Report on the Economic Development Commission Meeting, 
Thursday, 17 January 2002

Commissioners attending:
John Abrate - Chair
Charles Ward
Robert F. Kelly
Gail A. Wetzork
Harry Dahlbert
Pattianne Parker
Doug deHaan
and two others whose names I couldn't see.


Item number 3 on the meeting agenda was "City of Alameda Draft Housing
Element Recommendations."

Twenty minutes had been allotted for the item's discussion.  It went on for
over an hour.


THE COMMISSION'S CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE HOUSING ELEMENT

The Commission expected they were required to decide whether the Planning
Commission should adopt the the Housing Element.  After public comments
from a representative of Renewed Hope, three members of E.P.A.C. and long
statements by four Commission members reluctant to accept the Housing
Element as it stands, they debated recommending that it not be adopted.

A Planning staff member reminded them that the Housing Element would go to
the Planning Board regardless of their actions.

They decided then to delay any vote on the Housing Element.  Instead, they
asked the Planning staff to gather together all public comment gathered so
far.  Commissioner Doug deHann also pointed out the sizable packet of
information on the Housing Element just sent to the City by the State of
California.  All of that information, including their own collected
criticisms, will be assembled by staff for their consideration.  At their
February meeting, they will vote on the changes, considerations, and need
for additional analysis and public comment they'd like in order to make the
Housing Element more responsive to community needs for housing and parks.
They'll include that recommendation with the Housing Element as it goes
to the Planning Commission

They think the Housing Element is an inadequate document in its current
form.  They will recommend a reconsideration of Measure A in order to
discover a way to build more high density affordable housing, protect the
Victorian houses, and a re-examination of the need for Estuary Park on the
Dutra/Fox property.


PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE EDC ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT

Deborah Greene, speaking for EPAC, read the quote from the 1991 Master Plan
about the value of the park.  She said the community really wanted the park
but that the neighborhood needed time to organize a means of acquiring and
developing the land.  A commissioner asked how much time.  Deb answered, "A
year."

Joe Woodard mentioned that renters and owners alike wanted the park, that
E.P.A.C. would give formal voice to that opinion by submitting signed
petitions.

Jean Sweeney gave a brief, fragmented history of the public and private
control of the land, raising the issue of clear ownership.  She said that a
hasty move to build housing might stumble into the question of rightful
ownership.

The representative from Renewed Hope said that Measure A was restricting
the creation of affordable housing, that the City must reconsider it, and
must revisit the need for decent living conditions provided by public
parklands.


EPAC CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE MEETING

It seems even the pronouncement about the petition was enough to keep the
Commission from quick decision.  They are already reluctant to endorse the
Housing Element so public opposition quickly registers with them.  EPAC had
a minor victory tonight.  Our activities are producing some results
already.  The Economic Development Commission, the most powerful advisory
board to the City Council, is listening.


EPAC ACTIONS 

On Friday, I will take a hardcopy of all our public EPAC comments on the
park to the secretary to the EDC, Rosemary Valeska, on Friday.  She agrees
to include them with the Housing Element and other public comment provided
by planning staff.

Dorothy and I will see you at the EPAC meeting, Saturday, 19 Jan, 2 PM, at
our house, 2050 Eagle Avenue, #1. We'll talk about what we can do on the
petition drive, increasing public support for the park, raising money, and
researching the ownership of the Dutra/Fox property.

for EPAC
Joe Woodard
17 Jan