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.

Should SunCal choose to pursue again its redevelopment plans for Alameda Point, the company this time must pursue that redevelopment through standard City Hall channels.

So, yes, we still have a lot of work ahead. But, it’s critical that we continue to show patience and calm in order to get this project right before a single shovel of dirt is moved.

As I prepare to consider any future SunCal proposal, I will expect the package to:

* Not put the City at financial risk in any way. Period.
* Fit seamlessly with the rest of the city and to not adversely impact our high quality of life.
* Include an iron-clad project labor agreement that puts local trade- and craftspeople back to work.
* Accommodate the Veterans Administration in its efforts to site a medical facility and Memorial Columbarium at Alameda Point.
* Support the city’s efforts to build a clean and diverse business base at Alameda Point and to support the growing specialty food and maritime business sectors that exist there.
* Insure that any redevelopment is done in an environmentally responsible and sustainable manner.”

This was the section that made me pause though:

…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.

Which led me to wonder what it was that Frank Matarrese considered an adverse impact that would make his position differ so distinctly from November when he decided to switch teams.   In response to this email sent out in November, Frank Matarrese responded back clarifying his position as to why he decided to switch to not supporting Measure B:

My decision to withdraw support of the intitiative was based on the collapse of the finances that were supposed to deliver what the initiative promised. We can always debate traffic, Measure A, the discretion of the city government, but the promised benefits and future development was not going to be delivered in light of the instability of TI, the evaporation of “no cost conveyance” and the actual cost of what’s promised in the initiative as public benefits. In short, the City would have been place at unacceptable risk.

In retrospect, this is not surprising as we are still deep in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression – not a good time to be a developer.

To move on the base re-use, I use this term purposefully, we need use a broader direction view which includes:

• A regional effort with SF and Oakland, both of which have struggled with closed Army and Navy properties
• Involving our region’s Congressional clout for a WPA-like effort to address basic infrastructure (stabilizing land, sewers, streets, other utilities) and to provide economic stimulus by investing tax dollars in public assets rather than private companies.
• The land use plan as described is worth adopting in the General Plan

He moves from saying in November that “[t]he land use plan as described is worth adopting in the General Plan” to today when there are elements that need to be rejected.

Now, I’m not suggesting that any City Council member should be an ideologue, but an explanation in the change in messaging would be fairly helpful for those us of trying to figure out what position Frank Matarrese, candidate for Mayor and current City Councilmember, actually is taking on significant issues.    Because as of right now, it appears that Frank Matarrese’s “Frank Listens” tagline means that he listens and changes positions whenever it is politically expedient to do so.

Also it appears that Frank Mattarrse is also making the issue of the Veterans Administration hospital and columbarium one of his top issues when dealing with Alameda Point.    Which is an idea that no one has ever not agreed with.  Way back when SunCal was first shopping around their plan they mentioned that they would welcome the VA as a part of the Alameda Point site and that it would probably be a better fit than the VA attempting to build new infrastructure out on the Wildlife Refuge portion.    Plus the least terns would probably be happier as well.