Alamedans for Climate Protection

The group Alamedans for Climate Protection (you knew we had one right?  right?) asked all the candidates to submit answers to three questions regarding Alameda and environmental issues.  It’s a shame that not all the candidates submitted answers. (*cough* Beverly Johnson *cough* Kenneth Kahn *cough*)   But it makes for interesting reading nonetheless.  Here are the answers in their unedited format, because to take away from some of the deliciously, um, how to put this nicely…inane answers would be a travesty.  And also because many of the candidates had very thoughtful answers.  

The questions:

1. What government decisions would you unequivocally support during a coming term in office, in order to protect our climate, reduce global warming and mitigate risks from the forecast rising of global sea levels?
2. What measures will ensure that Alameda achieves sustainable development while the city adds housing, commerce, and jobs?
3. How can elected officials interact with and lead our city’s residents and businesses to use energy more efficiently and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution?

The answers:

Doug deHaan

1. I strongly continue to support the efforts to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, and enhance urban sustainability. The Kyoto Protocol agreement is only the initial step in bringing the worlds gas emissions under control.
2. The Cities for Climate Protection (CPC) task group will establish, implement, monitor, and evaluate the developed International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) initiatives. We must incorporate green building technologies and make it a stronger segment within our building codes. Expand the use of recycled water that is mandated in new developments into our entire city operations. We must better understand the ramification of noise and dust pollution and act accordingly.
3. The Council has recently increased the city’s commitments to more environmentally friendly community outreach, awareness and involvement programs. We recently adopted and endorsed the city’s participation in the CCP in support of ICLEI and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV’S) with a soft order for electric vehicles. We established the new City of Alameda Climate Protection Campaign CPC Task Force in support of the CCP campaign, coupled with our very successful Alameda County Industries (ACI) waste management recycle program, and our own city’s Planet Alameda environmental activities. Our city is a leader in meeting the County of Alameda’s voter approved Measure D in diverting 75% of all solid waste (garbage) from landfills by 2010. We have already reached a 60% recycling factor.I was instrumental in having Calstart, an advance technology transportation incubator located at Alameda Point. This was the initial headquarters for upstart companies that were developing new transportation technology, which included electric vehicle prototyping. In complimenting our commitment of the benefits of electric vehicles and electric power generation, in 1998 the city declared itself as “Alameda Electric City.” We must reestablish this commitment and encourage electric vehicle or like industry R&D activity at Alameda Point.Alameda has the benefit of owning and operating the city’s electric utilities, Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T). This has given our community a unique opportunity to develop our electric sources.

Eugenie Thomson

We can turn Alameda around for more open government and community driven development

We can stop developments when we believe the quality of life for current residents will degragde

As a community we can establish simple measurable criteria, that can be used to say we have gone too far.

Two such measures are the travel time delays leaving our island and/or traffic volumes on our neighborhood streets. When those criteria are exceeded, we can limit development to a handful of new units each year.

So immediately after I am elected, I pledge to propose the Island Traffic Plan that includes these traffic limiting measures like the above as well as improvement projects. And that will be developed in open session and driven by the community!!!

Lena Tam

1. As the water resources planning manager for East Bay MUD, one of my many responsibilities include tracking policies and reviewing legislation that helps protect our climate because of the impacts on future water supply reliability from global warming. I understand that transportation sources are by far the largest contributor of Green House Gas (GHG) emissions. I would unequivocally support decisions on the City Council that helps reduce CHG through some of the following options:
   Working with the Port of Oakland to reduce freight-sector emissions across the Estuary, and capping air emissions at Oakland Airport
   Increasing availability and use of alternative fuels, such as bio-fuels, wind, solar
   Reducing vehicle miles traveled by City vehicles
   Improving vehicle efficiency by converting fleet cars to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles or other cost-effective energy efficient alternatives.
   Expanding use of rail and public transportation, particularly water transit, cross-island shuttle to BART.
2. The City of Alameda faces a unique opportunity to plan and incorporate the best management practices of sustainable development with the plans for Alameda Point that is in keeping with regional “carrying capacity.” I support plans that encourage live/work opportunities as a way to reduce traffic impacts of housing, commerce and job. This means providing affordable housing opportunities close to work. To encourage public transit and reduce single occupancy vehicle traffic, we need to have compactness in development of neighborhoods, retail and commercial projects. When I served as a Planning Commissioner for Alameda County, our commission was in instrumental in working with the community to develop and enforcing land use policies and programs for Alameda County that respect these land use principles towards sustainable development. Under my leadership, the County certified its Housing Element providing adequate workforce housing, preserving open space and historic landmarks. It is important to incorporate my past experience in making land use decisions in the City of Alameda. While our City needs more workforce housing we must equally work to promote job creation and commerce so that our community can spend its tax dollars in Alameda and reduce vehicular traffic on already congested freeways like I-880.. Understanding that traffic is an issue with any new development we must work collectively to promote the usage of mass transit and creating walkable communities. 
3. As a city with its own electric utility, Alameda has and can continue to set the example for its residents by relying less on energy sources that produce greenhouse gas emissions. First we must work together to educate everyone on the importance of using energy more efficiently and reducing greenhouse gas emissions and pollution. We also need to work with other government jurisdictions to develop more programs and incentives toward energy efficiency, employing the best in new technology for insulation, power consumption reduction, and use of recycled building materials.

