Marina Matters - Get Away

First off let me state the best thing anyone can do for themselves is get away every so often. It is on this advice that I base my comments today. You see, getting away allows one to look at things from a completely different perspective, to be away from the trees and see the forest as it were.

So, as I return from a beautiful week deep in the Colorado Mountains I can share the lessons learned here that we all need to remember in Marina. It is my opinion that some of the best environmental policies in the country come from Colorado. It is Colorado that has found a way to incorporate the need for economic development and environmental policies to the success of both. It is also Colorado that voted down an Olympic bid because they felt it would be too devastating to the economy and environment several years ago.

It’s with this backdrop that I revisit the State of my younger years and see that, while so much has changed, the state has remained true to itself. What were small town ski areas 30 years ago are booming economic centers year round today. To drive up highway 70 past towns such as Georgetown, Vail, Avon and Edwards you barely see the development but it’s there.  Even the huge self enclosed area of Beaver Creek is built right into the mountain in a way that looks almost natural.

Over the years thousands of acres of trees have been removed to accommodate this development but it has been done in a way that preserves thousands of additional acres of natural habitat and beautiful mountains.

Now let’s take a look at Marina and Ft. Ord. We see people trying to convince us that the economic redevelopment of Ft. Ord is some great sin imposed on our environment. Never mind the fact that in most areas these lands have been scarred by decades of military use and any new development would actually repair much of the land and return the economics of our area to what it once was. In fact, that was the entire goal of the original Ft. Ord Reuse Plan. It was designed to replace the economic engine that the military was and do so while preserving thousands of acres of natural habitat.

There are those that want you to forget that part of the Ft. Ord Reuse Plan set aside an area slightly larger than the entire City of San Francisco as natural habitat. Areas that, still to this day, are being restored and managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

So yes, there will be development that changes the landscape in some areas. The ill fated Cypress Knolls project was one of them. It would have torn down all the blighted buildings on the property and restored the lands and developed a first class senior development that would be in tune with the goals of the Ft. Ord Reuse Plan.

There are other examples such as the Veterans Cemetery. Here we find opposition not in the concept but in the use of two entitlement parcels that will help fund the entire project. There are those that make a big public cry of support for the Cemetery but are trying like mad to stop the development parcels behind the scenes. To what end? It’s simply to stop all development at all costs without regard to the original goal.

My advice would be to take a trip, see what others are doing. Then come back and work together to replace the economic engines that will bring the jobs and housing markets back to our communities - to get off your high horse and see that our environment is being protected and has been from the beginning of this process.

More later

Cypress Knolls, RIP

Last Tuesday nights special council meeting in Marina signified the end of the development project known as Cypress Knolls, may it rest in peace. The current Council majority again pulled defeat out of the jaws of success and continues to put the City on a course of financial disaster.

Cypress Knolls was conceived in the late 90’s as a senior development to serve the entire region.  It was originally to use many of the structures already in place. These structures still remain today as dilapidated, decaying and dangerous buildings fenced off from public access. For a variety of reasons, including yet another lawsuit filed against a development project in Marina, the project stalled and was never built.

Several years later, another company came in with an updated plan to remove all the buildings and develop a new senior community on the same Cypress Knolls property. As the economy slowed this deal eventually fell apart and once again the project stalled and was never built.

Then two years ago the City of Marina started the process all over. They held public hearings and asked the Community what they wanted in a senior community on the property. As a result two developers came forward with concepts that would tear down all the blighted and dangerous buildings, fulfill the needs of the community and create a beautiful senior oriented community that created jobs while diversifying our City economy.

The process had many steps and stumbles along the way but it included a community selection committee (which I chaired), an investigation (on-going) and a decision to start over with a smaller project, then to reconsider and to choose one developer, than another re-consideration and a final decision last Tuesday to start the process all over again and seek developers for a smaller project.

