Blogging Bayport Alameda

February 13, 2015

If at first you don’t succeed

Filed under: Alameda, City Council — Lauren Do @ 6:03 am

The City Council’s agenda next Tuesday has some interesting items on agenda. The first is an agenda item based on one of Frank Matarrese’s referrals.  The staff, based on direction from the City Council via this referral put together a resolution that enumerated what Frank Mattarrese had asked for which included a resolution that, essentially, was well, here’s now City Staff put it in their Staff Report:

Attached to this report is a draft Resolution “Supporting a Conveyance of the Surplus Federal Property on McKay Avenue for Park and Open Space Purposes.”  This draft Resolution, which was prepared with the help of EBRPD staff through its direct discussions with Mayor Spencer, will be sent to the General Services Administration, assuming that Council approves this action tonight.

Additionally the City will establish a liaison committee and ask the City’s paid lobbyists to include talking up Crab Cove to our legislators.  So, next time those lobbying contracts come up for approval, I hope folks will remember that part of their job will be to chat up legislators on both the federal and state level on this issue that some people find to be very important.

Anyway, I heard, but it’s not yet available, that the GSA has put the Neptune Pointe property back up for auction.  So will this resolution from the City which:

urges the United States General Services Administration to negotiate a low or no cost sale to the Park District or the State of California

Do anything to sway the GSA to hand over this property they have valued at around $3 some odd million?  Doubt it.

Someone mentioned somewhere that the GSA was suggestion a “detention center” as a possible usage.  I have to see that to believe it, but I would probably file that usage under something that Alamedans would probably not prefer to housing.


  1. GSA is bound by law, and they’ve already lawfully put the property on the open market to sell to the highest bidder.

    Comment by jack — February 14, 2015 @ 6:27 pm

  2. A public benefit conveyance is the conventional process, Lauren, it’s not something odd and unheard of. In fact, it’s the attempt to profit from this property that’s odd and unheard of. The park district is prepared to pay for the property anyway, since of course they have the money from Measure WW, something that’s been referenced here several times over. I’m not sure whose viewpoint you’re representing at this point, I don’t know of anyone who’s inclined to sympathize with the GSA.

    Public Benefit Conveyance Legislation

    After it is determined that excess real property is no longer needed by the Federal government, various statutes authorize conveyance to state and local governments and in some cases, to nonprofits *at up to 100% discount for public benefit use*. Some of the qualifying uses include public health, homeless assistance, education, park and recreation, correctional, law enforcement, emergency management, among others.

    Comment by Darcy Morrison — February 17, 2015 @ 8:53 pm

  3. Thanks Darcy, I had heard about the auction from someone who had been relayed the information from someone else. The first person made it sound like the GSA was just launching into the auction portion of the sale, but if they’re going through the disposal through government agencies first, well then detention center is totally a possible use.

    Comment by Lauren Do — February 18, 2015 @ 5:49 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at