Michele Ellson on discussion about Alameda Point development

If you aren’t visiting Michele Ellson’s The Island blog on a regular basis, you should be. She’s issuing daily reports on all things Alameda. Yesterday she posted an editorial comment on the recently-launched campaign by a group called “Save our City! Alameda,” which opposes development at Alameda Point. (You can watch that group’s ad here.) Ellson looked into the facts and figures presented in the spot—you can read what she found here. And, yesterday, she posted this call for reasoned debate about development in Alameda:

Our Island is facing its biggest issue in a generation, the redevelopment of the former Naval Air Station Alameda. The issues around the redevelopment are complex, and the ramifications of any development or lack thereof are huge. We need to critically examine SunCal’s proposal and any viable alternatives, and we need someone who can honestly and respectfully outline any concerns.

What we have instead is Save Our City! Alameda, which launched an all-out assault on the plan this week based on a conflation of facts and outright misinformation, with the offer of a nice-sounding but largely undeveloped idea to turn the site into another Presidio as an alternative to SunCal’s development plan.

You can read Ellson’s whole comment here.


  • http://actionalameda.org/actionalamedanewsblog/2009/01/09/suncal-budget-document-citing-700-million-for-infrastructure-at-alameda-point/ David Howard

    In September of last year, SunCal said it will require $679 million – roughly $700 million – for infrastructure upgrades at Alameda Point. This is from their draft master infrastructure plan. In March 2007, they told the City of Alameda that they would seek redevelopment subsidies (tax-increment financing) to pay for infrastructure. These documents are available on http://www.alameda-point.com and a link to the budget document summary page is under my name.

    The City may claim at this point that they will only pay $200 million in subsidies. Only! But the contract with SunCal won’t be finalized until the middle of 2010 – well AFTER the November 2009 vote. So SunCal is free to go back to the negotiating table after the vote and try to talk the City into the full $700 million. It’s called ‘bait and switch.’

    Sell the project based on $200 million in redevelopment funds, get the measure passed, then finalize the agreement around $700 million. Bait and switch just like Measure P – “Protect Vital Services” but reserve none of the new funds for vital services.

  • http://www.laurendo.com Lauren Do

    Hi Eve:

    I really enjoyed Michele E.’s editorial on her site, I think that the ARRA meeting the other night, with the exception of a very small number of people, did just what Michele E. was calling for. Disagreeing, but doing it respectfully, which is very effective. However, there is still a very long process and road ahead and I hope that folks will continue to comment and critique the project, but in a way that enhances the dialogue.