From: Peter Bishop <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:25 PM
To: Concord City Council <citycouncil@cityofc oncord.org>; McGallian, Tim <Tim.McGallian@c ityofconcord.org>; Aliano, Dominic <Dominic.Aliano@cityofc oncord.org>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>
Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 4b Council Meeting 5/24/22
Say NO to Seeno
Last year, Concord community members cautioned the City Council that any Seeno- related company as Master Developer of the Concord Naval Weapons Station would be a costly and detrimental mistake. Now, ten months later, Concord First Partners (a Seeno-related company) is proving us right. They are requesting changes to the basic terms; they are asking for financial reimbursement if the deal fails; they are requesting property rights to the land before any agreements are made. They know they cannot deliver on the project as outlined.
These requests and their past practices should be the only grounds you need to reject Seeno as a development partner: they are uncooperative, unethical, and litigious.
We need to keep all the commitments and public benefits that were mapped out prior to the Seeno decision. Don’t break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated the commitments and benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their requested changes on May 24th.
Simply put: If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer.
We need all the things the development project has to offer, especially affordable housing. But no deal is better than a bad deal. Let Seeno walk away. Ask them to walk away. Don’t repeat the mistake that three of you made last summer.
Furthermore, as the Concord Naval Weapons Station development will result in additional dwelling and mixed use units as well as many other facilities utilizing water, all development should maximize the installation of gray water systems at every level to maximize re-utilize of the water consumed by this new development. Councilmembers, we are in a serious drought condition, and should make this an opportunity for the City of Concord to show the rest of California and the Nation that we are leaders in taking meaningful long term actions that will have a positive effect on our environment and our climate.
Sincerely,
Peter Bishop
From: Judith Herman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:34 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 4b on City Council agenda
Dear City Council,
In the last ten m onths, the staff has worked to secure an agreem ent with Concord First Developm ent Partnership to develop the Concord Naval Weapons Station. That effort has been unsuccessful. Now Concord First is requesting that the ex clusive negotiation agreement be amended so that the city would give up leverage in the negotiations, and Concord First would be protected from any loss if the City chose to go in a different direction further down the road.
They ask the city to make agreements before proper environm ental im pact evaluations. This request is being m ade shortly after they lost a lawsuit for violations regarding one of Seeno’s im proper environm ental im pact report on its current project in Pittsburg. Concord should not put itself in a disadvantaged position in this negotiation. So, suppose Concord First requires the city to cover their ex penses. If they want the land transferred before a firm agreem ent, Concord can only lose in any further negotiations under these conditions. Concord First has not been prepared for a project of this size and com plex ity. Tim e to let go and m ove on.
Who is this council working for-Seeno Partners or the people of Concord and Contra Costa County? The Concord City Council has m oved forward on this project with little regard for constituent input. Council m em bers have suffered few consequences as a result. But voters are getting tired of being ignored by this council, and I do not believe they can count on that condition continuing indefinitely.
I ask that the City Council reject Concord First’s request for am endm ents to the ex clusive negotiation agreem ent and go back to the drawing board with a developer prepared to com plete the project and a history we can trust.
Sincerely,
Judi Herman
Concord Resident
From: Anne-Lise Fink <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:52 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer
based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long
history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay
Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed
prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust
with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted,
they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Anne-Lise (Concord resident and business owner)
Anne-Lise Fink, DDS
Concord, CA 94519
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:39 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council, Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy. The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years. Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes. If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station. Sincerely, (Your name) Concord Resident
Just say NO TO SEENO
From: Richard DeShong <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:28 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Richard DeShong
Concord, CA 94521
From: Mike Corby <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:25 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Martin J. Corby
Registered Concord Resident
From: Charles Edwards <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 10:54 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <Tim.McGallian@c ityofconcord.org>; Aliano, Dominic <Dominic.Alia no@c ityofconcord.org>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; lkindsvater@savemountdia blo.org <[email protected]>; Save Mount Diablo & Community Coalition for a Sustainable Concord <[email protected]>
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Charles T Edwards
Concord Resident
Sent from Mail f
or Windows
-----Original Message-----
From: Charlene Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 7:08 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
Concord Resident
From: David Nicolls <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 5:07 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
David Nicolls
Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 1:02 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Why in the world would you give Seeno exclusive rights to the development before they even do anything?
Are you really such suckers?
