Adoption of Resolution Supporting a Conveyance of the Surplus Federal Property on McKay Avenue for Park and Open-Space Purposes and Approve the Work Plan pursuant to City Council’s Direction on January 21, 2015. (City Manager 2110)
We have a staff report. We do have speakers. I appreciate the speakers at this point. Sure. All right. The speakers will be Richard Banker, Irene Dieter, Doug Seiden. And then Gretchen LeBeau. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the city council, city staff for bringing this forward. I'd like to take my 3 minutes to just get in my digs against the GSA. I hope at the end of this process, we not only have expansion of a regional park, but an expansion of oversight over a federal agency, and possibly the ending of a loophole which not even the Pentagon has a loophole in federal land disposal that allowed the GSA to arbitrarily bypass the normal public benefit conveyance option and go straight to an auction. Not even the Pentagon could do that, as the Pentagon never said anything about recovering relocation costs for moving their military base. No, they haven't. But of course, the GSA wants to recover the, quote, relocation costs for moving the Department of Agribusiness down the street from offices they weren't using. And they spent $3 million doing that. And now they won't even tell the public how they spent that $3 million. But in the Freedom of Information Act, request and see if you get the file. They won't release it. I can tell you what they spent part of the money on. They put in a new parking lot. You can see it. But what did they spend the rest of the money on? We don't know. We don't know. Maybe the Department of Agribusiness saw an opportunity here to include some new equipment in this reshuffle. Outside the congressional. Budget authorization process. And maybe that's what they want to keep secret. We don't know. And now inexplicably, after this property has been zoned open space with only two possible owners, the federal GSA or the State Department of Parks and Recreation. The GSA is continuing to pursue eminent domain to take Mackay Avenue, which is owned by the State Department of Parks and Recreation, so that they, the GSA, can assume easement rights, that they can then in turn, assign to the state of California Department of Parks and Recreation. Now, I would call that cuckoo. And to quote Judge Judy. When something doesn't make any sense, someone is lying. In this case, I would say someone is hiding something. So I would suggest this. When your liaison committee is listening, I suggest that you liaison with our congressional representative and offer some personal encouragement to look into this. That is, if she's up to it. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, Mayor and council. My name is Irene Deeter, and tonight I speak on behalf of the Sierra Club. We urge you to support this resolution. And thank you for bringing it forward. By doing so, you'll not only join the Sierra Club in actively opposing the federal government's eminent domain action and working to secure the highest and best use for the property. You will also join the California League of Conservation Voters, the California State Park Foundation, Clean Water Action, Citizens for East Bay Parks, the Golden Gate, Audubon Society's Friends of the Alameda Life Refuge. Citizens for a Better Environment. National Parks Conservation Association. Save Mount Diablo. Save the Bay. Not to mention the city's own Rex and Parks Commission, our Regional Park District, the Friends of Crown Beach, and of course, our State Attorney General. This resolution, at long last, would send the right message to the GSA and to our state and federal representative. We urge you to pass this resolution. Thank you. Doug cited. And then it'll be Gretchen Lipo. Wait a minute. Good evening, Mayor. Vice Mayor, council members, city staff. For the record, I'm Doug Satan Florida Direction Regional Park District and I want to thank you for this consideration because I think this carries out the will of the people and that 28 people voted for Proposition WW and it was very specific and included when it became available. The property that we're talking about tonight across the Crab Cove or part of Crown Park, and then you and your colleagues on the council previously approved setting that aside that the citizens petition so you set it aside is open space but is threatened now. And let me if you have seen the from the GSA dated January 15 of this year saying that the property is available and then they go on to tell you the things that if you are a federal agency and they're required to make it known, other federal agencies, they could be my translation. I'll call it a junkyard, a storage area, a place to put down construction equipment, a youth detention facility. Of not saying anything about me staying at a spoke as open space. So I want to show you the smoke, the choking point and what I think we need to do. Thank you. Okay. Looking at the K Street coming down and then the state, the Crown Beach, part of the state park and then the GSA property where they propose saying the federal agency, you could do all these things where they don't tell them is you can't get there. Now, I don't know if you're a realtor in town and you try to sell property and you didn't tell them you couldn't get there. I think you were in trouble with the federal agencies doing that. But what they say at the checking court talking point is, well, the GSA will get the federal government to sue the state of California so that we can get to that piece of property. And this is where I think we need to be together to say to to Congresswoman Lee, to our senators of the city and the park district are together. And you heard the support of the previous speaker that this maintain is that they stop this lawsuit using our tax money in order to get to that piece of property. So I would encourage the adoption of this proposed resolution. Thank you. Thank you. Council members. Mayor, staff. The word Crab Cove, I can tell you, resonates. With everybody now. It's a magic word. And so I speak. You heard the background and you heard Irene, dear, talk about all the organizations that support this. Well, I'm talking about all the people in. Alameda that signed the. Petitions. And when you say. Crab Cove, basically Crab Cove, I mean, grandparents go back to Crab Cove. All kinds of activities have taken place in this area. This spot is sacred with the citizens of Alameda. So I'm here to cheerlead this issue on and I certainly support this resolution. And I hope you get in there. Fight for Crab Cove. Thank you. Thank you. She was our last speaker on that item. Staff, do you have did you want to make any comments? Now, this this