Like Sergeant Joe Friday of Dragnet fame, we just want the facts. And we’d like the facts to be the basis of voters’ decisions in February. Unfortunately, there are a lot of claims out there that simply are not true. Here are a few facts on some key topics:
Fiscal Neutrality: It is required by City ordinance that this project achieve “fiscal neutrality,” which protects the City and limits any exposure to costs and provides additional revenue to the City’s general fund. This requirement is part of the Specific Plan. The project area will be taxed to produce the necessary funding so the City will not have to provide the funds. In other words, the project must pay its own way. Additionally, the developer is required to make up for any shortfall that may occur.
Impact Fees: Alameda Point is within a redevelopment project area; such special districts typically engage in public-private partnerships to achieve revitalization. Often within a redevelopment area, the developer provides infrastructure or other public benefits in lieu of paying impact fees. Such waivers are not new in Alameda. Harbor Bay Isle has long been exempt from all future impact fees; more recently, Alameda waived impact fees for Alameda Landing. Both projects belong to other developers.
Binding Agreement: ARRA, the City’s redevelopment agency, and the developer will enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) that will address specific business points about which the City has expressed concern. The DDA will be a legally binding document as specified by the ENA. The Initiative is essentially a land-use document. Nothing prohibits the City from imposing additional requirements on the Project through the DDA.
Project Control: The developer will not have absolute control of the project as some claim, as it will remain subject to the legal authority of ARRA and the City, including all applicable subdivision laws and the many controls preserved for the City in the Specific Plan, including subdivision map act approval, pattern book approval and financial plan approval. The project is also required by City law to pay for itself and must achieve fiscal neutrality; in other words, it cannot be a financial burden on the city.
Schools: SunCal and the School District have been holding discussions regarding educational planning. The Specific Plan has addressed the basic framework for the community but allows for flexibility in number, size, location and phasing of schools. Refinement has always been anticipated once more detailed school planning occurs. It is not the intent of the Initiative to address the project’s impact on the School District; however, it does set forth the requirement for a CEQA analysis. Nothing in the Initiative waives the obligation of the developer to pay state mandated school fees. The Initiative in fact proposes to exceed this obligation by constructing schools on the property.
Public Benefits: The developer will provide 145 acres of parks and open space, build recreational and sports facilities, improve public access to water, and create bayside walking and biking trails. The developer agrees with the City on standards and specifications to ensure the public benefits are constructed, and this will be addressed within the DDA. These points will include providing more detailed specifications for the public benefits and a means of addressing rising future costs and cost overruns so that the City and its residents can be further assured about the public benefits to be delivered.
