Alameda's Recreation and Park Department, Alameda Unified School Oistrict.
and the East Bay Regional Park District. The deadline for additional items for
the agenda is 5 :00 p.m. on the Monday of the week prior to each Reuse
Authority meeting .
Vice-Mayor Roth requested that the portion of the agenda which discusses the
next agenda item be placed at the end of the meeting rather than at the beginning
AGENDA ITEMS:
A . Report from General Counsel and Acri on (if any) Regarding Policy Guidelines for
Designation by Each Authority Member of His/Her Proxy and Designation of
Remaining Proxies
Assistant City Attorney Heather McLaughlin reported that the JPA , as currently
drafted, allows each member to appoint one proxy. This proxy has full powers
of the Member, but it only functions in the absence of the Member. Ex-officio
members can also be appointed; however, according to the way that the JPA is
drafted, only one fully empowered alternate can be appointed. An ex-officio
member can be appointed to act as a third back-up person; however, this person
would be present in a passive, non-voting sense .
Vice-Mayor Roth made a motion to allow one designated proxy with full voting
powers of the Member, (with the exception of the House of Representatives
Member who shall be pennitted to have two pennanent voting proxies) provided
that the Member is not present, and that an additional non-voting, ex-officio
proxy can be appointed by each Member which will be seated at the staff table
rather than at the podium with the voting members . The motion was seconded
by Councilmember Lucas and carried unanimously .
5
I .1
l
D
u
Councilmember Lucas appoinred Alameda residenr Roberta Hough as her
permanent proxy: Councilmember Appezzaro passed: Chair Withro w haJ
already designated Lee Perez. BRAG Chair as his permanent prox y : Vice-Ch:.iir
S w anson designated his Senior Staff Member. Robena Brook s : Councilmember
Roth designated BRAG Reuse Subcommittee Chair. Doug deHaan : anJ
Councilmember Arnerich designated Mr. Albert DeWitt .
B . Discussion and Acrion (If necessary) on Resolution ro Amend Ruf es and
Procedures Regarding Meering Time of Alameda Reuse and Redeve!opmem
Aurhorirv
c. .
Vice-Chair Swanson requested that the starting time of the ARRA meetings be
changed ro 5 :30 p.m . to better accommodate the busy schedules of all of the
Members .
Councilmember Appezzato moved for acceptance of the resolution to change the
time of Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority monthl y meetings to the
first Wednesday of each month at 5:30 p .m . The motion was seconded by
Councilmember Lucas and carried unanimously.
Discussion and Acrion (if an.v) Regarding Procedure for Fonnarion of ARRA
Subcommirrees
After discussion regarding the types of subcommittees which may be required in
the future (i .e ., Procurement Policy, Marketing , Finance), the number of
Alameda City Council Members permitted to be on any one subcommittee be two
(2). and that subcommittee members volunteer or be designated by the entire
Governing Body for subcommittees . Councilmember Lucas recommended that
this item be continued on the agenda should the need ever arise to form
subcommittees .
D . Repon from Er:ecurive Director Recommending Ratification of a Letter from rhe
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authoriry to the Assisrant Secretary of Defense
for Economic Security Concerning Comments on the Interim Final Rule on
"Revitalizing Base Closure Communities and Community Assistance" and rhe
Pr,:or Amendment
E.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the Jetter. The motion was seconded
by Councilmember Roth and adopted, with one Member abstaining .
Discussion and Action (if any) Regarding Appointment of a Representarive of the
Alameda Unified School Districr to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopmenr
Authoriry as a Non-voting Ex-officio Member
6
Speakers:
Sam Huie . currem Presidem of the Alameda Unified School District. reported that
the Alameda Board of Educ:nion needed to be involved at the Reuse Authorit \'
level because of the need for the Board to have a say in the reuse of the base . ;.rnd
recommended that a representative of the Alameda Unified School District be
appointed to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority as a non-voring.
ex-officio member.
Gale Greely, current Vice-President of the Alameda Unified School Board. added
that the reason that the School District is interested in participating in the Reuse
Authority is the recognition of the interdependency of education and successful
base conversion. She reiterated that a representative of the Alameda Unified
School District be appointed to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
as a non-voting . ex-officio member.
Chair Withrow reported that he had distributed a letter indicating his support of
the President of the Alameda Unified School District Board be an ex-officio
Member on the Reuse Authority. He added that there is a risk of having a
diffusion of focus ; however , in this case he felt that both have the same
constituency, and that there is a very significant inter-relationship between what
-. 0 I
is done in converting the base and the quality of education that we experience in I I
the City of Alameda and other cities in the region .
