{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--APRIL 12, 2011--7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. Councilmember deHaan led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and\nMayor Gilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(11-181) Discuss Options Related to the Future Operation of the Chuck Corica Golf\nComplex and Provide Direction to the Acting City Manager on Next Steps.\nMayor Gilmore thanked staff for bringing all options forward; stated in some ways, the\nprocess has been very long and drawn out, but in other ways things are moving quickly.\nBen Blake, Kemper Sports Management, gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Tam stated at the January 25, 2011 presentation, Mr. Blake stated that\nspending $5 million to $5.2 million for a 27-hole configuration would be more prudent\nthan for 36 holes; $7.6 million is a rough estimate for 36 holes; inquired whether $5.8\nmillion would be needed for graduated improvements for 27 holes or 36 holes, to which\nMr. Blake responded 36 holes.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired what has changed.\nMr. Blake responded the original 27-hole proposal was the most fiscally responsible\nway to configure the Golf Course as well as being the most efficient to generate the\nhighest profits; stated the community did not like the idea; as part of a new solution,\nKemper Sports is willing to consider 36 holes.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the January 25th presentation did not focus on the Mif\nAlbright Course.\nMr. Blake stated that Kemper Sports would not be involved in the Mif Albright Course\nand considers the Course to be separate.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether Kemper Sports has looked at the Alameda\nJunior Golf Association (AJGA) term sheet, to which Mr. Blake responded in the\nnegative.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he couldn't calculate how a 27-hole course could\nmake as much money, particularly on weekends; that he is glad Kemper Sports is\nconsidering 36 holes; inquired what Kemper Sports would anticipate for the land use\nSpecial Meeting\n1\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 2, "text": "thereafter.\nMr. Blake responded the land could be converted to field use or go fallow.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Kemper Sports has had any dialogue\nregarding the current or past Harbor Bay Isle Associates (HBIA) proposal.\nMr. Blake responded that he found out about the current initiative via the newspaper;\nstated Kemper Sports has had ongoing dialogue with Harbor Bay throughout the two-\nyear period.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Kemper Sports has been involved in Club\nHouse discussions.\nMr. Blake responded Kemper Sports was involved two years ago; stated drawings still\nexist for the 27 and 36 holes as well as moving the driving range.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether any joint effort is being done now, to which\nMr. Blake responded in the negative.\nSpeakers: Tim Hoppen, Harbor Bay Isle; Peter Holmes, Alameda Soccer Club; Jim\nStrehlow; Alameda; Larry Newman, Alameda; Tony Corica, Alameda; Eva Hom, North\nLoop Business Group; Jane Sullwold, Alameda; Norma Arnerich, Alameda Junior Golf;\nLia Marshall; James D. Leach, Global Perspectives; Jack Boeger, Alameda; Pat Bail,\nAlameda; Ron Salsig; Joe Van Winkle, Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Karen Bey,\nAlameda; Ed Downing, Alameda; Jerry Ghiselli, Alameda; and Alexander Stevens,\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether reconfiguring the south course and\nrepositioning the Mif Albright Course for $6 million makes sense, to which Mr. Blake\nresponded that he would need to know the details.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested clarification on why Kemper Sports changed the\nconfiguration to 36 holes.\nMr. Blake responded a 27-hole course did not fly with the community; stated Kemper\nSports wants to do what is best for the community.\nCouncilmember Johnson inquired whether the issue of not being able to get financing to\nput in more upfront improvements is a Kemper Sports issue or a general golf issue.\nMr. Blake responded a golf issue; stated the golf business has been on a downward\ntrend for a number of years; two years ago, three companies got out of the golf course\nfinancing business.\nCouncilmember Johnson inquired whether anyone has been able to get financing.\nSpecial Meeting\n2\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 3, "text": "David Sams, Golf Consultant, responded the golf business has been on a downward\ntrend since 1999; stated the trend for golf is very stagnant; gross revenue is down\nalmost 45%.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the City's option for getting an influx of cash would be\nthrough some type of bond financing or finding a golf operator who is blessed with cash\nand would be willing to put cash upfront.\nMr. Sams responded having a golf operator invest $5 million in a municipal golf course\nis non-existent; stated golf will come back, but it will be very slow.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated older golf courses need capital improvements; inquired\nhow improvements would be accomplished.\nMr. Sams responded some cities put away money for golf operations; stated the\nmajority of cities are behind; that he does not know how improvements could be\naccomplished.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Mr. Sams is impressed with the Golf Course,\nto which Mr. Sams responded Kemper Sports is doing a very good job.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Mr. Sams sees another way of tackling the\nGolf Course without heavy revenue infusion.\nMr. Sams responded the greens have a lot of deferred maintenance; stated San\nLeandro closed down its golf course and spent $5 million building a new course.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the Golf Course can be competitive now, to\nwhich Mr. Sams responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired what the maximum rounds would be for 18-holes on a\nweekend, to which Mr. Sams responded on a busy summer day, the golf courses could\nhave 350 players per day.