Seeno shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
A Comcerned Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Rivera <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:32 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely
Christine Rivera
Alfred Rivera
Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: Emily Fowler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:08 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPhone
From: Philip Schafer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 11:49 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]> Subject: Concord Reuse Project
Hello,
I strongly urge you to reject Seeno's Proposal for renegotiating the Concord Reuse Project. The company has a long track record of broken commitments and shoddy practices, suggesting that its current renegotiation ploy won't be the last!
Regards,
Philip Schafer
Former Chair of the Dana Estates Neighborhood Alliance
From: DAVID LOWE <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 10:17 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Seeno historically plays the hidden shell game. Shows you the bean, shuffles the shells, lifts the shells to show you there is nothing under any of the shells. You lose sucker.
Sincerely,
David Lowe (50 year resident of Concord)
Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank and Deanne Pedroni <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 2:37 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy. See no is not trustworthy, they have proved this time and time again, yet we chose them as a partner.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years. Not to mention that we need to be sure the project keeps in mind the current climate changes, is this setting up the buildings to use recycled water, what are the electrical needs, where is the drinking water coming from, garbage/reclamation needs, traffic, etc. Are all of these things being taken into consideration? Our environment must be considered in this major development, not an afterthought.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Frank and Deanne Pedroni
Long time Concord Residents
From: Pamela Hester <[email protected]>
Date : May 18, 2022 at 11:06:01 PM PDT
To: [email protected], c [email protected], tim.mcgallian@c ityofconc ord.org, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes Dear Concord City Council,
S
eeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
My Sister bought a house in Irvines “Great Park” because of what Seeno proposed for Parks and public Benifets. She was disappointed each year as they took the open park and turned it into dense housing. If they could fool the Irvine company, I believe they can easily fool Concords City Council. They do it slowly, year by year with excuses taking away bit by bit and building unsupported density because the profit is greater. P lease don’t be fooled. Don’t turn Concord into an Irvine concrete jungle and decrease everyone in Concords beautiful Parks to an overcrowded grid. It will not bring people and profits to concord and decrease our views and quality of life. Do we have to keep moving North as areas become concrete jungles full of rats?
Sincerely,
Pamela Hester
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPad
From: Marlena Desoto <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 6:56 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name) Marlena Desoto
Concord Resident
From: Karen Keyser <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:41 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Please recind Seeno Deal
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno's history has proven it is an untrustworthy partner. The Eas t Bay Times editorial highlights their litigious past and m oving forward with Seeno would be opening the door to the city paying out huge am ounts of tax payer m onies in legal fees. Concord can wait a few more years for a better developer. Please don't push forward with so m any red flags waving.
Sincerely,
Karen Keyser
Concord
From: MJ n Mike <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:35 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
MJ Corby
Concord resident
From: Lawrence Striley <lstriley@hotma il.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:28 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <Tim.McGallian@c ityofconcord.org>; Aliano, Dominic <Dominic.Alia no@c ityofconcord.org>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; lkindsvater@savemountdia blo.org; [email protected]
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Lawrence Striley
Concord Resident
Sent from Mail f
or Windows
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Schmidt <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:54 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes!!!
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station. We believe if Seeno can’t adhere to the plan, they should withdraw from the contract.
We don’t believe they have the right to “bait and switch”
Sincerely,
Keith & Linda Schmidt
Long-time Concord Residents
Sent from my iPhone
From: suzq <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:12 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Susan Adkins)
Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 5:52 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPhone
From: me <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:48 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council, Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy. The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years. Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes. If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
In addition, I do not approve any of my tax dollars going to pay for a proven corrupt developer. Until there are safeguards in place to insure the city of Concord's citizens tax dollars are being securely used for the good of our future, this project needs to pause again and huge safeguards in place against a subpar project moving forward.
Use my tax dollars to fix the decaying streets we citizen's are driving on every day and causing damage to our daily travels and finances. Are you as elected council members really watching out for our day to day lives and needs? It appears only big developers are being allowed to come in to do business while the small businesses suffer and the citizens of Concord have to wait for pot holes to be filled. Try driving down Treat Boulevard. It's amazing how the Walnut Creek side of Treat is much smoother and a cleaner drive but as soon as you hit Concord borderline, your car is dodging degrading roads all the way to Brubeck Park.
