To the Editor:
At the July 2 City Council meeting City Council will consider placement of an amendment to the City Charter on the November ballot repealing the current 4-1 super majority council vote required to sell City-owned real estate or lease it for more than one year.
Following is a copy of the Alameda Citizens Task Force (ACT) letter of opposition to the proposed amendment. For those who wish to express views on the matter to the Council, email addresses of City Council and relevant staff are included.
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected].
Re: Item 7-D, City Council Agenda for July 2 Meeting
Dear Mayor Ashcraft, Vice Mayor Daysog and Council Members Vella, Spencer, and Jensen:
ACT strongly opposes placing any of the options presented in the staff report on the July 2 agenda item 7-D which would reduce the 4-1 council supermajority requirement for sales or leases of City real estate.
Due to the fact that the form of Council minutes in 1943, when the supermajority provision was added to the Charter, did not preserve any comments from Councilmembers or the public, we don’t know the rationale of that City Council for the supermajority requirement, but we must assume that both City Council and the voters who approved the ballot measure felt that the disposition of City real estate was an important matter that should have broad approval.
Most importantly, we know that in 2024 the City is engaged in a unique project compared to other Bay Area cities—the sale and leasing of hundreds of contiguous acres at Alameda Point, consisting of a large portion of the developable land. Decisions on placing any of the real estate in private hands has raised a multitude of issues concerning overall planning on what is appropriate for the site, protection of historic sites, the nature and location of the businesses and residences that should be placed there, protection of views of the Bay and San Francisco skyline, preservation of open space, environmental concerns, etc.
It is ironic that Council has not questioned the supermajority rule for over 80 years, but now considers repealing it just when the most important land use decisions in the City’s history are being made, decisions which should have a broad Council consensus before being made.
We understand the frustration of Councilmembers in having to achieve a super majority, but the importance of these decisions to the future of the City requires the broad Council consensus that the current Charter provides. If it is placed on the November ballot by a simple majority of the City Council, it will be seen by the public as a purely political act. We are confident that the voters of Alameda will reject it.
Sincerely,
Paul Foreman
for the ACT Board of Directors
Editorials and Letters to the Editor
All opinions expressed on this page are the author's alone and do not reflect those of the Alameda Post, nor does our organization endorse any views the author may present. Our objective as an independent news source is to fully reflect our community's varied opinions without giving preference to a particular viewpoint.
If you disagree with an opinion that we have published, please submit a rebuttal or differing opinion in a letter to the Editor for publication. Review our policies page for more information.
