Peralta Trustees, Oakland City Council, Oakland Planning

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Peralta Trustees, Oakland City Council, Oakland Planning Peralta Trustees, Oakland City Council, Oakland Planning Commission, BART Directors, Mayor Libby Schaaf, Alameda County Supervisors, State Representatives, Oakland Coliseum Authority Commissioners, Oakland Athletics Corporation, 902 people have signed a petition on Action Network telling you to Peralta & Oakland Officials: Protect East Lake, Laney, Chinatown & Our Students!. Here is the petition they signed: We, Oaklanders, long-time A’s fans, Laney and Peralta community members, workers, and supporters of maintaining a diverse Oakland, strongly oppose the proposal to build a new A’s Stadium at the Laney Peralta site. We are glad the A’s are committed to staying in Oakland after almost 50 years, and we want home runs for our team, but announcing Peralta as the preferred site on September 12 without conducting any impact studies or meaningfully engaging directly impacted stakeholders, is a strikeout and a loss for the home team. The A’s are proposing to place the stadium in the middle of two vulnerable cultural and historic districts already facing major displacement of small businesses and affordable housing for families - Eastlake and Chinatown. This action will wreak further havoc on these Asian, African, Latino, indigenous, immigrant and refugee, artist, student and low-income neighborhoods. The Peralta location is the least equitable option of the three sites considered. We are dismayed that the A’s are completely disregarding serious and widespread concerns from neighborhood stakeholders who have built up these cultural districts over the last century. To put it simply, this stadium could quickly wipe out one of the most diverse neighborhoods in Oakland and the heart of our Asian immigrant and refugee community. Additionally, placing a ballpark next to Laney College would obstruct the learning environment at the most affordable higher education resource accessible to our low-income students, as well as nearby public schools. A stadium at this small site would create severe noise disturbance (both at the time of construction and during games), traffic congestion, senior and youth pedestrian accidents, air and light pollution, and trash blight. Altogether, this would significantly impact strained school facilities, with crowds streaming through campuses serving sensitive populations such as re-entry, newcomer, and high school students. Stadiums across the country have accelerated displacement, spiked land prices, and decimated cultural districts. Oakland deserves better. There is no amount of mitigation that can stop displacement from a project this huge, and it’s irresponsible for the A’s to make an announcement without real engagement or buy-in when they know that speculators will immediately begin to push-out the existing community. As Oaklanders, we pledge to fight this plan that furthers the displacement that is already making Oakland less diverse, driving out families and closing schools, and diminishing the vibrant neighborhoods that make Oakland an incredible town. We demand that the Oakland A's choose another site, and pledge to boycott A’s games and all Major League Baseball products if the project moves forward at Peralta. We urge Mayor Libby Schaaf not to back down from her publicly stated concern about the Peralta site’s impacts on our small businesses, and to advocate and vote against city approval. We urge our Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners, BART Directors, and State Officials to protect our neighborhoods by not approving land use and planning permits for the Peralta site, and passing immediate legislation to stop current displacement. And we urge our elected Peralta Trustees not to sell off or permanently lease public land for private profit. Now is when we need our public officials to stand up for our neighborhoods, our students, and our working class families. Education, not gentrification! Public land for public good, not private profit! Don’t upROOT Eastlake and Chinatown! #StAyTheRightWay You can view each petition signer and the comments they left you below. Thank you, Stay The Right Way 1. (ZIP code: 94605) 2. M a (ZIP code: 94704) 3. (ZIP code: 94606) This is just a land grab by the real estate developers. 4. (ZIP code: 95687) 5. (ZIP code: 94621) 6. (ZIP code: 94612) 7. (ZIP code: 94607) 8. (ZIP code: 94609) 9. (ZIP code: 94577) 10. (ZIP code: 94703) 11. (ZIP code: 94607) 12. (ZIP code: 94606) I am a resident who lives mere blocks away from Laney. Take it from my neighbors and I-- a stadium in this area DOES NOT MAKE SENSE traffic-wise, parking-wise, or rent-wise. Please pick another location. Do not contribute to the displacement of more poor Oakland residents. The backlash will be huge, we promise. 