Councilmember Appezzato concurred with the Chair and added that he had
originally requested that this item be agendized . He stated that the importance
of education on the base reuse and redevelopment effort is not only a factor in job
creation, but a major deterrent to crime and hoped that the Reuse Authority Board
would vote unanimously for this action.
Councilmember Appezzato moved that a representative of the Alameda Unified
School District be appointed to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
as a non-voting, ex-officio member, specifically, the President of the Board of
Education of the Alameda Unified School District with one voting Proxy to be the
Vice-President of the Alameda Unified School District, with the change to be
incorporated into the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Bylaws after
being agendized at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by
Councilmember Lucas.
Vice-Mayor Roth reported that he had never withdrawn his concerns and asked
Mr. Huie to answer some questions. Vice-Mayor Roth asked for clarification
of the previous statement by Mr. Huie , "As President of the Board, the Board felt
that it was important for an elected official to be on the Reu_se Authority in order
that they may direct staff. ... ". Vice-Mayor Roth expressed his concerns
7
n
D
IV .
u
regarding the request: (1) as individuals. Reuse Authority Members do not direct
staff. only as a body: and. (2) when was this request on a School Board agenda
voted on at a public meeting'?
Mr. Huie reponed that the School Board can make some philosophical decisions
through concensus without necessarily doing a School District agenda: however.
if the Reuse Authority feels it is important enough. the Board will agendize it for
a vote.
Assistant City Attorney reported that if the change is incorporated into the
Bylaws, a vote by at least three Alameda City Councilmembers is required for
passage .
Speakers:
Mr. Dennis Chaconas , Superintendent of the Alameda Unified School District
responded to several of the questions raised by the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority regarding appointment of the BRAG Chair and
placement of the item on the School District agenda.
Chair Withrow reported that a motion had been made and seconded and called for
a vote . The motion was carried six to one.
It was clarified that the ex-officio member will not sit at the Council podium, but
at the staff table .
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
fu]eakers:
Richard Nevelin, displaced Depot worker and member of several of the BRAG
committees and several of the EBCRC Committees, expressed his disappointment in the
progress of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority as well as the progress of
the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission .
Neal Patrick Sweeney, a resident of the City of Alameda, stated that the formation of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority is delaying too long and fighting over
small issues and that the Reuse Authority should get busy with base conversion.
8
V COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
Vice-Chair Swanson srared that he had re:id Mr. Nevelin ·s anicle in the newspaper and
chose not to respond to the newspaper anicle. even though it was directed to his office . He
stated that fact rhat rhe Alameda Reuse and Rede velopment Authorir y is the body that will decide
whar happens ar the Naval Base, and ir is the body recognized federally to make decisions is
in fact progress . The Pon of Oakland 's expansion is direcrly relared to job creation and
conversion activity from all of these committees came ideas thar have been rranslated imo a
number of legislative proposals which have been enacted into law and that will result in action .
It was out of some of these committees that a piece of legislation is going through Congress right
now which provides that instead of laying off a worker, give an employer $10 ,000 of their
respective termination monies as an incentive to hire them. This idea came from all of these
committees. The community cannot afford to be pessimistic, but rather should be aggressive .
It was the fire fighters from NAS Alameda who came to the EBCRC Commission and pounded
on the desks and asked, "What are you going to do with the public safety offices'?". This issue
is currently in a piece of pending legislation so that if they want to become fire fighters for the
City of Alameda , there is money to do that. This legislation came out of a committee . He
emphasized that Mr. Nevelin 's comments are nor a fair characterization that nothing is
happening. Of course , the process is slow , and it involves a lot of work . Everyone is trying
very hard to make things happen . He reiterated thar he chose not to respond to Mr. Nevel in· s
newspaper anicles: however. he felt that Mr. Nevelin continually repeats comments which are
not accurate .
Councilman Arnerich agreed with Vice-Chair Swanson that the process is a seemingly
slow and tiresome thing . The BRAG and all the agencies involved are faced with terrible
consrraints by regulatory agencies , commissions and boards. Many things have come out of all
the meetings, and that Rome wasn't built in a day .
YI. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Withrow adjourned the meeting at 7 :20 p .m .
Respectfully submitted,
~~8cr~
Secretary
9
I _ 1