PTAG, you’re it

The next big Alameda battle which will reshuffle the supporters and opponents of Measure B will be the battle over the next school parcel tax.   With both parcel taxes set to sunset in order to ensure that Alameda Unified School District doesn’t collapse (close Encinal?  what?) a parcel tax will need to be supported by at least two-thirds of the voting populace to help keep AUSD afloat in the face of more cuts.

The Parcel Tax Advisory Group which included former plaintiff against Measure H, John Beery, has worked out a few options for how the parcel tax could be structured.   But here were their overall recommendations:

Ohhh snap!

So I had promised myself that I wasn’t going to write about Alameda Point until tomorrow, because even though news about the Interim City Manager sending out a Notice of Default to SunCal about their Optional Entitlement Application (OEA) was very interesting news, it could wait given that the Planning Board meeting is tonight and there is a fairly interesting, albeit small, item of interest.

So for those who have not read the Notice of Default (Michelle Ellson has a copy) it essentially says that SunCal’s OEA is not valid because it has to Measure A compliant according to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.   The ICM uses some fairly reaching arguments to come to that decision too.   Recall that this is the woman who insisted that the City’s Election Reports on Measure B only discuss what was included in the body of the language itself and not the “intent” of the Developer or even other documents that were confidential due to the ENA but that she had review previously.

More on leasing

But not Alameda Point leases!

Here was an interesting comment from Barbara which brought up the topic of Ballena Bay in the context of Measure B.  ”Barbara” is former Councilmember Barbara Thomas.   I’m sure this was not a heavily guarded secret.   Barbara T. says:

The City gets 125,000 per year for the 100 year lease at Ballena Bay. The developer (including a former councilmember) takes in millions. You wouldn’t let your land go so cheaply, Lauren. Why should the city? There is no reason the city cannot build the marina, build the other portions as they can be paid for, and any small aspects, such as limited residential, can be sold to contractors. Alameda was built a little bit at a time. That way, if the planners’ projections don’t pan out, Alameda can rethink its efforts without totally degrading the quality of life for existing residents.

So, I’m not sure if the comment about building the marina and other portions “as they can be paid for” is directed toward Ballena Bay or Alameda Point.  Because if it is Alameda Point, I would argue that $108 million for Alameda Point is not “cheap.”  But if it’s about Ballena Bay, then yes, Barbara T. is right, it was incredibly foolish of the City Council at the time to have allowed Ballena Bay to have been leased out at such low rates without any commitment from the developer/owner to keep up the infrastructure.   But I discussed the whole issue here previously.

Frankly speaking

Press releases sent out in a flurry post Measure B fallout!   But I was most puzzled by the statement sent out by Frank Matarrese from his “Frank for Mayor” campaign:

“I know that all Alamedans are frustrated with the slow pace of the redevelopment of the former Alameda Naval Air Station. I share that frustration. But now that the voters have rejected SunCal’s Measure B, we must move forward with the project — building on those elements that have been widely accepted and rejecting those aspects of the plan that will adversely impact our city’s quality of life.

A mandate, it’s neither a man nor a date, discuss.

Massive blaze of glory?  Check!

Changing the narrative on what people voted against?  Check!

Talk about people losing political cred?  Check!

I was really hoping that I would have to make good on my promise to buy Jack Richard that drink.   But I’ll buy you one anyway one of these days Jack R.

4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42

While tonight opponents to Measure B will be gleefully watching the results roll in while feasting on Smoking Loon wine and the Measure B pizza from  Croll’s.   The unappetizing description of said pizza reminded me once again why I have never visited  Croll’s a second time and prefer to drive all the way to Zachary’s on College to get a decent pie.   I’ll instead be watching the season premiere of Lost.

It’s not that I don’t care anymore, I’ve sort of burned out on this whole election thing.   I just want it to be over at this point.   I am hopeful at this point that Measure B will pass, but have resigned myself to the fact that it was probably doomed the moment that the election was set for February (low turnout = only voters with really strong opinions coming out to vote and people generally feel more passionate about being against something than for it).

Fear starts with B!

Too funny not to post, director extraordinaire Roger Grumble of Alameda Daily Noose has posted a “documentary” about what will happen if Measure B passes.   I’ve already watched it twice.

You spin me right round

Before the votes have even begun to be tallied, opponents to anything ever happening in Alameda have begun spinning what will be the cause of voter’s rejection of Measure B.   While you know and I know that it has been nothing but Development Agreement, Development Agreement, Development Agreement that has been the cause of people’s apprehension about Measure B, not so today 24 hours before people are going to start voting.  No, today it is because people don’t like the PLAN for Alameda Point.

Let us revisit the arguments against Measure B that are contained in the voters guide, shall we?  Here are the bullet points that the signers asked us to consider when rejecting Measure B:

Dirty words

Dan Zack, the Downtown Development Coordinator for Redwood City, who was also spearheaded the free market parking scheme for downtown Redwood City, has created a quiz challenging people’s assumptions about what “density” looks like.   In this town, to some folks density is a dirty word, right up there with “development.”    It doesn’t matter to those folks if the project is well designed and well executed, if you use the dreaded “d” word (either one, density or development, doesn’t matter) the will be against whatever it is.

But the quiz is rather interesting, give it a whirl.   I only wish that I had the fill in sheet so folks could get the real experience, because as Dan Zack mentions, people’s reactions are visceral when it comes to issues of density:

Yes we can

I always find that endorsement pieces tend to be the most difficult posts to write.   Not because I don’t know how I intend to vote, because often times I am reluctant to tell other people how to vote.

Personally, I have already voted yes on Measure B, and while I am hopeful that the result will be in Measure B’s favor, I’ve already resigned myself to the inevitability that it will go down in a massive blaze of glory.

But it’s not because the development isn’t good or that the land plan isn’t solid, it’s because SunCal allowed the debate to be about the Development Agreement instead of what is really important: the vision for Alameda Point.