pages
12 rows where "date" is on date 2008-06-04 sorted by date
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body, page, path
Link | body | date ▼ | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-06-04 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, June 4, 2008 The meeting convened at 7:04 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 7, 2008. 2-B. Approve the First Amendment to the Lease Agreement for St. George Spirits at Alameda Point. 2-C. Approve a Second Amendment to the Agreement with Marc Associates to Extend the Term for Seven Months and Add $45,000 for a Total Budget of $120,000 for Provision of Intergovernmental Relations Services. Vice Chair Tam abstained from Item 2-A (May 7 Minutes) because she was absent from that meeting. Approval of Item 2-A was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 4, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 1. The balance of the Consent Calendar was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Alameda Point Update Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, provided an update focusing on legislation approved by the House, and pending in the Senate, regarding the conveyance of Alameda Point. Staff worked with the Navy to pursue this legislation because they felt it was necessary to streamline the conveyance of the property. Since 1993, there have been lots of barriers and the strategy was to look at an approach that would be as efficient as possible in conveying the property. The legislation outlines three possible options: 1) take the June 2006 negotiated draft term sheet with the Navy and provide a timeframe for allowing SunCal to work with the Navy and ARRA on a Term Sheet that works for them to convey the property; 2) provide a land price formula that SunCal could elect to pursue if they were interested in that land price formula or felt t… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-06-04 | 2 | Member Matarrese requested that staff provide more detailed information under 'budget consideration /fiscal impact', i.e., how much did we spend, did we exceed budget, etc. Ms. Potter explained that all the activities undertaken by staff and consultants to prepare the legislation is an eligible reimbursement activity pursuant to the ENA with SunCal, that all costs are borne by SunCal. Member Matarrese would like to see these details in the staff report. He also asked about the activities SunCal is currently undertaking. Ms. Potter discussed that SunCal is particularly focused on examining sea level rise on Alameda Landing and Alameda Point, fill and geotechnical grading, updating the infrastructure numbers and hoping to have an updated proforma in 2-4 weeks that reflect those numbers. SunCal is also working on scheduling community meetings at the end of July or beginning of August, and on Sept. 19, their Development Concept is due. Member deHaan was hoping for more detail or progress report on each of the myriad activities that SunCal is doing. Ms. Potter explained that staff heard the desire expressed by the Board last month for a detailed progress report. She stated that SunCal will be back next month with a detailed update the Board is looking for. Member deHaan clarified the purpose of the options of the legislation and Ms. Potter affirmed his clarification. Vice Chair Tam asked for clarification on the consent calendar item just approved regarding increasing Marc Associates' budget. Ms. Potter confirmed that Marc Associates is the firm that worked with staff and the Navy on this legislation, and that their entire effort is covered under the contract amount of $120,000. In an effort to understand our coalition partners and how we are stacked in the bill, Vice Chair Tam commented that the Alameda Point legislation Section 2851 is a small piece. Ms. Potter explained that the entire bill is approximately 1000 pages long and Alameda Point is sandwiched between a number of other bases (all branches, not just the N… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-06-04 | 3 | Meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Airan Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-04 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -JUNE 4, 2008 - -7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:22 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA ITEM (08-252 CC/ARRA/08-035 CIC) Authorize the City Manager/Executive Director to execute a Transfer of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SSC Alameda Point LLC to a new entity with D.E. Shaw or a transfer of an ownership interest in the Master Developer entity, SCC Alameda Point LLC to D.E. Shaw, pursuant to specific terms and Conditions. The Assistant City Manager stated SunCal requested that the matter be held over for two week in order to allow representatives from D.E. Shaw to be present to answer questions. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore thanked the consultant for coming through and hitting important points that the City needs to have to protect itself; that she has a problem with eventually approving a document or agreement that she has not seen or read; Councilmembers were elected to make decisions on behalf of the citizens; if she approves the recommendation and things later go south, the citizens are not going to want to hear that she relied on a consultant when she made the decision; essentially, the consultant is framing the discussion about the issues; louncilmembers/Boaro Members/Commissioners might have additional items that the consultant has not flagged or that should be discussed in public; it is really important for louncilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners to be able to see and discuss the Agreement; if SunCal feels strongly about the confidentiality the Agreement could be disclosed in Closed Session; that she would be open to signing a confidentiality agreement; it is really important that the Council/Board/Commission sees underlying documents that she does not want to see SunC… | CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-04 | 2 | had an opportunity to review and discuss the matter before voting; D.E. Shaw is asking to become the City's partner if D.E. Shaw does not trust the Council/Board/Commission to keep the matter confidential, it does not speak well for the beginning of the partnership. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated D.E. Shaw is entering into an agreement with the taxpayers; that he would not be willing to sign a confidentiality agreement ; the matter is in the public realm; the background document should be presented to and discussed in front of the public. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how there could be an open discussion. The Assistant City Manager responded staff has discussed the matter; the confidentiality issues are D.E. Shaw's issues; staff would discuss the matter with D.E. Shaw's management tomorrow; staff has indicated that the issue would be a problem for the Council/Board/Commission D.E. Shaw is relying on a section of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) that allows confidentiality. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that she appreciates the concerns i there is an obligation under Section 10 of the ENA that keeps some of the information between SunCal and D.E. Shaw proprietary; inquired what the Council's/Board' Commission's role was when Catellus merged with Palmtree; stated the venture is a multi-party partnership and is a business relationship; the City changes financing partners when doing tax increment funding or refinancing bonds; the developer has been able to secure a financing partner unlike the prior developer. The Assistant City Manager stated the documents were reviewed when Catellus assigned part of its agreement to Palmtree; the CIC had issues and there were concessions; ARRA approved the Operating Agreement between Alameda Point Community Partners and Morgan Stanley; the financials have always been confidential, but the Operating Agreement generally has not been confidential. The Base Reuse and Community Development Division Manager s… | CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-04 | 3 | Council/Board/Commission the Council/Board/Commission might want to give direction regarding the key issues to allow the negotiation process to be a more efficient. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated said recommendation would be fine as long as it is understood that she would not vote for or against the Operating Agreement until she sees it; the Council/Board/Commission should see the document. The Base Reuse and Community Development Division Manager stated staff understands that the Council/Board/Commission wants to see both the executed Operating Agreement and term sheet and ensure that the key points outlined in the term sheet are carried over into the Operating Agreement; staff's recommendation is that direction only be given regarding the term sheet; the Operating Agreement would have to be entirely consistent with the points raised in the term sheet. The Assistant City Attorney stated that she informed SunCal's Counsel that the ouncil/Board/Commission would want to know all the details; the confidentiality provision of the ENA covers the issue sufficiently; if a third party wants to get a document, it would be on SunCal's shoulders; in the event of a legal dispute about whether or not something is discloseable under the Public Records Act, SunCal would have the burden of taking on the dispute. louncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that he wants to hear from SunCal about progress being made; the term sheet and Operating Agreement should not curtail or slow operations. The Assistant City Manager stated quite a bit of engineering work has been done; money is being spent. Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed consultants. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, 3 and Community Improvement Com… | CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-04 | 4 | Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, 4 and Community Improvement Commission June 4, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-04.pdf |
GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf,1 | GolfCommission | 2008-06-04 | 1 | ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING Wednesday, June 4, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Jane Sullwold called the special meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. at Jim's on the Course Restaurant, Chuck Corica Golf Complex, 1 Clubhouse Memorial Drive, Alameda. 1-A. Roll Call Roll call was taken and members present were: Commissioner Betsy Gammell, Vice Chair Ray Gaul, Commissioner Bill Schmitz, and Chair Jane Sullwold. Absent: Secretary Bill Delaney and Commissioner Jeff Wood. No staff member was present. 4. AGENDA ITEMS: Discussion/Action on a. Golf Complex finances; b. Response to letter of City Auditor Kevin Kearney to Golf Commission dated May 20, 2008; and C. Response to City Council regarding its discussion of Golf Complex finances at Council meeting on May 27, 2008. Chair Sullwold introduced the meeting by giving a report on the events that led up to it. On May 27, 2008, City Council held a special meeting at which the Chuck Corica Golf Complex budget for FY 2008/2009 was discussed. No member of the Golf Commission was present because no one from staff had advised the Commission that the matter would be coming up that evening. Fortunately, however, the meeting was videotaped and could be viewed the next day through the City's website, which all commissioners had done before the meeting. The budget that had been presented by Interim General Manager to the Golf Commission at its meeting on April 16, 2008, was presented to Council on May 27. In general, the proposed budget showed that the Golf Complex was anticipated to have a deficit of approximately $700,000 in the next fiscal year, unless the City agreed to rescind the Surcharge and Return on Investment ("ROI"), in which case the deficit would be reduced to approximately $440,000. Council immediately questioned why the City should be required to "subsidize" a deficit at the Golf Complex out of the General Fund by returning the Surcharge and ROI, and no one from staff pointed out why this was incorrect: that the Complex has actually been subsidizing the Gene… | GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf |
GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf,2 | GolfCommission | 2008-06-04 | 2 | Council that the matter would be referred to the Commission next month, and that the Commission is waiting to see the National Golf Foundation master plan before taking action, which left the impression that the Golf Commission has done nothing to date. Mr. Lillard characterized the policy changes that the Commission has considered as minor, and City Manager Debbie Kurita vehemently asserted that the Commission has focused only on what the City has been taking away, and not on "other things" (unspecified) that have been causing the losses. No mention was made by either Mr. Lillard or Ms. Kurita of the Commission's unsuccessful efforts over the past several months to obtain information from the Finance Department regarding certain expenditures and the accounting treatment thereof, particularly the $400,000 four-year lease for golf carts, which the Finance Department has fully expensed in this fiscal year despite the fact that 3/4ths of the payments will not be due this year. Also, at the Commission meeting on May 21st, Mr. Lillard advised for the first time that the Golf Complex had been charged with $115,063 for expenses related to the Beltline eminent domain litigation in this fiscal year, raising the question of whether expenses that came in and were charged to the Complex after the close of the last fiscal year, charges that caused the Complex to end the year with a deficit of $256,000, were also Beltline expenses that went to the Complex but not to other City departments that did not generate income. Mayor Beverly Johnson ended the Council meeting by stating that she wanted an interim report from the Golf Commission regarding finances and the budget. This meeting was called so that the Golf Commission can finalize a letter to City Council in an effort to correct the misinformation and misperceptions that were conveyed to it by staff in its May 27th meeting, and to correct Council's overall impression that the City is being asked to subsidize golf losses from the general fund. The meeting was also called to fo… | GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf |
GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf,3 | GolfCommission | 2008-06-04 | 3 | Former Golf Commissioner Tony Corica said he found it strange that Council was being asked to accept a budget that called for a deficit, and also strange that no questions were asked about the reasons for the deficit between revenues and expenses. Mr. Corica has been attending Commission meetings since the start of this year, and has seen the Golf Commission take action to increase tournament play, institute aggressive website marketing, increase demo days by golf equipment manufacturers, institute fee changes (reducing Mif Albright rates and increasing Jack Clark rates) to bring golfers back then increase revenues, end complimentary golf, and request an itemization of service expenses charged to the Golf Complex this year. He thinks that all these interventions by the Golf Commission should be mentioned in the letter to Council, even if they are each small individually. Chair Sullwold agreed that these should be included, and Commissioner Betsy Gammell added another item: the renewal of Saturday morning junior golf clinics, which bring 120 children and their parents to the Golf Complex and increase play on the Mif Albright course. Mr. Corica noted that the Commission's letter to Council