1999-07-07 ARRA MinutesAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
AMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ROLL CALL
1.
Present:
Wednesday, July 7, 1999
The meeting convened at 5:35 with Chair Appezzato presiding.
2 -A
Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandre Swanson, Vice Chair, Ninth Congressional District for Barbara Lee
Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of
Supervisors, District 3
Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Beverly Johnson, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Jerry Brown, Mayor, City of Oakland
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Shelia Young, Mayor, City of San Leandro
Absent: None
2. PRESENTATIONS
2 -A. Presentation of Office of the Secretary of Defense Award to ARRA for Exemplary Work in
Base Redevelopment. Presented to Lee Perez, BRAG Chair and Dave Berger, Deputy City
Manager.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
3. -A Approval of the minutes of the special meeting of June 15, 1999.
3 -B. Report from Deputy Executive Director recommending support for Assembly Bill 473,
Hertzbog.
Councilmember Kerr moved approval of the minutes as presented for June 15,
1999, and for the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilmember
Johnson and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes 0. Vice -Chair
Swanson and Alternate Friedman arrived after the vote.
1
4. ACTION ITEMS
4 -A. (Withdrawn) Report from the Deputy City Manager recommending authorization to finalize
negotiations and execute an interim lease through the temu of the Master Lease with the
Alameda County Homeless Collaborative for Buildings 101 and 92.
4 -B. Report from the Deputy City Manager recommending authorization to lease Hangar 41 for
non - museum use.
Deputy City Manager David Berger stated at the February meeting, the governing body adopted
the BRAG's recommendation to give the Alameda Naval Air Museum (ANAM) and Western
Air Museum (WAM), until July 1st to obtain the necessary funding commitments to do the code
required upgrades to Hangar 41. Recently, the Board of Director of ANAWAM decided to
dissolve as a joint entity and acknowledged that they were not able to meet that funding deadline.
He stated they had been looking for grants from the State of California. By ANAWAM
dissolving and unable to meet the leasing criteria established by the ARRA Board in February,
the staff's conclusion is that the group is not able to pursue Hangar 41.
Mr. Berger noted that staff is working with the museum to consummate a lease for Building 77
which they are working with them on to consummate the lease. He stated the formal
recommendation presented to the ARRA (Item 4B), is to release the present condition and allow
Building 41 to go on the open market at the direction of the ARRA in February. He the ARRA
has received at least two offers of interest and are waiting until the ANAWAM group could
indicate whether or not they could move forward with the funding commitment the ARRA Board
asked them to meet. Deputy Berger stated ARRA Facilities Manager, Ed Levine was present and
they would be willing to answer any questions.
Chair Appezzato asked how much money is needed for Building 77.
Deputy Berger responded approximately $70,000 is needed for Building 77. He stated this was
viable from what ANAWAM has shown them in their business plan and is ready to move
forward.
Chair Appezzato said if they go forward with the recommendation regarding Building 41 and if
Building 77 could continue to remain viable as a museum, a substantial amount of money would
be needed to maintain to keep it up and running.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked how much would it cost to maintain Building 41.
Deputy Berger responded the estimate they analyzed was for $500,000. The analysis from the
engineering division showed it would be closer to $700,000.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked are there advantages or disadvantages of Hangar 41 vs. 77 from
staff's perspective.
2
Deputy Berger responded the groups (museum task force) view is they would like to have both
buildings so they would have more space for interior storage and display of the restored aircraft,
which is primarily the advantage of Building 41.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked staff's opinion of the merits of having a museum at Alameda Point.
ARRA Facilities Manager Ed Levine responded that Building 77 was intended to be a museum
which displayed the artifacts that were formally from the Naval Air Station, primarily "pure
museum" as opposed to aircraft display, which would have occurred in the large Hangar of -
Building 41 which is approximately 112,000 sq. ft.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked staff's opinion of having a museum of this nature on any part of the
base.
Deputy Berger responded that the adopted Community Reuse Plan calls for both Building 77 and
41 to be Naval Air Museum facilities. If either building could demonstrate financial viability to
do the upgrades and maintain the up -keep of the facilities, then staff's view is that it would
leverage the Hornet as part of the historical presence as part of the formal Naval Air Station.
Any additional tourist destination to help the Hornet would also help the museum. He stated the
decision is based upon the financial viability of either building.