I can barely think about voting this election because who you think is on your side as representative of the community...well it all just seems suspect these days. I may have actually voted for some of the 3 suspect council members...so not sure I trust myself now because I did research them before I put an X by there name. This is why the City will lose out eventually because something like this will undermine the citizens of Concord trust in our leaders.
Don't let Seeno run the council!!!!
Sincerely, Shirley Huie Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Kelnhofer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:35 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Tom Griffiths
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPhone
-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Sager <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:31 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
We have been Concord residents going on 42 years. This is one of the few times we’ve felt it important enough to reach out. We are extremely disappointed that Seeno has been selected to be the sole developer of the Naval Weapons property. After the outpouring of our community pleading to not let this happen, the majority council members did NOT listen to the community that put you in office. How you can possibly think Seeno should be given a chance is beyond me. If any of you had the reputation that Seeno Builders has none if you would be in office.
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Dave and Lisa Sager
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPhone
-----Original Message-----
From: Jamie Beisner <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:03 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Jamie Edwards
Concord Resident
From: Janet M. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 11:00 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
If one look at the proprietary/outla ndish/me dieva l looking Seeno estate atop a Clayton hillside isn't evidence enough, please remember that:
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer!
This is based on:
* city staff review of qualifications
* their refusal to provide required financial information * long history of unethical and illegal business practices * their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision.
Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes!
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Janet Mueller, Concord Resident
-----Original Message-----
From: DAVID LOWE <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 10:07 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
Concord Resident
Have a good day!
-----Original Message-----
From: Elaine Jegi <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 10:48 AM
To: Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>
Subject: Seeno
Hello
I hope that our worst fears aren’t coming true in light of the report by the Concord City Manager dated May 24. The changes to the original agreement to negotiate terms as requested by the Seeno company are troubling. I am especially concerned about their request for ownership of property at the Concord Naval Weapons Station before all requirements are met.
I look forward to attending the City Council meeting on May 24. In light of the great number of citizens who have an interest in having this project succeed, I am wondering whether the meeting could be held at an alternate site that would accommodate everyone.
Elaine Jegi
-----Original Message-----
From: John Compaglia <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 9:26 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]> Subject: CNWS May 24, 2022 Council Meeting
Dear Concord City Council Members,
As former resident of the City of Concord, I am extremely aware of the various issues facing the Council with the redevelopment of the NWS property. To be specific, my father was the top ranking Civilian at the NWS, who worked with the City of Concord over his 30 year career at the NWS. He worked with the City to dedicate the government land for the now Diablo Creek Golf Course. He also, negotiated the introduction of the Tule Elk to the station during his management of the station.
The government has already donated a significant amount of acreage for non residential use ie. recreational space / use which will be supported by the residents of Contra Costa County through their property tax dollars paid to the park district.
The balance of the NWS is before you to determine future development. Given the need for new affordable working class, market rate housing, schools, future job growth from commercial, tech and retail space should be the focus of your decisions on behalf of your constituents.
As an independent planner, it is important to analyze solutions for the public which are shelter (housing), new permanent jobs, public and private recreation facilities, new schools etc as previously addressed. The station already has an existing internal rail transit system which should be re activated and can be connected to the existing Concord BART station 🚉🚉 on Hwy 24 and Port Chicago Hwy.
In closing, I worked on the reuse of Hamilton Field in Navato, CA. It took approximately 30 years before toxic clean up and actual development of any kind took place. Please do not allow a similar situation to occur with NWS.
I encourage you to review and check my comments. As a third generation Contra Costa resident, my interests are our fellow Concord and Contra Costa residents.
Sincerely,
John Compaglia
Planning Consultant
Sent from my iPhone
From: Lyudmil Grigorov <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 7:08 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Lyudmil Grigorov
Concord Resident
(from year of 2000 to present)
Sent from Luke’s
iPhone
-----Original Message-----
From: Donna Langner <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 6:37 AM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
Donna Langner
Concord Resident
Sent from my iPhone
-----Original Message-----
From: Keri Hill <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2022 9:57 PM
To: Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; McGallian, Tim <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy.
The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes.
If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
Sincerely,
(Your name)
Concord Resident
Keri
From: Donna McKinzie <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:55 PM
To: Concord City Council <citycouncil@cityofc oncord.org> Subject: Fwd: Item 4b Council Meeting 5/24/22
I second this motion by Peter Bishop, could not have said it better myself! Please do not let the Seeno’s continue their criminal ways.