Pat Bail

1. Greenhouse emissions are one of the most important aspects of global warming. When it becomes time to replace them, I would support ALL city vehicles being electric. I also believe we should lobby Bart for more shuttles (electric) that could pick up passengers at existing bus stops.I would encourage waste management, during our next contractual period, to avoid three different diesel garbage trucks picking up green, recycling plastic, and regular waste. We also need to further explore solar energy production as well as wind generation as sustainable sources.
2. I believe support of Measure A, the low density Charter Amendment, allows us the ability to control growth in a reasonable and sustainable way. The lead issue of high-density housing is the amount of traffic it produces. All of our bridges and the tube are currently at capacity or near capacity. If we continue with unabated development, the currently 4,000 new homes planned, and Oakland develops to the level they are planning, it will become almost impossible to use current roadways to move traffic. Big box stores located in areas of the city that produce cross-town traffic are a bad idea.
3. We should have incentives that encourage both residents and businesses to change their energy consuming habits. I believe I covered some of my other positions in item 1. To round out my overall concerns, we need stable and long-range plans for population growth and traffic control.

Mike Rich

1. I support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging and creating incentives for alternative fuels/energies/technologies, as well as alternatives to driving a car. Specifically, I would propose that the City of Alameda begin a program to provide alternative fueling facilities at Alameda Power and Telecom, including compressed natural gas, hydrogen, bio-diesel and electric recharging plug-ins. By providing a range of alternative fueling capacity on the island, we can encourage use of alternative fuel vehicles in Alameda, including expanded use of those vehicles in the City fleet. Alternative fueling capacity on the island would also provide a service to those Alamedans who currently use alternative fuel vehicles. I would also propose what I call “residential congestion dues” that would apply to all new residential development in Alameda. This is different than the EcoPass that is currently included as part of the planned Alameda Landing development. The basic idea is that people who bought a residence in a new development in Alameda would be told in advance that, as a condition of residence, they would be subject to “residential congestion dues” that would be applied every time they drove their car through access points into or out of the development. I want to stress that this would not apply to residents who are already living in Alameda in existing developments; applying it to them would not be fair because they did not have forewarning before they bought their home in Alameda. [He provided additional details about answering some residential congestion issues, including compliance.] . . . . It could: 1) mitigate congestion resulting from new residential development by creating a true and ongoing incentive to use public transit; 2) provide an ongoing revenue stream that could be used to fund transit improvements in Alameda, including bike lanes, pedestrian amenities, and low-emission alternatives to AC Transit buses, such as smaller electric or hybrid shuttles; 3) mitigate the traffic impacts of any density housing that was included in new developments; 4) improve air quality in Alameda by reducing the number of vehicle trips.
2. To achieve sustainable development we must ensure that the citizens of Alameda have meaningful input into development decisions; this means that the City Council should be responsive and willing to look at creative alternatives when legitimate concerns are raised, and citizens should keep an open mind to other views and a middle
   ground. The focus of all new development should be maintaining or improving our quality of life, keeping in mind that new development should include a mix (residential, business, retail, infrastructure/schools and open space) to mitigate impacts and achieve sustainability.
3. One idea would be for the City to take a greater role in encouraging alternative energy sources such as solar power for new homes and businesses. With all of the planned new development, there is an opportunity to have alternative energy be an integral part of the new development. For example, new development could be required to generate some percentage of its own energy through the use of solar panels. With Alameda Power & Telecom being part of the City, we could look at it as an enterprise opportunity that may have the potential to address our long term energy needs and keep electricity affordable. We should also look closely at energy savings that can be achieved through innovative building methods and materials, including expanded use of green materials and energy-efficient appliances for new residential development.

Frank Matarrese

1. Accelerate the establishment and timeline for seating and activating the Task Force that the City Council mandated. Promote resolutions for policies based on the goals and recommendations of the Task Force.
   Set a priority on obtaining Federal (Corp of Engineers, Home Land Security, etc.) assistance for monitoring and maintaining our shorelines. Just this last winter we had a preview of the future when the storm/high tide combination caused damage to the rip-rap out on Bay Farm Island. We also have other areas of old/inadequate bulkheads for today’s conditions; let alone what the future has in store. Establish city waste/energy reduction standards for our operations
2. build Commercial (other than retail) development, particularly building out Harbor Bay Industrial Park and the spaces identified in the preliminary design concepts for FISC and Alameda Point needs to be given more attention. Having well paying jobs locally takes commute pressure off our freeways as well as reduces commute time (save energy, reduces pollution, etc.).
   Promote additional work/live opportunities under the current city ordinance (again, a good solution for taking a commuter off the streets).
   Look at policies to use in evaluating the building code to incorporate “green” construction practices (the Task Force could work on this with the Planning Commission).Increase ferry service, improve links to BART and Capitol Corridor rail service (electric shuttle) as part of the development of the Point (not after it is developed).
   Work with Oakland to come up with regional traffic mitigations, including increased subsidies for mass transit.
3. The vehicle purchase policy was a first step. Trip reduction and vehicle use policies for city employees are a next step
   Work with AP&T to prioritize upgrades to city facilities to save energy
   Set policy that new city facilities are designed to meet LEED standards (such as was done with the Library)
   Increase the number of public events which focus on energy efficiency and climate damage (currently Earth Day and the Beach Clean Up have such elements, but there are more opportunities)
   Evaluate the best way to embed these activities (to be carried out initially by the Task Force) into to the routine workings of the city, with constant update
   Work with ACI to increase recycling opportunities (such as batteries and electronic waste)

 Ash Jones

1. I would unequivocally support any measures that would protect our planet from further harm caused by all of us . . . Unfortunately the city just decided to purchase 12 vehicles that did not meet “functional requirements” imposed by alternative fuel vehicles. (Opportunity gone.)
2. Sustainable development may be a debatable issue. But purring putting in huge retail stores that generate excessive amounts of fuel and energy to operate and get to is not the way I want to see us grow. The more small stores to support nearby housing will benefit us all.
3. This question is a little vague. As stated in #1, we missed a chance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If we all sat down together to think of other ways to conserve energy, I’m sure we could come up with many.