Councilmember Daysog read the report which indicated that Hangar 41 is "highly leaseable and
could generate approximately $400,000 per year if leased to a non - museum tenant." He asked if
any of the perspective tenants that were mentioned by Deputy Berger come close to the amount
quoted of $400,000 or is it too early to tell?
ARRA Facilities Manager Ed Levine responded yes, they have had two viable tenants that were
prepared to pay rent in that order of magnitude by the second or third year of their lease.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Kurt Bohan, 344 Westline Drive, C -301, expressed that toward the beginning of the last City
election, elected officials said they did not have money for the Skateboard Park. He expressed
that he was one of the first people who publicly suggested that the Skateboard Park be built cabin
style, in spite of others saying there was no money. With public pressure and having an election,
the Skateboard park was built, not based on money but moral issues. Mr. Bohan expressed
tonight the board has a moral decision to vote on the museum that would represent what has
happened in the City of Alameda for the past 70 years and the City should not pass it by. He
voiced that he made recommendations for Hangar 20 and the sprinkler systems and the costs are
ridiculous for the applications for what is going on for Building 41. He felt some of the figures
were made up so there is justification to not proceed with the Museum. Mr. Bohan expressed the
proper usage of this facility should be used to aid the entire community and that 5% is required,
according to federal law if the opportunity is there. He was confident that the museum can be
built, based on all the donations.
3
Grace Keachie, Alameda, voiced that she is donating $100,000 to get the museum moving. She
believes in it and is confident it will work: She further expressed years from now the children of
Alameda would thank the Board for the decision it made regarding a vote to move forward with
the museum.
Chair Appezzato asked Ms. Keachie if the board decides to only retain Building 77, would she
consider donating the $100,000 for that building also?
Ms. Keachie responded no. She stated that Building 77 is not going to go by itself, because it:
needs Building 41, otherwise it will sink.
Marilyn York, Alameda, voiced that she felt Building 41 is vital to the museum. Other museums
such as Castle Airforce Base, have static display of aircraft. Without that static display, our
museum whether it be artifacts or photographs, would still be very interesting. She stated there
are people in the City who are unfamiliar with what is going on at the base and they should be
made aware. Everything that had gone on with the Navy over the years at the base, is important
and should' be saved. She voiced that her group has gone to many people who will give them
money, but the lenders have requested a lease be shown and until that happens there will be no
money. Ms. York appealed to the board to give them the opportunity, and if something goes
wrong, the boardhas the money and they do not have to give it back. She requested they
reconsider proceeding with the museum.
Barbara Baak, Alameda, indicated she was in favor of the museum, Building 41. She expressed
that they had been set back by the withdrawal of the Western Aerospace Museum from the joint
venture agreement, which was unexpected. Volunteers and directors have restated their
commitment to building the museum and their intent to go forward to save the history for future
generations of Alamedans and Californians. She stated that although the board had a meeting on
the 28th indicating they could not go forward with Hangar 41 because of the withdrawal of
WAM, the Keachies' volunteered $200,000 toward Hangar 41 to allow them to continue working
on upgrades. In terms of cost, it would be a big investment for the City and they would continue
contributing efforts to make this successful. She indicated that the $200,000 would help
significantly in the upgrades, along with the hundreds of hours of work dedicated, the over
$30,000 pro bono attorney and the $35,000 from Mr. Franz Steiner's organization and fund
raising activities, should be enough to allow them to move forward. She expressed to the board
that the long term tourism and investment in the community would justify their decision.
Franz Steiner, Principal, VBN Architects, indicated he had been trying to help ANAWAM move
into Buildings 77 and 41 for approximately 1 1/2 years. Mr. Steiner expressed he supported the
budget estimate and stated the museum portion of the hangar is the reason why the upgrades are
necessary, which include the sprinkler system, ADA compliance toilet rooms and exits, which
comprise the majority of the costs of the upgrades. They have concluded the upgrades necessary
to receive a certificate of occupancy can be produced for $200,000. The sprinkler system would
incur the majority of the cost for upgrades, the other upgrades will take up the remainder and
what is left would be done by volunteer labor. Mr. Steiner indicated he did not have actual
4
numbers or commitments for volunteer labor, as he would take more time to identify those
people. He concluded by apprising the board that he felt the work could be accomplished by the
available amounts of money that have been donated to ANAWAM.