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Mr. Sams is aware that said maximum was\nnot met five years ago, to which Mr. Sams responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry, Mr. Sams stated a lot of rounds are\nlost on weekdays; in 1997 and 1998, 200,000 rounds were played on the two golf\ncourses.\nVice Mayor Bonta encouraged Council to support the idea of exploring the HBIA\nproposal further; stated the proposal is cautiously intriguing; tonight, legitimate\nquestions and concerns have been raised; suggested that representatives of different\nstakeholder groups talk through the matter in good faith.\nSpecial Meeting\n3\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 4, "text": "Mayor Gilmore stated that she is intrigued with the HBIA proposal also; she has no idea\nwhether the proposal would work; that she insists on looking at 36-holes; she likes Mr.\nBlake's suggestion to hire a golf course architect; in December, the City set aside\n$100,000 as matching funds for the Mif Albright and Wadsworth Foundation grants;\nthere has to be room for the Mif Albright Course; thresholds need to be discussed; the\nother part of the equation is what would go on the Golf Course land and whether part of\nthe proposal would be to swap out the land for potential all weather fields on North Loop\nRoad; Council needs to know whether the dirt portion of the land could be used; the\nissue cannot be dragged out forever; a timeline needs to be set.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the issue has many complex, moving parts; time is needed\nto understand the HBIA proposal; commitments have been made to the AJGA; the City\nhas been in active negotiations with Kemper Sports; inquired what is the critical\ntimeframe for the City responding to the Wadsworth Foundation.\nMr. Van Winkle responded the Wadsworth Foundation has not provided a specific date\nin which to respond because positive progress has been made; stated the Wadsworth\nFoundation is very pleased that the Acting City Manger negotiated a term sheet.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Mif Albright Course provides opportunities to do\ndifferent things, one being housing; a lot of other hurdles would need to be addressed if\nthere is feasibility; the timeframe could take six months to a year; a new Request for\nProposal (RFP) would need to go out to see if there could be a better deal; the HBIA\nproposal is not new; the proposal has been in the background for a long time; the AJGA\nterm sheet needs to be solidified.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether an RFP would not go out until July because of the\nworkload involved with the budget, to which the Acting City Manager responded her\ntime is dedicated to the budget.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the Acting city Manager could turn her attention to an\nRFP starting in late June or early July, to which the Acting City Manager responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMayor Gilmore inquired what would be the timeline once the RFP is drafted, to which\nthe Acting City Manager responded that the process would take several months to draft,\nissue, and receive responses.\nMayor Gilmore stated that her preference would be to go out with an RFP, have the\nRFP open to everyone, and be a transparent and competitive process; golf is important\nto everyone, but the budget is more important to the City as a whole.\nMayor Johnson stated time should be taken to explore the HBIA proposal; swimmers\nwere not able to finish the water polo season; broader issues need to be addressed;\nmore people should be involved with the process; swim groups should be included.\nSpecial Meeting\n4\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 5, "text": "Mayor Gilmore stated that she has a problem with the \"renovate as you go\" approach\nbecause the process would be slow; renovations would need to be done again within\nten to fifteen years.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the focus should not only be on the HBIA proposal;\nurged Council to visit the Golf Course on a weekend; money should have been set\naside for maintenance; all proposals should be reviewed; the process will be long; the\nproposal to build 104 homes never came to Council because the proposal was rejected\nby the Planning Board; the Planning Board and neighborhood had major concerns;\nquestioned whether placing 104 homes on the Mif Albright Course or another portion of\nthe Golf Course would be a concern; stated other golf courses always have surrounding\nopen space.\nMayor Gilmore stated the Planning Board would have to go through the entire zoning\nand hearing process if homes were considered.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the process could take a year and the golfing\ncommunity would be in dire straits; an RFP could be put together in thirty days,\nresponses would take up to sixty days, and a decision could be made within the\nfollowing thirty days.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated Council has been going down a path to preserve the\nGolf Course for years; the biggest change is that no one has financing for the golf\nindustry.\nMayor Gilmore stated community members advocate for whatever the particular interest\nis at the time; unfortunately, Council has to look out for the best interest of the broader\nCity; due diligence needs to be done for a win-win outcome; everyone wants what is\nbest for the youth.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated Council should go through the exploration process first and\nthen decide on the RFP process; Kemper Sports could be part of the discussion for\ndeveloping the concept going forward.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated some people are disappointed with the Kemper Sports\nproposal, but people are very satisfied with how Kemper Sports runs the Golf Course.