pages: CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf, 29
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 29 | Mr. Faye stated that SunCal came to tonight's meeting in good faith and is trying to create positives; the ENA term runs through July; SunCal's intent is to move forward in a positive, transparent manner; SunCal has entered into a project labor agreement with organized labor; SunCal had hoped to use the tolling period to continue to expand the outreach of support; SunCal is prepared to lift the confidentiality under the ENA and believes that transparency is a good idea; SunCal will submit the OEA on time and will send a letter of reservation with the application; the deadline will be met; that he withdraws the request for the 60-day tolling period because Council wants to review the plan; SunCal has spent over $100,000 in order to meet the deadline to submit a meaningful application; SunCal had hoped to submit the application without a reservation letter; SunCal looks forward to a completely transparent process Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired when transparency would start and what type of documents would be released. Mr. Faye responded confidentiality provisions would be lifted immediately; stated the only exception would be business terms between SunCal and D. E. Shaw, which are proprietary and SunCal's underwriting, which is proprietary; all information going into creating the project performa would be transparent. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated residents had many questions regarding the financials and whether or not things would pencil out; that she would like to start with releasing the financials so that the public can pour through information and draw conclusions. Mr. Faye stated SunCal is committed to the transparent process; SunCal loaned an underwriter to the City for stress models; SunCal has nothing to hide; the information flow was imperfect; that he withdraws the request for the 60-day tolling period so that no action is needed tonight; the Council/Board Members/Commissioners should meet with SunCal as soon as OEA corrections are submitted; SunCal has rebuilt part of its team; the new partners in labor are going to surprise the Council/Board Members/Commissioners. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated a year ago, SunCal started going down a contentious avenue and moved on to a situation where the election was deferred; the election could have occurred in November of last year; the City has been in the [ENA] agreement for three years; the initiative was very trying and became a campaign with a different approach; when SunCal lost its financial partner, the Council/Board Members/Commissioners extended the agreement for eight months; another extension was given for the initiative; the process has been prolonged; an 85% [voters against initiative] outcome is unknown in preceding elections; that he commends SunCal for the effort to make nice with the union; SunCal has not talked with Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and 4 Community Improvement Commission March 16, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |