In low-key Alameda, a big fight brews over redevelopment of old Navy base

The first thought for many newcomers to Alameda is that they've somehow landed on the set of "The Andy Griffith Show."

But just below the surface of this tree-lined city with a small-town feel – a place famous for its strictly enforced 25 mph speed limit – lies a cauldron of politics, backbiting and shifting alliances.

In most cases, the clashes come when the town's old guard goes head to head with off-island newcomers accustomed to more plentiful shopping, services and entertainment opportunities.

These civic skirmishes have involved construction of a new main library, redevelopment of the city's largest shopping center and rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater. But they may ultimately be viewed as minor confrontations compared with the battle – no, the war – that some observers say is coming over the redevelopment of the 1,500- acre-plus former Alameda Naval Air Station.

At issue is whether a majority of the city's 42,233 registered voters will approve a ballot initiative to suspend a 1973 amendment to the city charter as it applies to the redevelopment of the former Navy base.

That amendment, Measure A, sharply limits housing density. It's been hailed as saving Alameda's famed "Iowa-by-the-sea" quality of life and its famed inventory of historic Victorian-era homes.

The measure was approved by island voters who wanted to stop increasing numbers of property owners who were tearing down their aging Victorians and replacing them with boxy apartment buildings.

Concerns about attacks on the charter amendment have grown over the years. Within the last few years, fearful advocates of the measure have even printed up red and white yard signs to urge their fellow Alamedans to keep the measure intact.

Despite the presence of the amendment – the so-called "third rail" of Alameda politics – Irvine-based SunCal has stepped up to take what will likely end up being a million-dollar-plus swing at redeveloping the blighted, toxics-laden base on the north end of the city. Built before World War II, the base was once home to some of the Navy's mightiest aircraft carriers and some of its most famed aviators. It was decommissioned in 1997.

SunCal is proposing to build 4,346 new, mixed-density housing units on the site as well as more than 3 million square feet of commercial and retail space. SunCal also intends to build a 600 boat-slip marina and a new ferry terminal, and has earmarked 145 acres for sports, recreation and park uses.

To do all that and make it profitable, SunCal Vice President Pat Keliher says, Alameda voters must first agree to modify Measure A as it pertains to the base.

"We have placed our cards on the table. In order for our company and our partners to realize the return on the investment we're proposing to make, Measure A has be to changed," Keliher said.

Knowing the island's passion for turning local politics into proverbial blood sport, SunCal has brought in high-profile support in its efforts to get Measure A modified.

In recent months, the company has brought in Tramutola LLC of Oakland and Sam Singer Associates of San Francisco to help it shape its electoral and public relations strategies for the project.

Tramutola is known as the go-to strategy shop for municipal-level elections all across California. Singer, a master practitioner of public relations, is probably best known for its work with the San Francisco Zoo in December 2007 after a tiger escaped its enclosure and killed a teenager and injured two others.

Campaign finance records for January through June show that SunCal has spent more than $536,000 on its Alameda Point Revitalization initiative – instantly making it, officials believe, the single most expensive ballot measure in the city's 93-year incorporated history. Keliher says the initiative will likely appear on the ballot either in March or June 2010.

To date, the only formal opposition to the SunCal initiative comes from a group called Protect Our Point, which records show raised just under $10,000 for the same January-June period, spending about half that so far.

A few local activists have also organized some minor street demonstrations and prepared a few anti-SunCal cable access TV commercials.

A group calling itself Save Our City Alameda is working to persuade signers of the company's petition to have their names removed in hopes of disqualifying the initiative.

Although opinions vary, many anti-SunCal activists believe that any modification of Measure A – which limits developers to building just one housing unit per every 2,000 square feet of land – will be the first step in Alameda's demise.

They also believe the project will bring so many newcomers that the island's roads will be gridlocked and choked with emissions from idling traffic. Some activists say they want the city to bargain instead with the Navy to turn the entire base into a public trust not unlike the Presidio in San Francisco.

SunCal's first move was to confront the issue head-on – but not in the way many local observers anticipated.

Not only will SunCal ask Alamedans to modify Measure A, they will also ask voters to bless or reject the entire deal with the city within the so-called Alameda Point Revitalization initiative, a document that is 283 pages long.

"That is very shrewd," said Corey Cook, an assistant professor of political science at the University of San Francisco. "They're banking on the fact that very few voters will actually have the time or take the time to read the entire initiative, let alone understand it completely. Redevelopment projects of this scope are terribly complicated."

Charles Heath, senior strategist at Tramutola, said he expects the real fight over the initiative will be fought in Alameda's neighborhoods and precincts – not in the corridors of City Hall where opinions have already been cemented.

"We plan to make this a neighborhood-based, house-to-house, person-to-person campaign," Heath said, adding that his firm commissioned a poll of Alamedans on the proposed initiative late last year and came away pleased with the results.

While Heath declined to share the poll's exact numbers, he said the telephone survey of 500 likely city voters showed a "strong majority" in support of the initiative.

Both Cook and UC Berkeley political science professor Karen Christensen agreed that the initiative campaign may become one of the most watched development struggles in California – especially given the "not-in-my-backyard" attitudes many voters display when it comes to urban infill development proposals.

"I suspect this project and the election will be heavily observed and studied," Christensen said. "Clearly, there's a lot on the line, not only for Alameda but the entire East Bay area as well."

This story was first published in The Sacramento Bee on Sunday, Aug. 16, 2009. View the article here.