13. (ZIP code: 94806) 14. (ZIP code: 94606) 15. (ZIP code: 94601) The Peralta location for an A's stadium will have a negative long term impact on Laney and the surrounding communities. Displacement, noise pollution, parking, traffic, and safety are major concerns that will jeopardize the learning environment of Laney College. 16. (ZIP code: 94612) 17. (ZIP code: 94619) I'm an A's fan, former East Lake neighbor, and a 3rd generation Oakland resident with family roots in Deep East Oakland since the early 1960s. I strongly urge the Peralta Board of Trustees, the Oakland Planning Commission, and all City Officials to vote no on the proposed development on public lands. Oakland and its lower income residents of color are already dealing with the sweeping impacts of displacement in favor of development right in their home communities, uprooting generations of people who have called this city home. My deep ties to Oakland, my loyalty to justice, and love of the city will not allow me to support harmful private development all in the name of baseball. 18. (ZIP code: 94606) 19. (ZIP code: 94606) 20. (ZIP code: 94611) 21. (ZIP code: 94610) What Peralta should do with the land is build apartments for students enrolled in Laney and College of Alameda campuses. We are learning institutions, an environment for academic growth. So the needs of our students, some of whom are homeless, must come first. Also, the area does not need more traffic, added noise, displaced elderly and poor people living in the area. NO TO THE A'S - WHO NOW LOOK LIKE BULLIES. 22. (ZIP code: 94577) 23. (ZIP code: 94804) (ZIP code: 94563) 25. (ZIP code: 94606) 26. (ZIP code: 94602) 27. (ZIP code: 94606) 28. (ZIP code: 94607) 29. (ZIP code: 94609) This stadium would create a nightmare situation for a community already fighting for its existence. The A's should rebuild their current stadium, instead of destroying an historic neighborhood and adversely affecting the educations of Laney College students. 30. (ZIP code: 94619) I have seen way too much public money go to professional sports and very little value accruing to the City or its citizens. Enough already! Did we learn nothing from the horrible, and repeated deals/negotiations with the Raiders over the decades??!! 31. (ZIP code: 94619) 32. (ZIP code: 94606) More housing is needed. A stadium will destroy any possibility of housing in the area and will make our neighborhoods have less parking when it's already scarce. 33. (ZIP code: 94610) No matter what is promised, a stadium is only profitable for people who own parking. For the rest of us it's a huge negative impact on our neighborhood. 34. (ZIP code: 05207) Do not sell the land to the A's because our education is not for sale 35. (ZIP code: 94606) 36. (ZIP code: 94602) A survey of registered voters was done earlier this year asking for opinions about this. I'm curious if the results would be made public. 37. (ZIP code: 94606) 38. (ZIP code: 94602) 39. (ZIP code: 94605) It is already very congested in and around Lake Merritt & Laney. Cannot imagine getting off the 5th ave exit ever again if this plan proceeds. Not to mention it is a slap in the face to the East Oakland neighborhood who have been the A's roommates for 50 years. If you are truly #ROOTEDINOAKLAND than you should be rooted in the neighborhood that roots started in. #STAYtheRightWay 40. (ZIP code: 94577) 41. (ZIP code: 94621) 42. (ZIP code: 94606) 43. (ZIP code: 94546) A new stadium at the Peralta CCD offices would adversely affect Janet College and Chinatown. Jack London Square is a much better area, both short-term and long-term. 44. (ZIP code: 94606) 45. (ZIP code: 94618) Please build a new A's stadium at the East Oakland Site. With over 150 acres and great transit and auto access, the A's can develop a new baseball stadium, nearby, play on the old one until the new one is complete; demolish the old one; and build soccer fields plus a mixture of residential and retail on the Coliseum property. A NEW TRANSIT VILLAGE that would be a model for other cities as well as a wonderful asset for Oakland. 46. (ZIP code: 94601) A's stay where you are! Lots of parking and public transportation! 47. An (ZIP code: 94601) (ZIP code: 94619) the current site needs economic development and is MUCH better for the A's ballpark. i had mentioned this fact in the Oakland A's ballpark survey do not disturb the EastLake and Laney neighborhood. And this is just an excuse for the PCCD board to spend education $$ to get a fancier HQ, (ZIP code: 94619) (ZIP code: 94606) (ZIP code: 94607) (ZIP code: 94601) (ZIP code: 94606) (ZIP code: 94603) (ZIP code: 94606) (ZIP code: 94601) 57. (ZIP code: 94608) (ZIP code: 94602) 59. (ZIP code: 92139) (ZIP code: 94619) Oakland community members are opposed to this construction. Please stop plans of development immediately. If the people aren't listened to you won't be favored in the next election.