Sincerely
Donna McKinzie
Donna M 🇺🇺🇺🇺
Begin forwarded message:
From: Peter Bishop <[email protected]>
Date : May 24, 2022 at 2:24:39 PM PDT
To: citycouncil@c ityofconc ord.org, t im.mcgallian@c ityofconcord.org, dominic.aliano@cityofc oncord.org, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Item 4b Council Meeting 5/24/22
Say NO to Seeno
Last year, Concord community members cautioned the City Council that any Seeno-related company as Master Developer of the Concord Naval Weapons Station would be a costly and detrimental mistake.
Now, ten months later, Concord First Partners (a Seeno-related company) is proving us right. They are requesting changes to the basic terms; they are asking for financial reimbursement if the deal fails; they are requesting property rights to the land before any agreements are made. They know they cannot deliver on the project as outlined.
These requests and their past practices should be the only grounds you need to reject Seeno as a development partner: they are uncooperative, unethical, and litigious.
We need to keep all the commitments and public benefits that were mapped out prior to the Seeno decision. Don’t break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated the commitments and benefits over the past 15 years.
Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their requested changes on May 24th.
Simply put: If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer.
We need all the things the development project has to offer, especially affordable housing. But no deal is better than a bad deal. Let Seeno walk away. Ask them to walk away. Don’t repeat the mistake that three of you made last summer.
Furthermore, as the Concord Naval Weapons Station development will result in additional dwelling and mixed use units as well as many other facilities utilizing water, all development should maximize the installation of gray water systems at every level to maximize re-utilize of the water consumed by this new development. Councilmembers, we are in a serious drought condition, and should make this an opportunity for the City of Concord to show the rest of California and the Nation that we are leaders in taking meaningful long term actions that will have a positive effect on our environment and our climate.
Sincerely,
Peter Bishop
May 24th, 2022
Re: Deny the requested First Amendment and timeline extension to the Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate (ENA) between the Local Reuse Authority (LRA) and Concord First Partners, LLC
Dear Concord City Council,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the staff report dated 5/24 that details Concord First Partners request to modify the ENA for the Concord Naval Weapons Station. The Community Coalition for a Sustainable Concord (CCSC) urges you to deny this request. As your staff have highlighted, this proposal undermines the best interests of the city, the community and the future of our region.
The city’s vision and plan for the Reuse Project is strong and informed by years of community input and advocacy. The Council must not give up its leverage to achieve this vision by changing the terms that were agreed to by the CFP team. It took a long process to achieve the vision listed in original plans and we need to maintain the levels of deeply affordable housing, open space requirements and community amenities in order to make sure this project addresses our climate, housing, workforce and community needs for the region.
Despite having agreed to the terms of the RFQ last year, CFP has indicated that they are having difficulties composing a project land use concept that meets Area Plan requirements, City Council priorities, and community expectations. It is disappointing that the community and city still cannot view a term sheet and assess whether this developer team can actually deliver on the project’s goals. This project is challenging, as any plan that promises a range of long-term community goals should be, but it remains achievable through continued negotiation with stakeholders. Realizing the community’s vision for the project, however, will be even more difficult if the City gives up its leverage and increases the risk of litigation by guaranteeing a proprietary interest earlier in the process than usual. Accepting CFP’s proposal would be a highly unusual step that would put Concord - and the project’s core features - at greater risk. 1
The difficulty and risk of the project are real, but they are not justifications to weaken the high standards for affordable housing and equity goals.
We urge you to go with the staff recommendation to deny CFP’s proposed amendment to the ENA, as it is not in the best interests of the LRA.
Sincerely,
Community Coalition for a Sustainable Concord
2Page 108 of 143
Concord Community Reuse Project
Concord First Partner’s Request
to Amend the Exclusive
Agreement to Negotiate (ENA)
Concord Community Reus e Project
Alternative Actions
1. Deny the requested ENA amendment and:
a. Confirm the existing negotiation process and timeline, but co
mmit the LRA to considering all elements of the project – EIR, Specific Plan, DDA, DA and other matters – in one action to prevent the possibility that land-use matters are approved without the approval of a DDA or DA.
b. Ask CFP representatives if they wish to continue under the exi
sting ENA.
c. Extend the existing ENA for 90 days to finish the Term Sheet.
Concord Community Reus e Project
Alternative Actions (continued)
2. Direct staff to negotiate an ENA amendment and :
a. Provide direction to staff on elements to be further negotiated in t
he proposed ENA amendment:
i. Should the amendment incorporate an enforceable property interest for C
FP as part of an early-stage “outline” DDA?
ii. Should the amendment include a reimbursement provision? b. Direct staff to negotiate the language of the ENA amendment to ach
ieve the Council’s direction while addressing clarity and defensibility of the amendment and have staff return to City Council for consideration of the negotiated ENA amendment at the June 28, 2022, meeting.
c. Extend the existing ENA until June 29, 2022.
Master Developer
Presentation By
CONCORD NAVAL
WEAPONS STATION
CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION
May 24, 2022
CONCORD FIRST PARTNERS - PARTNERSHIP
• A partnership of Lewis Planned Communities, Discovery B
uilders, and California Capital and Investment Group
• 180+ combined years of master planned development
experience
• Most locally active and experienced development team with successful results
• Extensive Base Reuse Experience including Mather AFB, March AFB, and Oakland AB
• We are excited about our partnership with the City of Concord to deliver a world class project
2
CONCORD FIRST PARTNERS – SINCE DAY 1
• We continue to make the Concord Naval Weapons Station our t
op priority
• CFP has engaged in robust community outreach to businesses, non-profits, and individual stakeholders
• We have invested substantial resources over the past 6 months to analyze 20+ years of project materials
• CFP has and will continue to operate with full transparency with the LRA in sharing vision, ideas, and enhancements • We have met all of the submittal deadlines and have produced and delivered all required project materials as directed by LRA 3
CONCORD FIRST
PARTNERS
PROGRESS
CONCORD FIRST PARTNERS SCHEDULE OF MASTER DEVELOPER
SELECTION/NEGOTIATION
Ci t y i ssuance o f SO Q f or M a st er D ev el ope r Select ion Public Hearing
for Exclusive
Right to
Negotiate
Public Hearing for
Exclusive Right to
Negotiate Amendment4/16/2021
City issuance of
SOQ for Master
Developer
Selection
8/21/2021
Public Hearing
for Master
Developer
Selection
10/26/2021
Public Hearing
for Exclusive
Agreement to
Negotiate
5/24/2022
Public Hearing
to extend the
Exclusive
Agreement to
Negotiate
5
LAND PLANS
DRAFT TERM SHEETS
PROJECT PROFORMAS
12/16/21
CFP Land Plan
Presentation
12/31/21
CFP 1st
Submittal
2/21/22
City
Comments
3/29/22
CFD 3rd
Submittal
1/7/22
CFP 1st
Submittal
2/16/22
Partial City
Comments
2/4/22
CFP 1
st
Submittal
2/16/22
City
Comments
3/29/22
CFP 2nd
Submittal
TERM
SHEET
PACKAGE
Awaiting
City
Comments
Awaiting
City
Comments
Awaiting
City
Comments
CFP has held over 70meetings
with the LRA and their consultants
since CFP selected as Master
Developer
6
Over 100 Meetings with Stakeholder Individuals and Groups
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
7
Insert logos
COMMUNITY PRIORITIES
• Concord First Policy/Labor (fair wages/local hire)
• A
ffordable Housing/Veteran Housing
• Local Jobs/Employment
• Environment/Preservation/Recreation (trails/parks)
• Community Outreach/Inclusion
• Community Safety
• Education
8
9 CFP PROPOSED MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY
9
10 TRANSIT-ORIENTED DISTRICT IN CONCORD
10
11 CAMPUS DISTRICT
11
12 INNOVATION DISTRICT
12
13 VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOODS
13
PROCESS
TERM SHEET SPECIFIC PLAN
LRA PREFERRED PROCESS
CFP PREFERRED PROCESS
CNWS PROJECT PROCESS
SPECIFIC PLAN
DDA
+
DA
TERM SHEET
+
“OUTLINE”
DDA
DDA
+
DA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT (EDC) – NAVY & LRA
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
(EIR)
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
(EIR)
15
Insert logos
KEY ASPECTS OF THE PROCESS
• Most past BRAC examples included a Specific Plan and/or EDC A
greement prior to SOQ
• A capable private sector partner(CFP) is necessary to confirm project financial feasibility to Navy prior the Navy land conveyance to LRA
• “It is the Navy’s prerogative to utilize other conveyance methods if the planned EDC with the City does not progress in a timely fashion” (-US Navy email dated May 23, 2022)
16
ENA AMENDMENT
• Concord First Partners is requesting that the City Council extend the ENA and provide the LRA/City Staff with the direction to:
o Finalize a Term Sheet and present a final Term Sheet to City Council for future consideration (CFP submitted Term Sheet to LRA on 1/7/22) o Negotiate the acquisition terms of the Outline Development and Disposition Agreement (ODDA) and present a final ODDA to City Council for future consideration
Lets confirm the actual language of our proposal and eliminate all speculation
(Alternative 2)
17
“OUTLINE” DEVELOPMENT AND DISPOSITION
AGREEMENT (ODDA)
• Serves as a clear and transparent record of commitments for both parties • I
nstitutes process timeline/steps to ensure continued progress • Minimizes and mitigates for complications, delays, or future legal proceedings • Maintains City Council discretion and oversight throughout process • Any phased land conveyance from LRA to CFP will be conditioned upon the EDC Agreement and CFP’s delivery of an entitled, build-ready site Concord First Partners is assuming all of the risk and seeks to be confirmed as the Master Developer for risk mitigation
18
CFP SEEKS TO CLARIFY OUR REQUEST
• Clarify the elements CFP is requesting to be further negotiated in the p
roposed ENA amendment:
• Incorporate a CONDITIONAL enforceable property interest for CFP as part of an early-stage “outline” DDA?
(CFP must complete all entitlement and pre-development work with City Council approvals prior to any land transfer) • Include a reimbursement provision ONLY in the event CFP’s work product is used by others on this project
19
WHY ARE WE HERE?
“Staff has indicated to CFP that their concerns are understood, and that staff is amenable to exploring mitigation approaches that are mutually beneficial to both the LRA and CFP as long-term partners in the CNWS property development project.” (Staff Report page 3)
Our request is simple, PLEASE SUPPORT:
• Extending the ENA for CFP and LRA to complete the ongoing negotiations of the Term Sheet, which CFP submitted on 1/7/22, and, • Directing the LRA and CFP to explore mitigation approaches that are mutually beneficial to both parties so we can continue our work to deliver a world class project to the City of Concord.
20
WE ARE 100% COMMITTED TO THE CITY & LRA
“ONE VISION, ONE PROJECT, ONE TEAM!”
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen McCaffree <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 9:19 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: ENA extension
Why
extend ENA when CFP wants enforceable rights to CNWS property in beginning instead of at end no matter what we extend?
Se
nt from my iPhone
Agenda Item No. 4.b
Correspondence Received after
3 p.m.on Meeting Day
From: Carol Longshore <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 7:28 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: I am Carol Longshore andThank you for your attention. I have some…
• I am Carol Longshore andThank you for your attention. I have some heartfelt concerns. I don’t know what’s happened to this government of mine. I have keep my eye on the councils for three decades and I Even ran for public office twice before. I don’t know what went wrong with the councils that I have trusted and believed in until now. I have blatantly watched this government process very sincerely for 10 years regarding this Navel Weapons land For those of us that have been watching the council and this project from the beginning; when the land was first given to Concord the community and counsel, agreed on a plan and we were just about to vote it when the Navy pulled the rug out from under us. Then when Lennar‘s offer was right up to the last minute and they got so angry with demands from city of Concord that they quit. So appalled by the waste of our taxpayer money, I know those of us that have been around for a long time and have cared deeply for our hometown, we’re tired of the council not at least hearing us or talking to us.
Won’t you please acknowledge us now and say no to these revisions from SeeNo….thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
From: Mark Sever <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 5:41 PM
To: Concord City Council <[email protected]> Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Council Meeting 5/24/22 Say NO to Seeno Today
A person of financial power shouldn’t be able to buy his way into a huge city contract with no repercussions or ramifications from the voting public. We should not be beholding to him or any one entity or interest. Do not wield this power to have Seeno and our elected officials override the voice of us voters. Say no to Seeno!
From: Kathleen Sever <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 5:28 PM
To: Concord City Council <[email protected]> Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 4b Council Meeting 5/24/22 - Say NO to Seeno
Your attention, please.
We are Concord residents since 1987 and are very concerned about discussions in the Seeno plans for development. Seeno as an organization is known for being a bad actor and not trustworthy. I do not trust that they will do anything in the best interest of our city and residents, but will instead consistently put their own ideas and wants ahead of ours. I am an active voter as is my family, neighbors and friends. We will speak with our votes and implore you to listen to us, your voters, and do not allow these dishonest actors to be part of our city plans and future.
Thank you.
Sent from Mail f
or Windows
From: Daniel Roemer <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 3:41 PM
To: Concord City Council <[email protected]> Subject: End Seeno Contract
D
ear City Council Members and Mayor,
Please include the following article in the proceedings this evening:
Editorial: Concord should end weapons station deal with Seeno group (eastbaytimes.com)
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Roemer
Immediate Past Chair & Commissioner,
Immigration and Nationality Law
Adv isory Commission-State Bar of California
Cal. State Bar Certified Specialist -Immigration Law
Northern California Super-Lawyer
www.roemerlaw.com
This email communication may contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH ALSO MAY BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and is intended only f or the use of the intended recipients identif ied abov e. If y ou are not the intended recipient of this communication, y ou are hereby notif ied that any unauthorized rev iew, use, dissemination, distribution, downloading, or copy ing of this communication is strictly prohibited. If y ou are not the intended recipient and hav e receiv ed this communication in error, please immediately notif y us by reply email, delete the communication and destroy all copies
From: Ann Savage-Bair <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 3:52 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Concord Reuse Project: Please Reject Seeno's Proposal and Their Changes
Dear Concord City Council,
Seeno/Discovery Builders and their partners were clearly the weakest candidate for Master Developer based on city staff review of qualifications; refusal to provide required financial information; a long history of unethical and illegal business practices; and their filed lawsuits against the city, the East Bay Regional Park District, and the Navy. The Concord reuse project should keep all the commitments and public benefits that were discussed prior to the Seeno decision. Any watering down of these benefits and commitments would break trust with the public and stakeholders who negotiated public benefits over the past 15 years. Please reject Seeno’s proposal and their changes. If Seeno can’t build the plan that the community developed and that the Concord City Council adopted, they shouldn’t be the Master Developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station.
PLEASE REJECT THE SEENO CONTRACT!!!!!
Cordially,
Concord Resident - Ann Bair
From: Chris Crecelius <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 3:02 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 4b Council Meeting 5/24/22 - Say NO to Seeno Last year, Concord community members, myself included, cautioned the City Council that any Seeno- related company as Master Developer of the Concord Naval Weapons Station would be a costly and detrimental mistake. Citing a long list of detailed reasons, hundreds of Concord residents petitioned the City Council to reject the Seeno-led groups’ request to be considered for the role of master developer.
Now, ten months later, Concord First Partners (a Seeno-related company) is proving us right. They are requesting changes to the basic terms; they are asking for financial reimbursement if the deal fails; they are requesting property rights to the land before any agreements are made. They know they cannot deliver on the project as outlined.
I think we should take Concord First Partners at their word - they can’t figure out how to move forward in terms that are financially viable for them. If the Concord First Partners group can’t pencil out the development from an investment perspective, the three things that are likely to suffer if they remain on the project are affordable housing, community benefits, and fair treatment of labor. That’s not acceptable. These are all the areas where devious developers work carefully to place their profit before the interests of people; Concord residents, in this case.
I think we should follow staff’s recommendation and deny these requests for changes. The best course of action is to let their exclusive negotiating agreement lapse.
It is highly likely that more credible and financially capable candidates from the group last summer would be more than happy to take up where Concord First Partners leaves off. This approach is consistent with the chorus of community comments across last year that another developer be chosen rather than Concord First Partners.
No deal is better than a bad deal. Let Seeno walk away. Ask them to walk away. Don’t repeat the mistake made last summer.
Sincerely,
Christine Crecelius
Concord Resident
District 5
From: Tony Bravo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 3:02 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: agenda item 4b
Good Evening City Council, my name is Tony, a community organizer with Monument Impact. I think you should listen to your staff’s recommendations and deny any proposed amendment to the ENA. Concord First partners,continues to show us the community and you all that they are not prepared to handle this massive project. In late March of this year the City Manager gave them an extension from April 25 to May 25th and now CFP is asking for an even longer extension but not only that they are now asking for the property rights before having done any of the work. This is unacceptable and should cast a sense of doubt in all members of council and reflect if moving with the CFP is truly the right thing to do. Do not extend any more time, it is obvious that CFP is not the right developer for such an important project to Concord.
Tony Bravo
Organizing Manager
(925) 682-8248 Ext 2260
(925) 400-7977 (c)
www.monumentimpact.org
Benched Correspondence
Agenda Item No. 4.b
Received at 4 p.m. by
City Clerk
May 24, 2022
May 6, 2022
The Honorable Senator Dave Min
1021 O Street, Suite 6710
Sacramento, CA 95814
via email
Re: SB 881 (Min) – OPPOSE
Dear Senator Min,
On behalf of the City of Concord, I regretfully write in opposition of SB 881. Concord is the largest city in Contra Costa County with a population of about 125,000 working class people. Our community is served by MCE, and we are proud to support their work to build a cleaner, greener California.
Demanding better from the CPUC-regulated monopoly energy systems of the last century, CCAs began to launch about a decade ago to give the power of choice to their communities. This forward-looking business model has developed more than 10,000 MWs of new, clean, energy power purchase agreements, catalyzed job growth associated with these developments, and accelerated California’s clean energy transition. According to CalCCA, this includes developing 6,117 MW of new solar, 1,044 MW of new wind, 2,646 of new energy storage, 14 MW of new geothermal, and 7 MW of new biogas.1 These developments have helped CCAs exceed the state’s established targets for renewable and emissions-free power.
As currently written, SB 881 would hinder this entrepreneurial energy by stripping away the engine of these investments – autonomy and self-governance. It would leave CCA procurement authority subject to more significant oversight by the CPUC, which could actually impede climate progress. Just this past February, in its 2021 Preferred System Plan decision the CPUC ordered procurement with a higher carbon intensity than what CCAs are already procuring.2 The unintended consequence of this bill would be to stifle innovation, potentially increase energy costs, and send the policy signal to CCAs to be more conservative with their investments, given increased uncertainty over their purchasing autonomy.
1 https://cal-cca.org/cca-impact/
2 D.22-02-004, issued February 14, 2022.
5.a
The City of Concord supports bold statewide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors. Advocating for increased regulation makes more sense in the private sector, where profit margins are the only bottom line. However, CCAs are local government agencies, led by a set of local leaders elected by communities to represent various constituencies and who determine the CCA strategy based on the local community needs, resources, and opportunities.
While Concord is proud to support effective, assertive climate policies, regretfully SB 881 stands to do more harm than good. We must respectfully oppose SB 881, and urge you to go back to the drawing board and work with community choice stakeholders to find a more effective, less disruptive solution to our most pressing climate needs.
Respectfully,
Dominic Aliano, Mayor
City of Concord
Copy: MCE
Concord City Council
Valerie Barone, City Manager
Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager
Joelle Fockler, City Clerk
May 9, 2022
The Honorable Assembly Member Chris R. Holden, Chair
Assembly Appropriations Committee
1021 O Street, Suite 8220
Sacramento, California 95814
Re: AB 2170 (Grayson): Residential real property: foreclosure sales - SUPPORT
Dear Assembly Member Holden:
On behalf of the City of Concord I am writing to urge your support for AB 2170, which will give more Californians the chance to own a home by giving owner-occupants and public entities a “First Look” at purchasing bank-owned properties, and by prohibiting “bulk sales” of foreclosed homes.
In recent years we have seen an unprecedented shift in the ownership of homes from families on Main Street to investors on Wall Street. Since the foreclosure crisis of 2008, private equity firms and large corporations have created a new kind of rental housing market that harms both vulnerable renters and established communities. According to the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), between 2006 and 2012, the number of owner-occupied housing units in California declined by more than 320,000 while the number of renter-occupied housing units increased by more than 720,000. The housing market continues to see a massive infusion of capital from corporate investors seeking to capitalize on changes driven by the COVID-19 pandemic.
A corporate goal of the City of Concord is to preserve and enhance the livability of Concord's residential neighborhoods with opportunities for a broad range of housing options, and we support this legislation because it will help grow the expansion of owner-occupied neighborhoods within our community.
Sincerely,
Dominic Aliano, Mayor
City of Concord
Copy: Assemblymember Tim Grayson
Concord City Council
Valerie Barone, City Manager
Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager
Joelle Fockler, City Clerk
5.b