Richard Neveln, 1328 Park Street, expressed that it is sad that the board is considering renting
the building for storage which would produce nothing but rent money, when there is an
opportunity to create a museum that would bring tourists to Alameda from San Francisco's $6
billion a year industry. By tapping into the $6 billion a year tourist industry, it would be more
important than the short term gain. He indicated code requirements and upgrades could be
worked out financially just as it was for the Skateboard park. Mr. Neveln stated he was curious=
about. City staff looking for back up interests, and whether or not they contacted Joe Davis, the
Confederate Airforce, the Chino Air museum and other places for participation, that do have
aircraft to loan and park. He expressed he supports public transit on the weekends, which would
be key to make all of this happen. To call this not viable is inappropriate, unless you have
allowed Building 77 to open, allowed the museum to begin, and then call the question on
operating Building 41, after they have had a chance to demonstrate viability with one building.
Nita Rosen, 1045_ Island Drive, expressed that she believes in this museum and has no doubt it
can be done. Sit' indicated that she had been with the BRAG and the museum task force group
since the beginning, and sees no problem and does not know what the problem is.
Lee Perez, 29 Sea Bridge, Chair of the BRAG, indicated he was giving a report on the consensus
of what the BRAG task force stood on the issue of the museum. He expressed that they have
been working on this issue for three years and the problems have been finance, a viable business
plan and a administrative handle as to what was going on. They presented this to the board six
months ago, with a "drop- dead" deadline at the end of June. Unfortunately, the ANAWAM
organization folded and now the ANAM is trying to proceed. He expressed that at their task
force meeting, they concluded that Building 41 would not be a museum any longer, because of
lack of finance, and they would continue with Building 77. The task force is still soliciting
grants to complete the required upgrades necessary to receive from the City of Alameda a Use
Permit and Certificate of Occupancy, in the amount of $70,000, which has been donated as of
last week. Chair Perez indicated the task force recommends the ARRA continue to positively
support the efforts of ANAM, in working towards establishing and opening the ANAM museum
in Building 77. The issue of additional money and Building 41 had not been discussed, but the
task force would be willing to do so.
Chair Appezzato responded to BRAG Chair Lee Perez, that everyone thought it was a
worthwhile effort, however there comes a time when you have to make a decision one way or the
other. There was 110 question that everybody thought that it would not be so long in dealing with
it.
Ann Mitchum, 732 Central Avenue, #16, waived her time.
The public hearing was closed for Authority discussion.
5
Vice -Chair Swanson expressed that the presentation from the community representing the
museum was wonderful. He agreed with one of the speakers that it should not be a financial
issue, although if it was, the rent or lease payments would not compare to the multiplying factor
that it is involved in museum property. Part of the whole base conversion has been based on
certain promises, and the City and the ARRA has made these promises to the community about
the overall development of housing, light manufacturing and other business opportunities at the
base. Part of the community participation in this process would be benefitted by a museum.
There is a lot money in this country for museums and the community putting money into this
effort is encouraging. 'Vice -Chair Swanson indicated the federal and state governments mightlie
able to make contributions to this effort. They were able to get $14 million from the Department
of Defense for the Chabot Observatory, which is a multi - million dollar project, in which the
Department of Defense thought that the contribution to science and young people made sense.
Vice -Chair Swanson expressed it is not a time to give up on this project and that if the ARRA
decides to allow more time to develop, the congressional office would be willing to work with
the group to explore state and federal assistance for the museum. The memory and preservation
of the Navy and its history is part of the promise that was made early on.
Member DeWitt voiced the Board's principle is not to use general fund money to support the
Naval Air Station. The figures and projections are not coming to where they should be and they
are not making enough money at the air station and staff is working hard to keep everything from
going under. Member DeWitt read a correspondence written to Washington stating that "our
cash flow clearly shows that the cost of infrastructure, demolition, marketing and operation and
maintenance of the property, exceeds the revenue that was expected to derive from the sale and
lease of the property." Once the maintenance money from the Navy ceases, the cash flow at the
base is going to be bad. How should the bills be paid without going into the general fund?
Member DeWitt indicated this is the issue he is dealing and what causes staff to go out and rent
everything they can. Even if this is done, there will still be a deficit.
