Welcome to our Alameda Point page! Here you’ll find all the latest news about the development plans for Alameda Point and the initiative being put on the ballot to make it happen. Got tips or suggestions? Send ’em along to email@example.com.
Exploring the future of Alameda Point with up-to-date news stories, documents, analyses and images, put together by community volunteers.
Alameda Point development plan based on community surveys, plus some Point history.
Local advisory committee of initiative supporters.
You can find the text of the Point initiative here and a wealth of related documents, including Point development plans, the city’s exclusive negotiating agreement with SunCal and minutes and agenda documents for Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority meetings.
A city staff-generated report on the potential impacts of SunCal’s ballot initiative.
This is the report that lays out the initiative’s potential traffic impacts.
The Navy’s Alameda Point page. Also check out their announcements page for updates on the cleanup and disposal process.
More environmental documents than you can shake a stick at.
Advocates for choice in housing and economic vitality at Alameda Point.
Historical information and documents on the Point development process.
Official page of local initiative opponents.
Initiative supporters: Alamedans for Alameda Point Revitalization; HOMES; Councilwoman Lena Tam; School Board Trustee Mike McMahon; Greenbelt Alliance
Initiative opponents: Alameda Architectural Preservation Society; Alameda Chamber of Commerce; Mayor Beverly Johnson; Vice Mayor Doug deHaan; Councilman Frank Matarrese; Councilwoman Marie Gilmore; State Assemblyman Sandré Swanson; Alameda County Supervisor Alice Lai-Bitker; School Board Trustee Trish Herrera Spencer; School Board Trustee Tracy Jensen; City Auditor Kevin Kearney; City Treasurer Kevin Kennedy; Protect the Point; Renewed Hope (affordable housing outfit); Alameda Education Association
LATEST ALAMEDA POINT HEADLINES
SunCal has withdrawn its request that the city extend the term of the exclusive negotiating agreement it holds to ink an Alameda Point development deal by two years. The City Council, sitting as the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, had been set to make a decision on that request tonight. City staff recommended the council deny the request.
Some City Council members interviewed in the wake of Measure B’s loss at the polls on February 2 are saying they want a development at Alameda Point that has far fewer homes that developer SunCal was asking voters to approve.
Updated 11:31 a.m. Sunday, February 7
City officials have notified SunCal that the developer is in default of its exclusive agreement to negotiate a development deal at Alameda Point because the plan they submitted doesn’t comply with Measure A.
With all precincts counted, the Alameda County Registrar of Voters is reporting that Measure B has suffered a landslide loss. The Alameda Point development initiative lost 11,947 votes to 2,120 votes, or 84.93 percent to 15.07 percent, according to unofficial final results.
Updated 1:53 p.m. Monday, February 8
Last Tuesday, Measure B took a decisive drubbing at the polls – putting the decisions about what to do with Alameda Point and whether to move forward with SunCal back into the hands of city leaders. SunCal still has an exclusive agreement with the city to negotiate a development deal at the Point, and they have submitted the same plan voters rejected directly to the city for its consideration. Would city leaders try to work out a deal, or walk away?
Hey folks, I just wanted to check in to let you know I’ve secured a copy of the letter the city got with SunCal’s alternate development plan last week. (The city’s not releasing the rest of it right now; long story.) Anyway, I’ve scarcely had the time to formulate a thought on this but given the fact that we’re all voting on it, I wanted to get it to you ASAP. Enjoy!
In case you missed it, last Friday blogger Lauren Do broke the news that developer SunCal submitted a development plan to the city that could serve as an alternative to the development plan and development agreement local residents are voting on as we speak.
The City Council and School Board got what was, for the council at least, a brief summary of the 288 pages of Measure B 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.
The already crowded field of Measure B opponents has got another player: The unions.
The drama that surrounds Measure B, the February 2 ballot measure that could decide the fate of Alameda Point, is the gift that keeps on giving this holiday season, with Santa leaving the first pair of cranky pants under the tree of a Mr. Barry Fadem.