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the Kemper Sports proposal was a starting point and\nsubject to negotiations, to which the Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether aspects of the proposal that Council was not wild about\ncould be explored further with Kemper Sports, to which the Acting City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Bonta's inquiry regarding the term sheet, the Acting City\nSpecial Meeting\n5\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 6, "text": "Manager stated Council does not have to make a decision on the term sheet tonight;\ntonight, Council needs to provide direction on whether to go forward with 36 holes.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated AJGA might want to explore tweaking the term sheet; the staff\nreport notes the term sheet requires an operator agreement, which has not been agreed\nupon yet.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the Leased Facilities section of the term sheet\nproposes that the Norma Arnerich Teaching Center and driving range practice stalls\nwould be available for the Alameda Junior Golf Academy, which would be run by the\nnew operator; however, AJGA would need to secure someone to maintain the Mif\nAlbright Course.\nMayor Gilmore stated Council would assume that all interested entities would have a\nvoice.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated bringing the term sheet back after determining\nthe location makes sense.\nVice Mayor Bonta inquired how long it would take to craft a lease after a term sheet is\nagreed upon.\nThe Acting City Manager responded not long; stated Mr. Van Winkle has worked on a\nmodel.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the term sheet would come back for Council discussion\nafter the exploration phase, to which Councilmember Johnson responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how long the exploration phase would be, to which\nMayor Gilmore responded sixty days.\nCouncilmember Tam stated sixty days has been requested.\nVice Mayor Bonta inquired what Council wants as a deliverable.\nMayor Gilmore responded that she would like a staff report regarding what the\nconsensus would be and what the 45 holes would look like in order to have a\nmeaningful, public discussion, and see what the proposed ball fields would look like.\nCouncilmember Tam stated that she would like to have all of tonight's questions\nanswered, in addition to those that have been emailed; she would like to know whether\nstating 14.4 acres can be shoe horned into 8 acres is factual and should be considered\nand how issues regarding the Kemper Sports proposal would dovetail with the Golf\nCourse configuration in terms of the operation.\nSpecial Meeting\n6\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 7, "text": "The Planning Services Manager stated the HBIA proposal will be posted on the\nCommunity Development page of the website; getting to a final decision point and doing\nall of the environmental studies for the Mif Albright Course, Golf Course, and the Village\n6 site would take approximately one year.\nMayor Gilmore suggested that the word \"golf\" be included in the title of the information\nplaced on the website.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to be provided with detailed\ninformation on what HBIA would plan to do with the Golf Course; information received\ntonight is not adequate.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated an interim plan needs to be provided on how the Mif Albright\nCourse would stay open the entire time, and how golf would be interrupted the least\namount of time possible.\nCouncilmember Tam stated it is important to be clear that Council is not making any\ndecisions regarding swapping the Mif Albright Course for the North Loop Road project\nbut is looking at whether the moving parts fit together; there is no commitment to trade\nopen space for development property.\nMayor Gilmore stated open space is very precious to the City because of the limited\namount; the only reason Council is willing to entertain the HBIA proposal is because of\nthe potential, upfront infusion of capital cash and the potential benefit to the rest of the\nAlameda sporting community.\nThe Acting City Manager stated staff would bring the Mif Albright term sheet back to\nCouncil after the 60-day exploration phase of the HBIA proposal; the deliverable that\nCouncil expects to see come out of the exploration phase is the layout of how the South\nCourse plus the new Mif Albright Course would work as well as the athletic facilities;\nCouncil wants a championship golf course on the South Course; environmental\nconstraints, finances, and capital improvements need to be addressed; an interim plan\nneeds to be provided; HBIA, Kemper Sports, the golf community, and other sport\ngroups need to be involved.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated AJGA should be part of the discussion.\nMayor Gilmore stated the workload sounds very ambitious; perhaps an Off Agenda\nReport could be provided; Council could give direction to increase the time line.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the burden would be on HBIA and community\nmembers.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Mif Albright Course property should have a\nresidential appraisal.\nSpecial Meeting\n7\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Gilmore inquired whether an appraisal could be done in sixty days, to which\nCouncilmember deHaan responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated sixty days [to accomplish all Council direction] seems\nvery optimistic.\nMayor Gilmore stated Council wants to light a fire under HBIA; any extended time would\nbe for staff.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the matter has a bearing on the budget; information should\nbe obtained in sufficient form to ensure that it would be reflected in the budget.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated the Kemper Sports portion of the proposal would be taken out\nof the equation if HBIA provides the financing for capital improvements; Council would\nbe able to continue to think about what the proposal would look like if Kemper Sports\nwere present.