Recommended publications
  • OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 79235 C. M
    OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 79235 c. M. H'fdTY CLLlO; ', L INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMEMBER 7~~\ $C64L, Y AV> j2-iyg~ RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 72727 C.M.S., WHICH IMPLEMENTED THE CITY OF OAKLAND'S COMMUNITY POLICING POLICY, TO PROVIDE A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WHEREAS, the people of Oakland require that their municipal government provide police services in the manner calculated to best insure public safety; and WHEREAS, for the last two decades cities and police departments across the Untied States have adopted strategies to reduce reliance on 911-response policing and instead utilize approaches known as "Community Oriented Policing," "Problem Oriented Policing," or "Community Policing;" and WHEREAS, the experience of the police departments which have adopted community policing strategy demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach in both reducing crime levels and increasing public sense of safety; and WHEREAS, the Oakland Police Department has been a pioneer in the development and utilization of community policing strategies through such programs as Beat Health, Neighborhood Watch, and Home Alert; and assuming a leadership role in comparable efforts by the Oakland Housing Authority; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 1996 the City Council of the City of Oakland passed Resolution No. 72727 to implement the community policing program in the City of Oakland and this Resolution was subsequently amended by Resolution No. 73185 C.M.S on December 17, 1996 and by Resolution No. 73916 C.M.S. on November 4, 1997; and
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of OAKLAND PUBLIC ETHICS COMMISSION One Frank Ogawa Plaza (City Hall) Special Commission Meeting Monday, July 31, 2017 Hearing Room 1 6:30 P.M
    CITY OF OAKLAND PUBLIC ETHICS COMMISSION One Frank Ogawa Plaza (City Hall) Special Commission Meeting Monday, July 31, 2017 Hearing Room 1 6:30 p.m. Commissioners: Marc Pilotin (Chair), Krisida Nishioka (Vice-Chair), Lisa Crowfoot, Dana King, Gail Kong, Jodie Smith, and Jonathan Stein Commission Staff: Whitney Barazoto, Executive Director; Milad Dalju, Deputy Director and Chief of Enforcement; Suzanne Doran, Lead Analyst – Civic Technology and Engagement; Jelani Killings, Ethics Analyst; Ana Lara-Franco, Commission Assistant; Simon Russell, Investigator City Attorney Staff: Trish Hynes, Deputy City Attorney SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 1. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum. 2. Staff and Commission Announcements. 3. Open Forum. CONSENT ITEMS1 4. Approval of Commission Meeting Draft Minutes. a. June 5, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes (Attachment 1 – Minutes) ACTION ITEMS 5. In the Matter of Lynette Gibson McElhaney (Case No. 15-07). Staff presents a report summarizing evidence that Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney committed the following violations of the Oakland Government Ethics Act: 1) solicited and accepted gifts valued at more than $50 from a source she knew, or had reason to know, was a restricted source, in violation of Section 2.25.060(C) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act; 2) made a governmental decision in which she had a disqualifying financial interest in violation of Section 2.25.040(A) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act, and; 3) failed to disclose the gifts she received from the restricted source on her annual statement of economic interests in violation of Section 2.25.040(B) of the Oakland Government Ethics Act. Staff recommends that the Commission refer this matter to an administrative hearing before a single Commissioner.
    [Show full text]
  • Find out If Your City Councilmember and OUSD Board Member Have Changed As Part of Oakland's Recent Redistricting. Your City C
    City of Oakland Presorted 250 Frank Ogawa Plaza First Class Mail Find out if your City Councilmember and OUSD Board Member Suite 3315 US Postage CITY OF OAKLAND Oakland, CA 94612 PAID Have Changed as Part of Oakland’s Recent Redistricting. Oakland, CA Permit No.2508 Every 10 years the City of Oakland reviews and revises City Council District boundaries, as mandated by the City Charter. The purpose of this Redistricting process is to equalize each district’s population according to U.S. Census OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING data. New City electoral district boundaries are drawn to address population changes over the past decade. Important information that may affect you… The Oakland City Council Districts also serve as the electoral districts for the Governing Board of the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD), commonly called the Board of Education. Any changes made to the Council Districts also change the boundaries for the areas represented by the elected members of the Board of Education. Look inside for changes to Electoral boundary changes do not impact school enrollment choices. City Councilmembers represent the interest City Council Districts. of the residents of their respective districts During the 2013 Redistricting process, the City of Oakland: when making city policy, giving general policy District changes may affect n Complied with the Federal Voting Rights Act; direction, voting on ordinances and resolutions electoral districts, n Balanced district populations; and adopting the City’s biennial budget. but do not affect school n Preserved communities of interest; To find out who represents you on the enrollment choices. n Followed visible natural and man-made geographical Oakland City Council, please use the City’s and topographical features; and online Council District Locator Tool at n Avoided displacing any incumbent City Councilmember or http://mapgis.oaklandnet.com/councildistricts/ OUSD board member from the district he or she was elected or call (510)444-CITY(2489).