Member Daysog asked Deputy City Manager David Berger and ARRA Facilities Manager Ed
Levine, if they had time to evaluate the $100,000 offer and the ramifications of even considering
it, which include the volunteer labor. He asked if they could get it and will the performance be
of the quality that was originally proposed? Has there been time to evaluate that level of
evaluation of the $100,000 proposal put forward?
Deputy City Manager David Berger responded no, because they just received the information
yesterday or the day before. Based upon prior review of their detailed cost estimates from VBN,
they believe that the cost is between $200,000 - $700,000. Mr. Steiner indicated that $200,000
could be used for the sprinkler system and the balance for the other required upgrades, which
they had not had the opportunity to evaluate the degree it could be done through volunteer or
skilled labor and who would manage it. Deputy Berger indicated they could pursue it at the
request of the board, however their prior review caused them to believe this would be a very
formidable task for a group to do, unless you have tremendous experience.
6
Chair Appezzato voiced the $200,000 is just capital cost and there are other costs which the
$200,000 will not cover. Where will the operational and maintenance money come from?
ARRA Facilities Manager Ed Levine indicated they had been conversing with the museum group
for about three years and what was made clear at the beginning, is delivery of a comprehensive
business plan and financial statements to support their position that they can successfully develop
and operate this museum over an extended period of time. To date, a business plan has not been
received. It is difficult to evaluate their organizational abilities, how they intend to operate the
museum, what they intend to put in it, and where the aircraft, which would be displayed, is going
to come from. There is no information to date.
Member Kerr voiced she has been and still is a supporter of the museum, however, in a staff
meeting a month ago the federal government indicated they would not support us after
September. They tried to figure out how they would issue revenue bonds to pay the bills at
Alameda Point, which includes police and fire, among others. It takes about $7 million a year to
meet the beginning duties and we do not have that money. The Navy has not met its
commitment to do the EIR/ EIS record decision, and while there is a lot of money in
Washington, it isjiot coming out here. Because the federal government has failed to meet its
schedule, we do-not have title to the base. In addition, EFA West, the agency which handles the
conveyance of bases, is being cut back and Member Kerr indicated she does not know that EFA
West has successfully conveyed a base except Hamilton, which is an airforce base and that took
them 20 years to do. Member Kerr voiced that we cannot take any promises to the bank. In a
few months we will be faced with the need to pay the bills at Alameda Point to meet the
commitments on the leases that we have and we do not have the money to do it. Member Kerr
indicated she has given a clear message to staff to go after those leases, although she would like
to be in the financial position to give the museum more time for Hangar 41. The offer of
$200,000 is extremely generous and would be able to upgrade the sprinkler system and put
money in the bank. Unfortunately, we are out of time and do not have the time to consider
supporting other people because we have to pay our bills out at the base, which is over $7 million
a year. Member Kerr voiced they are hoping to issue revenue bonds which will get us through
two years and after that we are not sure what will happen. Money will have to be borrowed
against the existing income from the current leases. With great regret she would continue to
support the commitment of leasing out Building 77.
Member Johnson voiced although the board issued a "drop - dead "deadline in January or we will
not go forward with it, there have been some changes in the circumstances. The Western Air
Museum has dropped out of the process and now there is an offer of $200,000. As Vice -Chair
Swanson indicated, we need to look at this issue not as an economic income producing building,
because the Base Reuse Plan commits us as a museum if it is viable. Until we can show it is not
viable, we cannot change that unless we amend the Reuse Plan. Member Johnson voiced that she
did not like the criticism of staff about not giving them a chance because it has been three years.
As Vice -Chair Swanson indicated, his office might be willing to help and it is worth giving them
more time, as it states in the Base Reuse Plan. Member Johnson voiced that we cannot say this is
not viable and supported giving an extension of time for them to decide if it is viable or not.
7
Member Daysog voiced that he was told before the meeting they would like one more month to
demonstrate they can go forward. Member Daysog asked the museum task group force, in one
month time frame what will we get from you and will you demonstrate the $200,000 you receive
will work and how will you use the volunteer labor to make up the difference of the $200,000
$500,000?