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the new Kemper Sports proposal includes contributing\n$500,000 upfront for improvements; unfortunately, improvements would be made over\ntime.\n***\nMayor Gilmore called a recess at 10:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:27 p.m.\n***\nBOARD REFERRAL\n(11-182) Golf Commission Report to Council\nSpeakers: Jane Sullwold, Golf Commission; Adam Strue; Joe Van Winkle, Alameda;\nand Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nMayor Gilmore stated the Golf Course is an asset for the entire City; in the past, some\nGolf Course charges were instituted because of shortfalls in the General Fund; Alameda\nMunicipal Power (AMP) has made transfers into the General Fund to support City\nservices, mainly public safety; people want to call 911 and have police or fire show up\nwithin the usual four to six minute time frame; the Acting City Manager has addressed\nsome of the issues in terms of the budget plans going forward.\nThe Acting City Manager stated in late July, 2010, the City adopted the Fiscal Year\n2010-2011 budget and a forecast for Fiscal Year 2011-2012; the Return on Investment\n(ROI) went away in Fiscal Year 2010-2011, the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT)\nzeroed out, and the surcharge continued to be charged for Fiscal Year 2010-2011;\ninitially, she was hoping that the City would have a deal by now and the Golf Complex\nwould be privately leased and managed, which is not the case; Council has requested\nmoving forward with an exploration phase; staff time would still be devoted to the Golf\nSpecial Meeting\n8\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 9, "text": "Complex; eliminating the cost allocation entirely would not be prudent; appropriate\nlevels should be reviewed; a cost allocations study has not been done for a couple of\nyears; said study is on tap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the only anticipated Golf Course charge going forward\nin Fiscal Year 2011-2012 would be some number for cost allocation.\nThe Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated an Internal Service Fund\ntransfer would not make sense; at one time, plans were to write off the $300,000 loan to\nthe Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (AARA); however, the loan will be\npaid back this Fiscal Year.\nVice Mayor Bonta inquired what is being done with the PILOT and surcharge going\nforward.\nThe Acting City Manager responded the forecast for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 zeroed out\nthe PILOT and surcharge, which would continue unless Council directs otherwise.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is\naudited every year; that she does not recall that specific transfers between the Golf\nEnterprise Fund and the General Fund were flagged.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that she does not recall either.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the City has three major Enterprise Funds: Sewer, Golf and\nAMP; the overall budget is approximately $208.6 million; the auditors look very carefully\nregarding how fund transfers; the Golf Course is an asset for the entire City and the Golf\nEnterprise Fund is treated the same as every other Enterprise Fund; money does not\ndisappear just because it moves from fund to fund; that she is not sure whether the\nissue is a problem that she can immediately discern as requiring a solution.\nMayor Gilmore suggested forwarding the Golf Commission report to the City Auditor for\ncomment.\nCouncilmember deHaan suggested that AMP be included also.\nADJOURNMENT\n(11-183) - There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at\n10:48 p.m. in a moment of silence in memory of Jesus Campos, owner of Otaez\nRestaurant\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nSpecial Meeting\n9\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 10, "text": "The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\n10\nAlameda City Council\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-04-12", "page": 11, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA),\nAND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY-APRIL 12, 2011 - -5:30 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 5:30 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners\nBonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor/Chair\nGilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nSpeakers: Jane Sullwold, Alameda; Pat Bail, Alameda; Joe Van Winkle, Alameda.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(11-177 CC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8); Property: 1\nClubhouse Memorial Drive; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Kemper Sports\nUnder negotiation: Price and terms.\n(11-178 CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Gov. Code Section 54957.6); Agency\ndesignated representatives: Mayor Gilmore and Vice Mayor Bonta; Unrepresented\nemployee: City Manager.\n(11-179 CC/11-041 ARRA/11-021 CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing\nLitigation (54956.9); Name of case: SCC Alameda Point, LLC, et al V. City of Alameda\net al, U.S. District Court, case number CV 10-5178.\n(11-180 CC/11-042 ARRA/11-022 CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing\nLitigation (54956.9); Name of case: SCC Alameda Point, LLC. et al V. City of Alameda\net al, Alameda County Superior Court, case number RG 10537988.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Gilmore\nannounced regarding Labor, Council provided direction on salary; regarding CV 10-\n5178, direction was given to the attorneys, regarding RG 10537988, direction was given\nto the attorneys, regarding Property, Council discussed price and terms of payment.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:48\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, CIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and\nRedevelopment Authority, and Community\nImprovement Commission\nApril 12, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-04-12.pdf"}