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland City Council Candidate Questionnaire Thank You for Taking the Time to Complete the Oaklandside’S 2020 Election Questionnaire
    Gibson McElhaney Oakland City Council candidate questionnaire Thank you for taking the time to complete The Oaklandside’s 2020 election questionnaire. We understand we’re asking a lot of you and your time, but we feel that Oakland voters deserve to know as much as possible about each candidate’s views on major issues like housing affordability, homelessness, public safety, and more. We will be posting your answers to these questions on our website for our readers to see, and noting whether candidates chose not to respond. We are not endorsing anyone for office. We’d like to receive your answers by August 28. Please briefly answer each question below using no more than 200 words. Please be as specific as possible when discussing policy ideas ​ ​ or positions you’ve taken, or would take, on different issues. Our reporters will also follow up with you for a phone or Zoom interview at some point. Your name: Lynette Gibson McElhaney ​ City Council district seat you are running for: Oakland District 3 ​ We want to know more about you and the reasons you’re running for council: 1. Please list your age, education, any professional licenses or other relevant credentials, your current occupation, and your neighborhood of residence. Age: 52 Education: BA in Political Science from University of California Berkeley I am the current City Councilmember for District 3. I live in West Oakland. 2. Before running for City Council, how were you involved in local government? Have you served on any local boards or commissions? Prior to running for Council my involvement with local government was only as a taxpayer.
    [Show full text]
  • City Council Candidates
    Oakland Youth Commission CITY OF OAKLAND 2014 GUIDE Voter Election Guide Ranked Choice OAKLAND, CA ELECTION NOVEMBER 4T H Voting Mayoral Youth Commission Candidates City Council 2014 Voter Guide Candidates OUSD School Board Candi- dates Mayoral Candidates 2014 Ken Houston Ballot Bryan Parker Measures Charles Williams Recommen- Hon. Libby Schaaf dations Hon. Courtney Ruby Proposition Mayor Jean Quan Recommen- dations Hon . Dan Siegal Nancy Sidebotham Eric Wilson Patrick McMcullough CONTENTS Jason Anderson Peter Y. Liu Joe Tuman Guides 3 Hon. Rebecca Kaplan Contents Saied Karamooz Ranked 4 Choice Voting Measures 6 and Propositions City Council Candidates District 2 District 4 District 6 Mayoral 12 Candidates Hon. Abel Guillen Hon. Annie Campbell Hon. Desley Brooks Andrew Park Washington James Moore City Council 26 Dana King Jill Broadhurst Michael Johnson Candidates Ken Maxey Paul Lim Shereda Nosakhare School Board 41 Kevin Blackburn Candidates Oakland Youth Commission 2014 Voter Election Guide OAKLAND, CA ELECTION NOVEMBER 4T H Youth Commission 2014 Voter Guide Oakland Ballot Measures Measure N Measure DD Measure Z Measure EE Measure CC Measure FF Alameda County Measure BB School Board Candidates District 2 District 4 District 6 Aimee Eng Hon. Annie Campbell Hon. Desley Brooks William Ghirardelli Washington James Moore Jill Broadhurst Michael Johnson Paul Lim Shereda Nosakhare P A G E 3 Youth Commission Voter Guide 2014 October October 2014, Dear Oakland Residents, The Youth Commission would like to present this voter guide to you in an effort to inform youth and youth advocates about the candidates and the Oakland Youth electoral process in this election. The Youth Commission would like to Commission thank all candidates who forwarded responses to our questionnaire.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland City Council
    OFRCE OF" TH£ CITY CURK OAKLAND 13 JUN 13 PM |:U6 ty Attorney's Office OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL Resolution No. C.M.S. INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMEMBERS LIBBY SCHAAF & DESLEY BROOKS A RESOLUTION DECLARING MONDAYS TO BE "MEATLESS MONDAYS" IN THE CITY OF OAKLAND WHEREAS, the City of Oakland is dedicated to the preservation of the environment and natural resources; and WHEREAS, the City of Oakland is committed to the well-being and good health of its citizens; and WHEREAS, in 2011, Oakland passed a landmark Energy and Climate Action Plan with the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and WHEREAS, the United Nations recognizes that "Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to today's most serious environmental problems" and recommended individuals "replace meat with another source of protein" as a way to celebrate its World Water Day; and WHEREAS, recent studies and reports have demonstrated that we can lower our carbon footprint simply by reducing the amount of animal-based foods we eat; and WHEREAS, 42 percent of children in Oakland are ovenweight or obese and studies show that obese children tend to grow up to be obese adults, and those who are obese are at increased risk of developing many chronic diseases, including heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, and many types of cancer; and WHEREAS, the economic costs associated with obesity in Alameda County are estimated at $1 billion; and WHEREAS, the American Dietetic Association recognizes that reduced meat consumption decreases the risk of various health