resolution was drafted with the assistance of the staff. From the East Bay Regional Park District and then worked over a little by our staff. They're fine. We just made a couple of tweaks to it so that it worked within our our formatting. And this is basically what they've asked for and this is what we're presenting to the Council tonight. Thank you. Yes. I'm proud of you. Thank you. And thank you to all the speakers who spoke and good staff report. And I just want to say that since this item was last introduced and I certainly expressed my concern and opposition and yes, stemming largely from my feelings about entities who sue our city and the six figure legal bills that we have as a result. However, I've had a chance to rethink the issue. At the time I said that I didn't think that a large public agency like the East Bay Regional Parks District should need the. The city's, ah, little city's help in its dealings with the Federal Government. But after speaking, thinking more about this, speaking to our East Bay Regional Parks District Representative Doug Seiden, and trying to look at the issue from the park district's perspective, I realized that the Park District does need our help, the city of Alameda, because as the Board of East Bay Regional Parks District was told, the objective of the lawsuit that it brought against the city was to acquire the Crab Cove property. But that didn't happen. The lawsuit has been settled. Fortunately, the city, as it was noted, has enacted the ordinance to rezone the property open space, and yet it still is not in the hands of the Park District. So now the Park District has to pursue other avenues. And and I understand that. And I will say that there does seem to be some hard feelings, to say the least, between the Park District and GSA. I'm not a party to those transactions, and I'm not going to begin to speculate. I'm also not sure how much the city can do to help the Park District and the federal government mend fences between them. But a statement of support from the city and as outlined in this this staff report, certainly can't hurt and it just might help. And I so I said that in my notes that I will support taking the high road in this case. I think that's what the city's doing. We can say, okay, let's put the past behind us. I think what the Park District does best is run parks. It's negotiating with other parties. Might might not be as great as stellar as its operation of parks. But we would like them to get back to the business of running parks. And certainly the city of Alameda would benefit from that property at Crab Crab Cove being in the hands of the Park District. So there's a change of position on my part. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Any other council member comments like madam? I just want to say briefly, I think it's important for for all of us here on council and also our city staff to basically roll up our sleeves and join with the Park East Bay Regional Parks and the people of Alameda and the other nonprofits and community based organizations who want to see Crab Cove be what everyone so desires. So, you know, there's a lot of tough work ahead of us, but, you know, we've got to roll up our sleeves and get going. As one echoed Councilmember De Sung said. And then just add to it a thanks to the vice mayor for bringing this forward. We talked about this all last fall, how it's important that we're all on the same page. So the city and the East Bay Regional Parties took fighting on the same side. I just want to thank the city manager or negotiating and putting together this resolution and as he always does, the most professional of ways. And I'm ready to support this, and I'm glad that we're taking this step as a city. I just want to acknowledge the mayor's role in working through this with both parties. I also wanted to ask whether it would be appropriate at this time to have the city clerk give a brief report. Because at the time of the time I wrote this report, the city clerk was researching the matter of whether there had been a liaison committee in the past, and I let her tell you what she found. I did find that the city council and the Park District held several joint meetings together in the eighties long ago. And there was discussion, other discussions in the moment about the council referring to meetings between the city manager and the mayor meeting with ECB Regional Park District. But there was never the formation of a subcommittee that actually met and had an ongoing relationship, so I could not find anything that supported. That in the. Record. And if I may, Madam Mayor, and therefore, I think it's important at this time to get instruction, to get confirmation or other instruction from the council about the proposal, from the staff in number three, which is. And it's the report says, you know, with council's concurrence, we would propose to speed the creation of a liaison committee with two members from each board to meet quarterly. The other alternative would be to have a joint meeting of the two boards. I don't recommend that their joint board meetings are unwieldy and difficult and usually don't get a whole lot of work done. But that is a potential option, given there was a clear desire at the time this referral came forward to look at the historic relationship. And the historic relationship going back 30 years is that they did meet jointly. Again, it's not the staff's recommendation or recommendation is two from each body and meeting quarterly, and we would propose that to the regional park district this week. So yes. Vice Mayor Yeah, I, I think that the formation of a liaison committee was clear in the referral. It's a method that's been used with the school district here. It's been a method that's been used with AC Transit District to much success. And those the members of that liaison committee would bring the recommendations jointly worked out in in those meetings to the respective bodies for action. And my question is, let's let's get started on this and let's do it now. I'm as is of the essence, I think. And we also part of this of this referral was to help rebuild a good working relationship between the city and the park district, because this is not the only project out there, $6.5 million of East Bay Regional Park money slated for Alameda Point. And I think a liaison committee would be very helpful in sifting through the pieces and bringing a recommendation to the respective boards on how to move forward on spending that money. So I'm in favor of getting this resolution on the board. I agree with the city manager. That joint meeting of the two boards, the council and the East Bay Regional Parks Board is difficult to schedule and unwieldy. And the liaison committee is the