Fort Ord Reuse Authority Update and Status Report December 19, 2018 https://www.fora.org/
Background • 1991 Fort Ord closure announcement • Over 30,000 people left the economy = City of Monterey, 9% of MC • Repercussions throughout the region • Seaside and Marina especially hard hit. 12/19/2018 • Over 19,000 jobs lost: military, civilian, private sector, schools • Early 90’s regional groups conferred, tried to craft response • Task Force created a Strategic Report • Chaired by Leon Panetta, over 600 people in subcommittees • 720 page report providing direction, focus • 1994 Creation of an “authority” to provide regional direction • Focus on Education, Economy and Environment • Formed an organization, hired staff, Board-determined projects • Pacific Grove was part of the creating legislation as a voting member 2 • Participate in planning, setting goals, supporting regional recovery • One vote, $14,500/year
Recent status • 2012 Extension of the original Act (80% expectation) • Development was hindered: economic slowdown, land “value”, 12/19/2018 development assumptions were overly optimistic. • Building re-use • Demand for open land • Cost to take down derelict buildings • June 30, 2020 FORA sunsets • Now: Transition Plan • Assigns on-going responsibilities and obligations • Settles liabilities • Surfacing gaps, issues, possible ways to go forward • Later: May seek a legislative extension or stand- alone “JPA” • Senator Monning is actively involved as the legislator most likely to put forth legislation. • Unknown form or structure at this point 3
What does FORA do? FORA worked out how to transfer lands from the Army to 5 separate jurisdictions, how to manage habitat protection, remove munitions and hazardous materials, created a Base Reuse Plan and Master Resolution, etc.……. • Serves as Funding Conduit for Base-wide projects 12/19/2018 • Community Facilities District Fees (not transferrable to successors) • Paid per development permit • Pays for Base-wide Projects: Transportation, Water Augmentation, Habitat • “Entitled” Development cannot be charged new fees ($72 million) • Land Sales/Leases + Property Tax • ½ to City/County: General Fund • ½ to FORA: Base- wide Building Removal (FORA’s obligations) and CIP (Roads + Water + HCP) • Unencumbered, so can be applied to special projects, pensions • Coordinates Army Grants to remove munitions (ESCA) • Army’s initial progress for munitions removal was very slow • FORA negotiated grants for speedier cleanup (over $100M) • Make that land transferable to Land Use Jurisdictions: Marina, Seaside, Del Ray 4 Oaks, County of Monterey and City of Monterey • Army wants single-entity, not multiple contracts
• Creating (not done yet) Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) • 69% of 28,000 acres is Open/Recreational Space • Fort Ord Dunes State Park • National Monument • HCP will serve as collective set-aside to balance development and finance long-term maintenance and operations 12/19/2018 • Waiting for Federal and State agencies to approve (18 months) • Endowment “target” has been increased from $9 to $40 -60M by additions of species and required protections • Plan • Create a JPA to receive funds, oversee management • Rely on Land Use Jurisdictions to continue to fund from development fees • Without the HCP, each jurisdiction will have to find an offset (replacement habitat) within their own lands or per negotiations • City of Monterey has 100 acres for “light industrial” • Insufficient land within 100 acres to offset impact of development 5 • So, no building, therefore no jobs.
• Sets Base-wide policies • Affordable housing goals set at 20% of development, more than required by redevelopment standards • Prevailing Wage requirements as “Public Works” 12/19/2018 • Disagreement about secondary projects • Regional Urban Design Guidelines • Sets standards for road design, setbacks, heights, landscaping, etc. • Consistency Determination • Are all developments, General Plans, consistent with the Base Reuse Plan? With Base-wide principles? 6
• Funds Capital Improvement Projects • Cross-jurisdiction road projects are funded from CFD paid by all • Ex: Seaside Highlands’ fees paid for roads in Marina • How to make that “square”? 12/19/2018 • Ft. Ord infrastructure • Far from current safe standards • Roads were all inward; fully gated then, now open • Water Augmentation uses development fees for water projects to supply water up to development ceiling • Marina Coast Water District is the supplier: annexation/control • Early movers get water for “Entitled Projects”, but “Proposed” may not • FORA’s building removal obligations will be met in early 2019 • Why are derelict buildings still all over the base? • Developer obligation 7
Transition Planning • Terms of the 2012 Extension – so a legal obligation • By December 30, 2018 a Transition Plan shall be submitted to 12/19/2018 Local Area Formation Commission which “…shall assign assets and liabilities, designate responsible successor agencies, and provide a schedule of remaining obligations.” • Transition Task Force/Committees • 2016, 2017 recommended continuing legislation • FORA “lite” • Keep financial agreements with Entitled Projects’ Fees • Keep Agreements with Land Use Jurisdictions • Keep property tax extra increment • Keep single-point oversight of munitions removal • Keep collective oversight, regional approaches • Transfer modular responsibilities to relevant entities (ex: TAMC) 8 • Obligation is to create a complete Transition Plan
Transition Plan (s) Multiple versions, edits, approaches First vote on 12/14 passed a Transition Plan (11-2) Second vote 12/19 Key outstanding issues: • To what extent will current agreements survive FORA? (New agreements 12/19/2018 between and among the Land Use Jurisdictions) • 145 Contracts – 0 with PG • How will collective programs be funded? • How will pensions and litigation liabilities be resolved to protect all? • What gets left out? (MST bus replacement agreement) • How will collective, regional interests be addressed? • What is LAFCO’s role in the transition? • Does this Plan have a CEQA impact? • Programmatic vs. Project EIR What is Pacific Grove’s interest/concern? • Getting 100% funding for CalPERS termination liabilities • Habitat funding, supports and adequate management 9 • Fair and equitable treatment for all parties
U pcoming….. • Submit a Transition Plan to LAFCO this month • Does not commit anyone to anything • Shows what the impact of sunset would/will be 12/19/2018 • Does commit to a PLAN that secures 100% pension funding • Land Use Jurisdictions have all the action items • Negotiate agreements on funding, sharing revenues, projects • Continue work on forming a JPA to receive an HCP (or backup) • Continue to work with LAFCO to refine Transition Plan • In parallel • Evaluate the benefits of some sort of legislation • Work with other agencies to assume accountabilities • TAMC and MCWD • Future date • A vote on continuing FORA without Pacific Grove – or not 10 • Public outreach, input and Council discussion and direction
Recommend
More recommend