By Rin Kelly
Over here at The Island, we’ve focused a lot of attention on the polite-but-pointed war of words between developer SunCal and Interim City Manager Ann Marie Gallant over SunCal’s ballot initiative for development of Alameda Point. But while all that was going on, another battle was brewing between SunCal and the school district – one that was only hinted at in the terse letter parents received from Superintendent Kirsten Vital last week saying the parties have so far failed to come to an agreement about what schools need to be built in order to educate the proposed project’s future student residents.
It’s official: In an effort to avoid rampant voter confusion, our local government types have convinced the folks at the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to call SunCal’s Alameda Point development initiative Measure B.
Into the great, screaming yawp that is my overstuffed news hole this week (Or maybe that’s just me screaming?) comes a letter to SunCal from Interim City Manager Ann Marie Gallant, essentially rebutting SunCal’s rebuttal to a city report that lays out the potential impacts of the developer’s ballot initiative for Alameda Point (that’d be Measure A, chuckle, chuckle).
By Rin Kelly
If you don’t already have whiplash from the last few weeks of Alameda Point developments, the next month might just do it: the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce and Asian Health Services are not happy about the SunCal initiative going to the ballot without a completed environmental impact report they say is required under a lawsuit settlement agreement, and they say they may sue.
Lots of little bits of developments on the Point this week. Let’s get started, eh?
Now that developer SunCal has turned in the signatures for their Alameda Point redevelopment initiative, I thought it was high time I followed the suggestion of some of my readers to post an Alameda Point page.
Folks, it has been a crazy couple of weeks on the Alameda Point front. SunCal submitted their ballot signatures, our local Chamber of Commerce submitted their opinion on SunCal’s initiative. An advisory committee made up of of local folks who favor SunCal’s plan was born, and a slew of folks who hate the plan wasted no time in roundly attacking them. And then a local housing advocate opted to spring a “rebranding” contest for the initiative on the unsuspecting owners of three local websites, including this one. (All in good fun, folks. All in good fun.)
A local group that opposes developer SunCal’s redevelopment plan for Alameda Point has convinced more than 500 people to take their names off ballot initiative petitions the developer circulated this past spring.
A while back, I wrote a piece about a park that had been planned for the northwestern tip of Alameda Point but was absent from SunCal’s development plans. A SunCal rep said that one of the reasons they hadn’t made plans for the site was that the Navy was still working out contamination issues there.
Should SunCal’s plan to develop Alameda Point make it on to the ballot, there’s one group of people who may not join the large, dissonant chorus of voices who have put their two (and 10) cents into the mix: Leaseholders out at the former Naval base.
Last week, I wrote a post about campaign expenditures for and against the proposed ballot measure to develop Alameda Point, which got folks talking about the payments developer SunCal makes to help cover the city’s costs for working on the Point development plans.
Last Friday marked the latest filing deadline for campaign finance statements, which this time around included contribution and expense statements from proponents and opponents of a pending ballot measure to develop Alameda Point.
When Richard Bangert first realized that the park he had worked to keep in the development plan for Alameda Point had been taken off the map, his wife told him it must be a typo.
Got a note over the weekend from a tipster who pointed out that the process for transferring a piece of the former Naval Air Station Alameda to the city is finally headed toward completion – a decade after the city asked for the land.
A few weeks ago I did a post on all the debt the city carries, which led to a comment about redevelopment debt and how it works. I asked for more information, because a lot of questions have been raised about how redevelopment debt incurred for the proposed Alameda Point development could impact the city, and frankly, it bothered me that I couldn’t offer good answers.
In place of our regularly scheduled post (sorry – still working on it), I’ll drop a quick note to let you know that the folks behind the newly organized Protect the Point have organized a protest march against the pending Point ballot initiative at 10:30 a.m. Saturday, June 13.
A new political committee has joined the growing list active around the development proposal for Alameda Point. It’s called Protect the Point, and its members are pulling together a host of community groups that oppose the in-the-works ballot measure to develop the former Naval Air Station.
One of the big, important questions folks have been asking, in the runup to the ballot measure for the proposed Alameda Point development, is where the money is going to come from to pay for all of this. Specifically, they want to know what the deal is with D.E. Shaw, the hedge fund/private equity/tech development firm that has pledged to back developer SunCal (at least through the course of its negotiating agreement with the city).
Welcome to The Island’s new ongoing series, On Point, which represents my effort to keep up with all the goings-on at Alameda Point.