will probably not change the ultimate decision whether to lease or not to lease, but at least it will show that the Commission has made efforts to change and improve conditions at the Golf Complex so that an intelligent decision can be made. Former Commissioner Norma Arnerich also mentioned the outside company that is willing to prepare scorecards booklets in exchange for allowing advertising. Former Commissioner Bob Wood cautioned that the Golf Commission may be asked by Council for its estimation of what savings or increased revenue could result from the changes the Commission has proposed. Chair Sullwold said that many of these items could be estimated by someone with access to the underlying information, and that staff should be charged with that task. Mrs. Arnerich stated that she found it discourteous that Mr. Lillard had n… | GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf |
GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf,4 | GolfCommission | 2008-06-04 | 4 | Commissioner Bill Delaney met with Finance Director Juelle-Ann Boyer and Mr. Lillard in January regarding Golf Complex finances, he asked specifically if the Golf Commission could be involved in preparing the budget for the next two fiscal years. It is impossible to become involved in the administration of a budget if one has no involvement in the budget preparation process, and the Council charged the Commission with responsibility for the Golf Complex budget at its joint meeting in January 2007. Nevertheless, no one from the Golf Commission was ever invited to become involved with the budget process. Marshal Bill Wehr questioned why the Golf Complex was being asked to fund the Beltline litigation, and whether the costs were being assessed against any other City department. Chair Sullwold said her best guess was that the City had to charge the expense against the few City departments that had cash reserves from which the charges could be paid. Commissioner Schmitz noted that it was the City's prerogative to assess the charges in that way, because in the final analysis it is the City's money, but the City needs to be honest and open about what it is doing, and not take the money away secretly, then complain loudly about the fact that the Golf Complex has a projected loss of $440,000 next year. Chair Sullwold pointed out that it is unreasonable to take away so much money from Golf Complex revenues that an insufficient amount remains to pay what are fixed labor expenses and fixed expenses for necessary services such as tree maintenance that cannot be reduced. George Humphreys asked if the Golf Complex would be reimbursed after successful final resolution of the Beltline litigation. No one knows the answer, but most agreed that it was unlikely. Moreover, no one has ever suggested that the Golf Complex be repaid for the loan of $300,000 it made regarding the preliminary efforts to build another golf course at Alameda Point. For some unknown reason, that loan earns zero interest. George Humphreys noted that the Golf C… | GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf |
GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf,5 | GolfCommission | 2008-06-04 | 5 | Commissioner Schmitz noted that Corsco is going back to the City of Oakland to renegotiate the terms of its lease of the Metropolitan course because business is down. A motion was made by Commissioner Schmitz and seconded by Commissioner Gammell that Chair Sullwold should use her discretion to make minor to moderate revisions to the draft letters to City Council and Auditor Kearney as discussed in the meeting, then get the letters out as soon as possible. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Sullwold noted that, at the meeting on May 27, the Mayor and Councilman deHaan praised Mr. Lillard highly for his efforts since taking over management of the Golf Complex, and criticized prior management, blaming it (without naming names) for the problems being experienced today. Chair Sullwold learned, however, that former General Manager Dana Banke actually had very little to do with preparation of Golf Complex budgets, and that the City's Finance Department refused to allow revenue estimates in the budget to decline, even when it was apparent that play was down. Mr. Corica noted, however, that there was a serious lack of marketing efforts over prior years that contributed to Golf Complex financial problems. Vice Chair Gaul asked whether we could find out where the enterprise fund has gone over the past five years, but it was generally agreed that it was unlikely we will find out precisely how that money was drawn down. Chair Sullwold noted that the NGF Operational Review does not criticize management or blame it for the financial losses the Golf Complex has been suffering, yet Mayor Johnson continues to do so in public meetings. Chair Sullwold also noted that the Golf Complex budget will reflect a payment of $80,000 for Mr. Lillard's salary and benefits next year, representing about 1/3 of his total pay, even though it has been estimated that he spends less than 10% of his time at the Golf Complex during an average week. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned at 7:38 PM. The agenda for the meeting was post… | GolfCommission/2008-06-04.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );