A Bayfront task force meeting requested by residents has been scheduled for Thursday evening — 6pm at city hall. The meeting will supposedly focus on the recent delays in negotiations and will hopefully make headway in solving them.

Ticking time bombs do remain in the development agreement at this point and appear to be roadblocks to a successfully executed deal, but separately, the ongoing sad state of the City’s finances are its own impediment to success. Special consultant Charlie Long included a summary in his most recent project status report:

[S]hortly after the Planning Commission’s [recommendation for approval on November 28], the City completed a substantial reassessment of the City’s capacity to fund the local share of the project costs, including the land acquisition. [...] [T]he plan had been to use advances from capital 2 accounts to be repaid from the sale of real estate owned by the City. The reassessment concluded that the funds available in capital accounts had been severely diminished by massive deficits in redevelopment. In addition, proceeds from the sale of City-owned real estate are not likely to be available for another 12 months and may be subject to “claw back” by the state. Based on this lack of available funding, the City was forced to take a step back and to re-assess how to address the funding for the project.

[Insert snarky comment about the owner/developer refusing to execute on the train station land agreement portion without the other required documents for full entitlement as the reason for delay.]

I fully expect an unadulterated discussion of the pertinent issues facing the project. Anything less will be insulting to the community that has worked so hard for so long to push this project from a perpetual track towards failure to one that has even the potential for success.

The complete project status report by Charlie Long is embedded below:

UPDATE — Charlie Long has sent out an updated report with discussion points for this evening…

The Patch continues to run their series of “prominent Herculeans” and their predictions for 2012.

Similar to Mayor Romero, Councilman Bill Wilkins expects a finalized waterfront deal: “2012 will bring the conclusion of negotiations for the ITC and Waterfront Development and the approved agreements will have been signed by all parties. The City and Hercules Bay Front LLC will be working to move both projects forward. The City should be working on the Bay Trail and infrastructure needed for both the ITC and Waterfront Projects to be successful.”

Although this is a positive outlook on a very critical project for the city’s recovery (note the non-capitalized ‘c’ in city), signs are emerging that cracks remain in the City’s commitment to executing a fair deal. In fact, the pretense within the City Manager’s description in his latest weekly report of the current standoff between the City and owner/developer (Jim Anderson of AndersonPacific) is telling (emphasis mine): “The Implementation Agreements, Tentative Map and Waterside Purchase and Sale Agreement are yet to be finalized and the approved Landside PSA [purchase and sale agreement], which the owner/developer has refused to execute until the other documents are approved, will require modification due to delays in funding.”

City Manager Steve Duran is new to Hercules so he must not realize its very recent history of a council and staff conspiring against waterfront residents to prevent progress and funneling bond funds (meant for the waterfront project) to other projects in decisions that were hidden from public view (Sycamore North, New Town Center, very nearly Hilltown) that ultimately bankrupted the city (just not officially). The previous council repeatedly lied, distorted facts, and acted against the interest of the city. The staff followed orders and never exercised their civic duty to speak up and act for what was clearly wrong (except in one case when everything was crumbling down anyway).

The actions of the past council and staff has resulted in the following in the past year or so (in no order):

• two veteran councilmembers being trounced in an election to reformers;
• the most popular city politician resigning in the face of a recall;
• two councilmembers being recalled;
• three reformers being elected to office;
• the hiring (and firing) of an outsider interim city manager;
• the hiring of two insider interim city managers;
• the replacement of the city attorney;
• key staff changes (a lot of department heads shown the door); and
• the hiring of a permanent city manager (Duran).

That is probably not even the half of it, if that. The point being — this city remains in a period of uncertainty. Almost everything the City owns and stands for is debatable — land assets, staff, programs, even the tax base. It is quite unfortunate, but the City needs to retreat from its steep demands to make this work. The project and the future of the city (again, the lowercase ‘c’) require it.

And you don’t buy a car without knowing what the dealer will pay for your trade-in.

One step at a time. One step, at a time.

The City Council will approve the revised zoning for the waterfront project (principally the Hercules Bayfront private development that surrounds an intermodal transit center that converges train and bus and eventually ferry) at Tuesday evening’s city council meeting — 7pm at city hall.

Get this — the item is (properly) included under the unfinished business portion of the meeting’s agenda. Unfinished business. Could there be a more perfect euphemism for the long-stalled (by city hall) waterfront project — the award-winning, public-supported new urbanist development plan that would serve as the finishing touch and crowning point for a community that began a decade ago? That development plan? Unfinished business.

What isn’t included tomorrow evening, of course, is the development agreement. In fact, according to the city manager’s most recent weekly report, the City provided “its final comments on remaining documents under negotiation to the owner/developer on December 26 and set forth a schedule that would have resulted in final approval on January 24. However, the owner/developer has requested more time to respond.”

It is heartening to see that the city has finally resolved itself and finalized the documents for the developer to consider. Perhaps all the ticking time bombs have been removed. Perhaps the City Council is being honest with the community it serves and following through on its commitment. Perhaps staff will not railroad this deal one more (last?) time.

The owner/developer (Jim Anderson of AndersonPacific) has shown no indication that he is willing to throw away the potential and value that this plan represents because of political miscues by the City (e.g., push poll), and there is no reason to think that that has changed to date, at least in some dramatic fashion that would disrupt the deal from indeed being finalized in our lifetimes.

What remains much more disconcerting is the City’s poor standing and understanding of their land assets (which will be used to finance their portion of the deal, including the intermodal station project itself, whatever grants do not cover) — all the properties purchased with redevelopment bond funds (plundered from the waterfront) whose fate have been tossed in the air by the governor’s budget plan that was affirmed as constitutional by the Supreme Court. That is where staff focus should be. And the mayor’s too. He should be in Sacramento pleading Hercules’ case. The solvency of the City depends on it.

But, yea, zoning; time to get that settled.

East Bay Regional Parks District — EBRPD, the largest urban parks district in the U.S. — will vote tomorrow to approve the EIR for the completion of the Bay Trail through Pinole. The WCCTAC and TIGER-funded project involves closing the gap between Pinole Shores and Bayfront Park by constructing a bridge over the Union Pacific railroad tracks.

The meeting starts at 2pm on Tuesday at EBRPD headquarters in Oakland (2950 Peralta Oaks Court).

I am familiar with the results of the geotechnical exploration conducted for the proposed bridge. The engineering concerns are similar to those facing the construction of the Intermodal Station (and related infrastructure) in Hercules — point being, it will be an expensive pedestrian bridge. I’m assuming at least a portion of the funding will come from the recently-approved Measure WW, another perfect example of local taxes staying local. Although Hercules will be competing for the same pool of funds, an improvement along Pinole’s shoreline is an improvement for Hercules — particularly for those within walking distance.

And — again — the EBRPD annual membership is a great deal (especially if you have a dog). The park system is truly one of the best resources in the bay area.

Sometimes the right decision hurts more than the wrong one. That is certainly the case of the California Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Governor and Legislature’s plans to effectively eliminate redevelopment agencies. In my opinion, it is very difficult to see how the Court could have ruled differently (and I am/was a strong supporter of the program; local control of local money): redevelopment was a state program created by statute, and thusly could be removed by statute. It’s as simple as that.

Why did the Court have to reach that right decision now? Why did the perfect storm have to sweep through Hercules? On the heels of all the bad decisions made by Sakamoto, Oliva, Balico, Valstad, Raines, Batara, McDonald, Ward and Kuehne, why did the state have to take away the tools to recover just as our reform council was set to put the necessary wheels in motion? It’s cruel. It’s unusual. It has become reality.

The reason redevelopment was eliminated — or had to be eliminated — is not because redevelopment is wrong, misguided and costly, although that was certainly a talking point — and there was no better “poster child” than the city of Hercules. (The state could be tried for aiding and abetting in abdicating their responsibilities of oversight for years, er, decades. This truly is a case of sleeping dogs.)

The real reason redevelopment was folded is the state legislature’s inability to balance a budget. Nelson Oliva (and staff) may have acted with criminal intentions, our city council may have knowingly or unknowingly watched over it all, but it is our state’s representatives that were the executioner. Susan Bonilla. Mark DeSaulnier. Jerry Brown. They continue to fail at their jobs running this state — playing politics with cities, large and small, is their chosen sport.

It hurts that redevelopment was a program taken advantage of, including in our town, but that is not unlike almost every other state program. The unethical always seek paths to corruption, and redevelopment had known fissures the size of rivers. Corruption in redevelopment wasn’t done behind closed doors — at least not always — but in open session, in press releases, in marketing brochures. It helps that redevelopment has done many, many great things across this state, and that the largest cities advocated for the program’s protection — San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose — and will work towards creating successor agencies.

But the big cities were also the ones that could afford the opt-in fee — rightly termed as ransom because that is exactly what it was. And the Court saw it too — striking the pay-to-pay clause of the Governor/Legislature plan. They got both parts of the ruling right (in my opinion, of course). Proposition 22 did mean something after all. Cities like San Francisco will survive without redevelopment as currently constituted. The tax base and political strength will bridge their expenditures until the successor is law (and eventually corrupted).

The City is in a bad position. A meager tax base. An unbalanced budget. Debts up the wahoo. And a state unwilling to fix itself (the root cause of all this, and everything else, i.e., education, is the absurd Prop. 13).

Hercules did it wrong. The Court got it right. This sucks.

The Patch is running a series of “prominent Herculeans” and their predictions for the new year.

New mayor Dan Romero predicts success on the waterfront: “The Bayfront/ITC agreement will be finished and we will have a clearer outlook of state and federal grants to fund the project. Hopefully, we will be able to start the continuation of John Muir to the Bayfront, marking the beginning of the Bayfront/ITC Project.”

On the one hand, this is the same rhetoric we have always heard (again, and again). Nothing happens. Empty words have never weighed so much.

On the other hand, this is a new reform council. New leadership (Romero will probably change our idea of what the mayor is, by any definition of the word) may bring new, welcome results, something that adds this project to the success portion of the pass-fail scale of life.

Time will tell, I guess, but patience — if not completely eroded — wears thin. Enough with the damn talk. We need action.

A pause for reflection.

Matt Taibbi for Rolling Stone: “It’s called having a conscience: even though there are plenty of things most of us could get away with doing, we just don’t do them, because, well, we live here. Most of us wouldn’t take a million dollars to swindle the local school system, or put our next door neighbors out on the street with a robosigned foreclosure, or steal the life’s savings of some old pensioner down the block by selling him a bunch of worthless securities.”

That is exactly what our former city managers did — both Nelson Oliva and his predecessor/mentor Mike Sakamoto. That is what key members of city staff did. And that is what our esteemed former councilmembers did — either directly or indirectly (passive acceptance).

They robbed a generation of Herculeans. An unconscionable act.

This is also why our current council looks so comparatively well — despite legitimate concerns about action and focus. It will be quite the feat for this reform council to top the misdeeds of the recent past councils. But complacency can certainly lead us over that cliff again.

Mistakes were made, priorities were abandoned, and greed and ego multiplied the impact. Perhaps it is insurmountable. We will never know if we don’t try.

We pick up the pieces and rebuild. We don’t abandon our hopes and dreams.

Hercules needs the waterfront. It is not the other way around. (And god bless city hall.)