    [Show full text]
  • Black Panther Party: 1966-1982
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (ASC) Annenberg School for Communication 1-1-2000 Black Panther Party: 1966-1982 Michael X. Delli Carpini University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers Part of the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Delli Carpini, M. X. (2000). Black panther party: 1966-1982. In I. Ness & J. Ciment (Eds.), The encyclopedia of third parties in America (pp. 190-197). Armonke, NY: Sharpe Reference. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/1 NOTE: At the time of publication, the author Michael X. Delli Carpini was affiliated with Columbia University. Currently January 2008, he is a faculty member of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Black Panther Party: 1966-1982 Abstract The Black Panther party was founded in Oakland, California, in 1966. From its beginnings as a local, community organization with a handful of members, it expanded into a national and international party. By 1980, however, the Black Panther party was once again mainly an Oakland-based organization, with no more than fifty active members. In 1982, the party came to an official end. Despite itselativ r ely short history, its modest membership, and its general eschewing of electoral politics, the Black Panther party was arguably the best known and most controversial of the black militant political organizations of the 1960s, with a legacy that continues to this day.
    [Show full text]
  • Law in the Service of the Public
    OAKLAND CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE Annual Report FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019 juslaw in thepro service ofpopulo the public Table of Contents Message from City Attorney Barbara J. Parker ............................................................1 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................2 Mission of the City Attorney’s Office .............................................................................3 Office Profile .....................................................................................................................5 Organizational Chart ........................................................................................................6 Financial Trends ...............................................................................................................8 Outside Counsel Costs ....................................................................................................9 Payments .........................................................................................................................12 Dollars Secured by City Attorney .................................................................................18 Divisions of the City Attorney’s Office .........................................................................23 Affirmative Litigation, Innovation & Enforcement Division ........................................32 Labor & Employment Division .......................................................................................39
    [Show full text]
  • A Downtown for Everyone Robert A
    REPORT SEPTEMBER 2015 A DOWNTOWN Shaping the future of FOR downtown Oakland EVERYONE Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary SPUR staff Egon Terplan, Project lead 6 Introduction Mohit Shewaramani, Oakland Fellow 9 How We Got Here Sarah Jo Szambelan, Research Manager Robert Ogilvie, Oakland Director 12 Today’s Opportunities and Challenges SPUR Oakland City Board 20 Our Vision: A Downtown for Everyone Robert A. Wilkins (project co-chair) Bill Stotler (project co-chair) 24 BIG IDEA 1 Tomiquia Moss (board chair) Grow 50,000 more jobs in downtown and create pathways to get Fred Blackwell people into them. Deborah Boyer 33 BIG IDEA 2 Anagha Dandekar Clifford Jose Corona Bring 25,000 more residents to downtown at a range of incomes, and Charmaine Curtis enable existing residents to remain. Paul Figueroa 37 BIG IDEA 3 Mike Ghielmetti Set clear and consistent rules for growth to make downtown a better Spencer Gillette place for everyone. Chris Iglesias Robert Joseph 44 BIG IDEA 4 Ken Lowney Create inviting public spaces and streets as part of an active public Christopher Lytle realm. Olis Simmons Joshua Simon 54 BIG IDEA 5 Resources and reviewers Make it easy to get to and around downtown through an expanded Anyka Barber, Alex Boyd, Anthony Bruzzone, Clarissa transportation network. Cabansagan, Dave Campbell, Jim Cunradi, John Dolby, 63 Big Ideas for the Future Margo Dunlap, Karen Engel, Sarah Filley, Rachel Flynn, Erin Ferguson, Sarah Fine, Aliza Gallo, Jennie Gerard, June 66 Plan of Action Grant, Savlan Hauser, Linda Hausrath, Zakiya Harris,
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland Permanent Access to Housing Strategy (Path)