The process reminds me of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown, this time she will hold the ball for the kick. Of course, Lucy pulls the ball away leaving Charlie Brown on the ground wondering what happened again this time. The problem is this is not a cartoon, this is real and it has real implications for the citizens of Marina.

First, the blighted buildings on the Cypress Knolls property will be there for years to come. Next, due to this decision our City’s budget situation will continue to get worse. There will be no developer fees, no reimbursements, no property taxes and no jobs for many years to come, if at all.

Our community’s image in the development community is severally tarnished. After all, how would you feel after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, following all the rules then to be told that we changed our minds and to go away?

So with the Cypress Knolls project years away again (if ever), the Mayor’s highly touted Eco Village dead (what, no one told you that before?) and no new revenue generated over the past four years, our City Council will have little option but to continue to cut services in the future. This will mean cutting core services such as police, fire and recreation even though our citizens voted to tax themselves to keep this from happening.

So now the City has few choices ahead. They can continue to cut our core services or they will need to sell the Preston and Abrams Park communities to cover the City expenses until the real estate market recovers in California. There are few options left and further delays of projects such as Cypress Knolls will force that decision.

More later

Marina Matters – Priorities

“There you go again”. It’s a famous line from Ronald Reagan in one of his debates with Jimmy Carter. I feel we in Marina can say the same thing to Mayor Delgado and the current Council majority. There are two items on the Tuesday Council agenda that strike me as simply missing the point, again.

One is item F1 that is a report back to the City Council on the sphere of influence as it relates to the annexation of a portion of CSUMB. The second is item 10D. This has to do with endorsing a United States Constitutional amendment stating that corporations are not people and do not have free speech and other protections guaranteed to living humans by the Bill of Rights and the 14^th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Let me ask this simple question. If the City of Marina has a significant budget shortfall and will likely need to lay off or significantly reduce our police, fire and recreation departments in next year’s budget, then why in blue blazes are they wasting time on these subjects? What does this say about the priorities set forth by this Council?

Let’s look at the annexation first. The Council has asked staff to report to them the costs associated with the annexation process to incorporate the East Campus housing areas of CSUMB into Marina. This is a costly and time consuming process that keeps valuable City resources (time and money) away from bringing new revenue into the City. Question: should the City of Marina look to expand its boundaries and stretch its resources further when they already have a significant budget shortfall and know they will have to continue to cut services in the future?

As for the second item, supporting a resolution to endorse a constitutional amendment, it’s more of the same. This is in response to the Supreme Courts Citizens Unites v. Federal Elections Commission decision last year. While individual Council members may wish to endorse this or any other item, is this really what we are directing staff to deal with? Again, the more time spent on items that are not related to fixing the City’s budget and bringing in revenue the worse our City budget issues get.

I attended the Monterey Chamber of Commerce Leadership luncheon this past week where all of our area elected officials spoke. When it came to Marina’s time, Mayor Pro Tem O’Connell (who filled in for the Mayor) spoke. He talked about the City working to narrow its budget deficit and not cutting our public safety and recreation services. He then proceeded to list several projects that implied they brought new revenue to the City. This list included the Wellness Center (maybe a little sales tax), the new MPC Campus (none), the Airport grant (not general fund), the Airport Fire Station improvement (none), the Pilot Lounge (none), the Canine Institute (eventually some sales tax), improved bike lanes on Reservation Road (none), the Equestrian Center upgrade (none but maybe some revenue in the future but not general fund), the Labor Day and Earth Day celebrations (maybe some increased sales tax) and the Teen Center (none). While each of these has merit they do not address our City’s budget in any significant way.

The City Council outlined some 125 plus priorities when this Council’s term started. How many of these related to bringing in new revenue to the City? How many other items were added to this list at each Council meeting that have nothing to do with revenue? Why has this Council not found one extra dollar in revenue but continues to spend monies on projects that the City does not have? Why do they continue to direct staff away from projects that could benefit the City’s budget?

More later