Barbara Baak indicated they would give them the figures of the $329,000 figure that Franz
Steiner and Steve Keachie arrived at and those figures have been approved by Celia Karian,
ARRA Engineer, who verified those figures were valid. They would like to discuss with Vice_ F
Chair Swanson the opportunity to make it possible to add to the $200,000, so they would be in-a
better position. Ms. Baak indicated they have submitted business plans for Building 77 and 41.`
The $329,000 estimate is based on using some volunteer labor and would hope to give the board
those figures in 30 days.
Member Daysog stated the question that Mr. Bohan raised about putting this issue as a moral
issue was quite insightful. Moral issue in the classic sense of what is good for community and
what it constitutes, defines and binds it. It is also an issue of ethics which deals with the choices
we take to arrive at what constitutes the community good. Member Daysog stated he is willing
to give the task force group another 30 days for two reasons: to evaluate what they have to offer
and the financiars state in writing that Building 41 is for public use.
Alternate Leonhardy voiced that a museum function would serve the region well, however he
would agree with the majority board. Alternate Leonhardy indicated he would be absent from
the August 4th ARRA meeting, but he would be looking from staff for a more detailed
breakdown of what capital improvements are needed and which ones would be necessary for a
certificate of occupancy, require a license bonded contractor to perform or oversee the project
and volunteer labor. Alternate Leonhardy voiced that he has not seen a business plan from the
group, only an outline. It is incumbent the ARRA have an opportunity to look at an operations
budget and a business plan that includes an operation budget and presumed funding sources,
which is critical. Alternate Leonhardy asked Counsel Highsmith is this a vote that requires the
majority of the City Council?
Counsel Highsmith responded no, this vote does not require a super majority vote, because
whatever the board decides to do, the Reuse Plan has already taken that into consideration.
Alternate Ornelas voiced she has looked at communities that look back at their history and wish
they had the opportunity to make this a reality and save this as part of their history, instead of
acting so quickly. The good in the history of this community and what the base has contributed
to the region is something that cannot be measured or have a value placed on it. Alternate
Ornelas indicated she was part of the meeting back in January, in which they discussed having a
deadline on this issue and recalled her commitment to the need for that deadline. However, a
very strong argument has been put forth from the community, particularly in the demonstration
of personal financial contributions. Alternate Ornelas expressed she was encouraged by the
congressional commitment to seek other opportunities for funding. She would like to see an
8
opportunity for them to have an extension of time, rather than having to base their decision
tonight solely on profit and loss, the bottom line of the base.
Chair Appezzato responded that he is not sure they are acting quickly, since they have been
dealing with this issue for over three years.
Alternate Friedman voiced there are compelling arguments on both sides of this issue. He
indicated he agrees with Alternate Leonhardy that, although this does not require a majority vote
of the City Council, he would like a common definition of a business plan agreed to in a few
days if the Council decides to grant this. The business plan should conform to the criteria that
ARRA Facilities Manager Levine has asked of other businesses. Alternate Friedman expressed
his appreciation to all the people who have sustained through the ups and downs of this project
and remained eager to move forward with this project.
Chair Appezzato stated the board has been dealing with this issue for a long time and this is not a
quick decision as some might think. Unfortunately, for some it has become an emotional
decision. Chair Appezzato indicated that we have a base to run, a development plan to follow
and we need the revenue to do so. By October 1, 1999, there may be no additional revenue from
the Navy to operate the base. Consequently, Western Aerospace Museum has bowed out. There
are three museums in a city of 75,000, the Alameda Historic Museum, the Meyers House, both of
which are funded by the City presently and one which may have some financial difficulties; and
the Hornet, which has not met its tourist projections. We have had to yield on the rent for the
Hornet. With a fourth and fifth museum on the outskirts of the City, Western Aerospace
Museum, how many museums can the City of Alameda sustain? Chair Appezzato stated three or
four months ago he was ready to vote not to go forward, however he was convinced by the board
to give it another three months. The board approved a sink or swim by July 1st, and again we are
asking for another 30 days. Chair Appezzato voiced he could not imagine the costs of the
operations and maintenance of this museum. This has been done long enough and we owe it to
the community. He said he was going to support the staff recommendation to lease it out.
Member Kerr stated the tax increment from the redevelopment area does not occur until the City
gets title, which will not occur until the future. Money would have to be borrowed and the
amount of the revenue bonds might be able to generate paying this money back, would depend
upon the kind of income we produce now. We are presently in negotiations and to have another
building come online for $400,000 a year which would help us in the generation of those revenue
bonds, if we are able to do that. Being this is July, at the end of September we will have to have
commitments to maintain the base and no money from Washington to do it. Member Kerr
indicated her moral commitment is to the fiscal stability of the City of Alameda.
