Schools

Report presented at the Special Joint Meeting of the City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRAAlameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority. The City Council acts in this capacity.) and Community Improvement Commission (CICCommunity Improvement Commission (Alameda's redevelopment agency). The City Council acts in this capacity.)
April 6, 2010
7:01 PM
City Council Chambers
City Hall

City Manager/Executive Director Communication

3-A. Update on SunCal Negotiations [City Council, ARRA, CIC]

Excerpt:

he City Council and School Board got what was, for the council at least, a brief summary of the 288 pages of Measure BSunCal's ballot measure to redevelop Alameda Point. It was defeated by a vote of 85 to 15 percent on February 2, 2010. and a pair of city staff-generated analyses of the measure Tuesday night. I meant to write you a story about it to read Wednesday, I really did. But after nearly five hours of presentations, points, counterpoints, accusations and a heaping serving of political theater, I realized there wasn’t really much new to say.

Alameda Point Development Initiative Election Report Presentation
Joint Meeting Alameda Unified School District and City of Alameda
January 5, 2010

Contents

I. Initiative Process

II. Chronology of Process

III. Contents of Initiative
A. Summary of Initiative
B. Land Use Program
C. Development Agreement
D. Fiscal Impacts
E. Traffic

Excerpt:

The City Council and the School Board are holding a special joint meeting at 7 p.m. this Tuesday, January 5 to talk about development at Alameda Point. And important note: They’ll be at Mastick Senior Center, 1155 Santa Clara Avenue.
...

Excerpt:

[Response to SunCal's letter of October 19, 2009]

Table of Contents

1. Scope of Election Report
2. Regulatory Framework
3. Subsequent DDADisposition and Development Agreement Approval
4. Failure of Initiative and Effect on Maintenance of Base
5. Impact Fee Exactions and Exemptions
6. Public Benefits and Financing
7. $200 Million Public Benefit Cap
8. Fiscal Neutrality
9. Transfer of Rights

Excerpt:

SUNCAL/SHAW HEDGE FUND INITIATIVE PROBLEM OUTCOMES: SUMMARY

The initiative, if approved by Alameda voters would

* give the developer the right to decide the overall project‟s size, mix of uses, open space plan, public facilities, transit options, and timing.

*give the developers the right to decide the size, density, mix of uses, open space plan, transit options, timing and other major characteristics of the development within each district.

* lock in a process of ministerial (i.e., no city discretion to modify or reject) approvals that prohibit the public, the Planning Board, and the City Council from reviewing or appealing permit approvals, with few exceptions

* fail to guarantee delivery of any specific public benefits or improvements, including those listed in the initiative

* divert scarce city and redevelopment resources from the rest of Alameda to the Alameda Point project and make it prohibitively expensive for the city to refuse to provide the project with redevelopment (tax increment) funds;

* allow the developer, to sell off Alameda Point piece by piece with these extremely valuable entitlements in place to developers it selects. The city would be obligated to honor the development agreement with developers falling short of the city‟s minimum financial, competence, and design qualifications.;

* undermine environmental review by postponing it until after the developer would already be in possession of full development rights that would hinder the city‟s ability to require mitigations or project alternatives; and

* prohibit amendments to correct any of the initiative‟s problems without the approval of the initial and subsequent developers, for at least 30 years

Excerpt:

Beleaguered residents of the Pacifica San Juan project off Valle Road will continue paying a Mello-RoosA special tax assessed on an area for a specific purpose—see also CFD (community facilities district) tax that generates $443,000 a year, mostly for the Capistrano Unified School District, even though the project only sends 10 kids to public schools.

Fewer than 60 of a planned 416 homes were built in Pacifica San Juan before the developer, SunCal, and lender, Lehman Brothers, plummeted into bankruptcy. Residents have attended several meetings of the Capistrano Unified School District board of trustees, asking for relief from the tax.

"The Initiative does not provide information justifying the need for a school. The Initiative also does not indicate whether AUSDAlameda Unified School District has been contacted regarding the proposed project and its impact on local school facilities." (p. 33.)