Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,

I’m writing to you in strong support of advancing to the November ballot both the City’s proposed infrastructure funding measure (agenda item 7-A) and the proposed City Charter reform measure regarding city-owned facility leasing (agenda item 7-C).

While these measures may appear different on the surface, the overarching goal is substantially similar: to address our most pressing civic infrastructure needs.

• The proposed City Charter reform will make it more predictable for businesses to lease the massive spaces at Alameda Point, thereby funding operations of Alameda Point services and paying into the City’s funds for full rebuilds of underground utilities and surrounding streets across Alameda Point.
• The proposed infrastructure funding measure will ask us as voters and as taxpayers to do our own part, contributing toward carefully managed funds for street repaving, flooding preparations, emergency response times, and seismic improvements to outdated buildings for the established neighborhoods and business districts of Alameda Island and Bay Farm.

While city staff and consultants have estimated Alameda’s entire extent may need upwards of $800 million in public funds to address known physical problems, the combination of these two ballot measures targets the most critical of those needs and sets in place a sustainable path toward addressing the entirety.

The proposed infrastructure funding measure is designed to pair with external funding sources, to leverage regional/state/federal grants. Most of these grant opportunities require a “local match” (sometimes upwards of 30%):

• Alameda has a very successful track record of winning these competitive funding opportunities when we work together: the Alameda Free Library was built with funds from Alameda’s voters/taxpayers and funds from a State of California grant. I’ve appreciated insights Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft has shared with me and other newcomers to Alameda of the many people and groups who worked together to pass the successful bond measure for the city’s share of the funds. I also appreciate seeing Councilmember Daysog’s name on the plaques in the lobby, highlighting the continuity of community leaders who care about Alameda’s public facilities and services. Credit is also due to Councilmember Jensen for leadership on the Alameda School Board, the Alameda Health Care District Board, and the Alameda Health System Board overseeing capital projects using both voter-authorized and partner-provided funds.
• The critical FEMA BRIC program is now back and a window has opened again to accept applications (thanks to court order and lobbying by Congressional members such as the Bay Area’s Rep. Sam Liccardo). Alameda was previously on track to potentially receive tens of millions of federal dollars to reduce the city’s exposure to flooding from San Leandro Bay. The reinstated program now favors shovel-ready projects — precisely the kind of plans Alameda and partners have kept refining through the federal lull. What's needed is the local match, and a dedicated, voter-approved bond will put that piece in hand, so Alameda can compete vigorously.
• In recent years, Alameda city staff have brought to our city tens of millions of external dollars from MTC, from Alameda County’s transportation-dedicated sales taxes, and from federal sources including the EPA, HUD, and USDOT. This successful track record, which is quite impressive for a city of ~80,000, depends upon strategic preparations and prompt work. The exact form of a federal “Notice of Funding Opportunity” or a state or regional grant opportunity may not be known in advance. When Alameda competes successfully, it’s because the city already has the potential ingredients in hand: broad assessments prepared by expert consultants, sufficiently flexible funding sources ready to serve as local matches, and leaders on City Council ready to promptly execute agreements.
• Voters and taxpayers can trust that the proposed infrastructure funding measure will dedicate its proceeds solely to capital expenses in well-defined classifications – not to operational costs or to pension liabilities. (While also important, those "soft" costs will continue to be managed through the City's fiscal-year budgeting process.) And simultaneously, these new locally-controlled capital funds will be strategically deployed by the City to pair and supercharge with external funding as both planned and unexpected grant opportunities appear.

The time to act is now:

• Voters effectively decided that it is the City of Alameda that serves as the “master developer” for Alameda Point. Since then, the city and its real-estate managers have successfully worked with private businesses and developers to create eateries, residences, R&D facilities, and the beginnings of a new mixed-use district. But progress is slow. And at times progress for even standard leases has become overly politicized. To continue to work toward the potential of Alameda Point requires that the City more efficiently lease and sell vacant buildings. This approach continues to firewall the rest of Alameda capital funds, which are needed for existing neighborhoods, business districts, and streets. Alameda Point can and will pay for its own infrastructure needs, as long as the City acts with the professionalism and efficiency required to be an effective counter-party to sophisticated businesses and experienced developers.
• You all know of many iterations the City of Alameda has tried to raise local funds for infrastructure repairs and improvements. In the meantime, construction costs have increased. On the Transportation Commission, where I currently serve, we were presented with detailed budgets in advance of the most recent two-year fiscal year cycle indicating that this is the first time that the City of Alameda is needing to utilize the General Fund to supplement gas taxes and traditional sources for the annual paving management program. Without an additional source of local funding in coming fiscal years, Alameda will no longer even be able to keep up with the previous rate of repair, which was already insufficient to get ahead on potholes and paint, let alone traffic safety concerns. While City Council members may each fiscal year continue to vigorously debate funding priorities such as staff headcount for various departments, I hope you can all agree that the city’s repaving program is a necessary annual requirement that will ideally not have to draw from and compete with the many needs for the General Fund.

These two proposals you are considering on July 7 represent both a continuation of what already works in Alameda – what residents and businesses trust and see in civic facilities like Alameda Free Library, the city’s annual paving program, and lively pockets of new activity at Alameda Point – and forward-looking means of building a more secure, sustainable, and shared city.

Please vote to bring the proposed infrastructure funding measure and the proposed Charter reform measure regarding leasing city-owned facilities to our ballots in November.