Member DeWitt asked the board to allow another month, due to Vice -Chair Swanson indicating
that there may be some money somewhere. Member DeWitt asked the board allow another 30
days, during which time further evaluation can be made.
9
Alternate Leonhardy voiced that when the business plan comes, it should be in a format that is
acceptable to staff, which would give it a fair evaluation. Alternate Leonhardy asked Member
Johnson would her motion include capital improvements, which is needed for a certificate of
occupancy and what is needed for licence?
Member Johnson responded it needs to be a detailed plan, which will allow the board to
determine if it is viable or not.
Chair Appezzato indicated there will be verbal poll to ask the Council members to vote on it. _
Vice -Chair Swanson voiced that in Washington there is currently discussion of no -cost
conveyances of property because of many issues. It is does not make sense that the City has to
ask the Navy for money while it is trying to maintain the property. Vice -Chair Swanson
indicated that they are remaining committed to trying to help supplement those funds. He would
work with the group and place calls to see if there are federal agencies that can assist them.
Member Johnson recommended a motion be made to extend to the applicant to come up
with a viable business plan in 30 days or by the next ARRA Meeting. Motion was seconded
by Member Daysog. Ayes - 7; Noes - 2.
Roll call vote: Councilmember Daysog, Councilmember DeWitt, Councilmember Johnson
and Alternate Swanson, Alternate Leonhardy, Alternate Ornelas and Alternate Friedman
voted yes on the extension; Chair Appezzato and Councilmember Kerr voted no.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
Chairman Lee Perez indicated the BRAG report was part of his presentation to the board, on
behalf of the museum for Building 41 and 77.
4 -B. Oral report from the Deputy City Manager.
No report was given.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Bill Smith, 732 Central Avenue, #16, expressed he has realized five sources of funds to leverage
the money that is offered here. He indicated that although Item 4A had been dropped, the people
at the Homeless Collaborative are going to be offering classes at their community center for
people coming off of welfare, the streets or ex- military families. If there is a museum at the base,
part of the money should be part of the business plan, which allows it to be shared to the
homeless. If people from the community donate their service, why not get an emergency funding
or federal tax credit for professionals having tax credits for offering up their services and have
10
these people trained to do contractor work. There could be on the job training and people would
work for free for food and work and do the upgrades to the sprinkler system. There should be
some federal legislation to get this done and would save a lot of the $200,000. These people are
also being trained by the Homeless Collaborative for cooking school and they could have a
buffet at the museum.
Richard Neveln, 1328 Park Street, expressed one of the problems with the Hornet Museum from
day one, was the lack of public transportation to this museum. Last night the City Council took
some action to start a transportation committee with Member DeWitt and Member Johnson to - -
bring more transportation to the City of Alameda and to the Hornet Museum. This will mean a t
greater amount' of tourist dollars coming to Alameda, rather than storage dollars out in the
hangars and other buildings. It is important every citizen be involved in this and to help the
museums stay viable. Mr. Neveln expressed that had the Naval Air Museum been open for these
three years, there would no discussion of the viability of Hangar 41 because it would have
demonstrated more capability.
6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Member Kerr asked Deputy City Manager David Berger where are they with the conveyance as
mentioned in the last meeting.
Deputy City Manager Berger responded they are currently on schedule with the conveyance
process and would give her more information in the weekly report.
Member Kerr asked Deputy Berger what does on schedule mean?
Deputy Berger responded they and the Navy negotiators have agreed to a conveyance schedule
by the end of January 2000.
Member Kerr asked if the EIRI EIS approvals are coming along in that schedule?
Deputy Berger responded yes and he would give her further details in his weekly report.
Vice -Chair Swanson indicated the Economic Development Commission has given the East Bay
Conversion Reinvestment Commission a $900,000 grant to start a revolving loan fund to support
small businesses at Alameda Point and Bank of America has joined in partnership to complete
the private sector contribution of that fund, which makes it $1.5 million. He stated they hope by
fall the fund will be up and operational.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
11
Res ectfully submitted,
ucretia Akil
ARRA Secretary
12