    OAKLAND PERMANENT ACCESS TO HOUSING STRATEGY (PATH) A Companion to EveryOne Home: The Alameda Countywide Homeless and Special Needs Housing Plan Written and Prepared By Debbie Greiff, Debbie Greiff Consulting Kate Bristol, Kate Bristol Consulting TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 II. Background on PATH and EveryOne Home.......................................................... 1 III. The Challenge: Homelessness in Oakland............................................................ 3 A. Oakland’s Homeless and At­Risk Population ....................................................... 3 B. Housing Needs of Homeless and At­Risk People................................................. 5 IV. The Plan: Permanent Access to Housing Strategy.............................................. 7 A. Desired Results .................................................................................................... 7 B. Resources Needed to Realize Results................................................................. 8 C. Taking Action to Realize Results........................................................................ 10 Goal (P): Prevent Homelessness and Other Housing Crises ............................. 10 Goal (H): Increase Housing Opportunities for Targeted Populations.................. 13 Goal (S): Deliver Flexible Services to Support Stability and Independence ...... 16 Goal (M): Measure Success and Report Outcomes ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study Report: Oakland International Airport Bart Connector
    MTI Working Paper Research Project 2503 Collaborative Funding to Facilitate Airport Ground Access CASE STUDY REPORT: OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BART CONNECTOR Geoffrey D. Gosling, Ph.D. Wenbin Wei, Ph.D. Dennis Freeman May 2012 A publication of Mineta Transportation Institute Created by Congress in 1991 College of Business San José State University San José, CA 95192-0219 ii Mineta Transportation Institute iii Copyright © 2012 by Mineta Transportation Institute All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2012938608 To order this publication, please contact: Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business San José State University San José, CA 95192-0219 Tel: (408) 924-7560 Fax: (408) 924-7565 Email: [email protected] transweb.sjsu.edu Mineta Transportation Institute iv Mineta Transportation Institute v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The case study documented in this report has been prepared as part of the Mineta Transportation Institute Research Project Collaborative Funding to Facilitate Airport Ground Access. The objectives of the research project include examining and documenting past experience with collaborative funding of airport ground access projects and the use of different funding sources to facilitate interconnectivity between transportation modes in order to improve airport ground access. The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the sponsors of the research, the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics and the Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI). The authors also thank MTI staff, including deputy executive director and research director Karen Philbrick, Ph.D.; director of communications and technology transfer Donna Maurillo; student research support assistant Joey Mercado; student publications assistant Sahil Rahimi; and webmaster Frances Cherman, who also provided editorial support.
    [Show full text]
  • Term Sheet 7.20.21
    Attachment 1 STAFF’S PROPOSED NON-BINDING TERMS DRAFT ONLY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER NEGOTIATION AND CHANGE 1. Parties & Intent This non-binding term sheet (“Term Sheet”) sets forth the preliminary terms upon which the Athletics Investment Group LLC d/b/a The Oakland Athletics, a California limited liability company (or an affiliate thereof) (the “Oakland A’s” or “Developer”) and the City of Oakland (the “City”) would negotiate and draft a Development Agreement for a mixed-use ballpark development project, as described herein, to be presented to the City Council for consideration, subject to requisite environmental review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Developer is proposing to acquire the rights to develop a site known as the Charles P. Howard Terminal (“Howard Terminal”) on the Oakland waterfront from the Port of Oakland (“Port”), acquire certain adjacent properties from private owners, and construct a new Major League Baseball ballpark, as well as residential, entertainment, office, hotel, and retail (mixed use) development, creating a new Oakland Waterfront Ballpark District (the “Project”). The proposed Project would be constructed in phases as described below. The site proposed for development of the Project includes the Howard Terminal and certain adjacent properties totaling approximately 55 acres (collectively, the “Project Site”). The Project Site is located on the Oakland waterfront, north of and across the Oakland-Alameda Estuary from the City of Alameda. A location map and aerial photographs of the Project Site and the surrounding vicinity are provided on Exhibit A attached hereto. The City and Developer desire to enter into a Development Agreement to secure benefits for the City of Oakland and its residents, which are not achievable through the regulatory process, as well as to vest in Developer and its successors and assigns certain entitlement rights with respect to the Project Site.
    [Show full text]