shortest distance between two points. Okay. If that's the will of the council, the. If possible, I'd like to address the adopt the resolution first of those one motion and then the second motion as to the liaison committee. Madam Chair, I'd like to move stats recommendation as to the resolution. Second. And then comments. So I'd like to share. I want to thank Robert Doyle, who is the general manager of East Bay Parks, as well as our board member, Doug Seiden, for their continual good work to protect our parks and and offer Crab Cove to our community. And as a school board member, when I was on the school board and worked with these gentlemen and the Park District to bring a resolution in front of the school district, and I'm very proud to have been able to work with East Bay Parks again, to be part of bringing this to our city to to approve. And I agree and I appreciate member Ashcraft stepping up on this and her explanation. She's absolutely right. It is imperative that the East Bay parks have a resolution like this so then they can do their work and have the best possibility of being successful. So thank you very much. And again, so I also want to thank staff for their work on this. So keeping having that stated all those in favor. I oppose motion the resolution as approved unanimously. Thank you. And now in regards to the liaison committee. To make a motion to establish a liaison committee as stated two members from each board and make that overture to East Bay Regional Parks to be seated at the earliest possible convenience. Second. And so I have a question. Would we select members at a future meeting or do we do that at this point? But to come back? Protocol would be you have to wait for them to formally accept. You can bring it back at another meeting. Thank you. It's it'll. You could bring it back. I mean, you could even put it on the agenda. I don't think it requires a report, a written report. You could put it on the agenda for the March three, the March three meeting. And then go into, you know, go and do that as you choose. But that's up to you. And I don't buy most. How you do that is up to you. Not if you. Want to amend your motion by saying it. Well, Matt. Yeah, I was just going to make the suggestion that perhaps because it seems like it's been sufficiently publicly noticed, perhaps the council could actually decide who are two committee members would be. And then certainly pending acceptance of our offer to the the acceptance of the park district's reciprocal agreement, this could then come back perhaps just on the consent calendar for approval. I'm going to defer to the city attorney. I just want to be sure, because there's not an item that says appointment of I just don't want to run afoul of sunshine and it's not going to change how quickly you would be able to get a meeting. Sure. Because we're going to be speaking with them about a meeting date. So this week. So, I mean, not the meeting this week, but we'll be talking with them this week. If we could put it on. And as John was. Speaking, I was reading the heading to see how it was noticed. And I agree, I don't think it's sufficiently noticed to be able to take that action. It was mentioned in the staff report, but I think it's safer to wait. Thank you. The next. Meeting. But we could express an interest in being part of that liaison committee today. So I. Think. Does it matter to Wade? However, Council is a first of all, let's get a motion. Would you like to amend your motion? I'll amend the motion to add that follow the city manager suggestion to attendees. This item for the March 3rd meeting. And until second. And now for a conversation. Any comments? Yes. So I'm Madam City attorney. Acting city attorney. So on the title of the the staff report here. So it's adoption of a resolution supporting a conveyance of the surplus federal property on McKay Avenue. We've done that and approved the work plan. Pursuant to City Council's directions. So the work plan, is it not these four specific actions under discussion. What is the work plan that we're discussing? Well, if I may just I understood the workplan to be the four items that are under discussion. The only issue is whether somebody's looking at the agenda with no one appointment. What's happening? So, I mean, the council the council can take the decision it wants to take, but. Why not cross your ts would be my advice. And there are four points that are specified on staff's report. And it says number three is establish a council, East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee. It does not include language and appoint members. And I think that's the issue being raised. Up to the body. It's. That's fine. It's not that I'm over the anxious that we have to do it tonight. It's just that we sent. We tend to have a lot of agenda items coming back to us. And I was just thinking, if your economy is fine, but maybe it's time to stop discussing this one and move on. Thank you. Perhaps we could bring it back as a consent calendar item as John. All right, so do we. If we want to discuss who would be on, we don't have to vote on that tonight. You want to have the discussion and then it could come back on consent, if that's the council's desire. Were you to bring it back on consent, then you'd have to have the names, which means you'd have to discuss it tonight. Which means it doesn't talk about appointment here. I would. I think you should just have it as a regular agenda item at your next meeting so you can decide. Then going back to appointments. Going back to the motion. The motion is to set up the liaison committee and to agenda is on the third. After hearing back from East Bay regional parks that they're agreeing to it and to sit the committee. Right. Thank you. Remember Ashcroft. Isn't it broader than that? Because it proves the work plan would be all four of those items, right. Or is that just assumed in proving this? We're asking for you to approve the work plan. I mean, just. Okay. Yeah. You approve the work plan is the appointment that I'm advising you not to actually do. Yeah. Okay. And you can't do it by consent. Or you would have almost certainly violated the Brown Act by having a chain meeting to decide whose name was going to be in there to consent to. So you don't want to do that either. Thank you. I'm going to call the question. All those in favor. I oppose none. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Now we're on item six be. Introduction of ordinance, approving and authorizing the city manager to execute documents necessary to implement the terms of the lease with complete coach works. The California Corporation for a lease for two years and nine months and a portion of building 24 located at 2301 Monarch Street at Alameda Point.