The Concord City Council will give Concord First Partners (CFP) — the Seeno/Discovery Homes-owned LLC it designated master developer of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station — an extension of its deadline to have a negotiated term sheet in place.
But the council on Tuesday denied CFP requests to amend the agreement to give them early property rights and reimbursement of costs should the deal fall through.
The night before the current deadline expired, the council voted 4-1 to extend the deadline until Jan. 31, 2023.
Councilmember Carlyn Obringer voted against the extension. She said she didn’t have faith CFP wouldn’t present more demands down the line, risking taxpayers’ money.
“There is a real trust issue; I hear it from my constituents every single day,” Obringer said.
The city already granted CFP a one-month extension. The company wanted an additional 90 days — to Aug. 23 — to complete a term sheet, a timeframe in which council members said they don’t have faith would be enough to reach an agreement.
CFP also wanted to negotiate an early-stage “outline” disposition and development agreement (DDA) before land use planning and environmental review moves forward. It also asked for an “enforceable right in the CNWS property in the early-stage outline DDA'” and the council to “reimburse CFP for certain expended costs should the city council fail to approve the future EIR (environmental impact report) and specific plan.”
“That’s off the table,” said Vice Mayor Laura Hoffmeister.
CFP agreed to continue negotiations. Guy Bjerke, the city’s director of economic development and base reuse, told the council progress has been made, but the term sheet would likely be done now if not for CFP’s amendment demands.
Staff recommended the council deny CFP’s proposed amendments as not being in the city’s best interests. The city didn’t get the request until May 10, which staff said didn’t allow enough time for review and negotiation.
The fate of 5,046 acres on the city’s northeast side has been one of Concord’s biggest issues since the Navy abandoned the area in 1999. The Navy officially designated it as surplus and made Concord the local reuse authority for the site, of which 2,300 acres are targeted for 13,000 units of housing and millions of square feet of commercial space.
The site will also be home to a new 2,540-acre East Bay Regional Park, named Thurgood Marshall Regional Park – Home of the Port Chicago 50, commemorating the nearby Port Chicago tragedy during World War II.
The city has been consistent in its demand the development includes more affordable housing than the state requires. It also wants a guarantee that local labor is used, which was a sticking point with its first master developer, Lennar Five Point. The company pulled out of the project in March 2020 when its initial exclusive negotiating agreement expired and its negotiations with local labor unions failed.
.. council to “reimburse CFP for certain expended costs should the city council fail to approve the future EIR (environmental impact report) and specific plan.”
If I’m a developer, I’m not doing anything until that EIR is signed, sealed and delivered. Too much financial risk.
… don’t give an inch Concord… they have too sketchy of business dealings
Something isn’t being made clear when units are mixed up “of which 2,300 acres are targeted for 13,000 units of housing and millions of square feet of commercial space.” Especially when the terms are vague like “millions” Don’t they know how much area is designated for commercial space?
Last night’s meeting was, as one caller put it, a “Clown show.” The project, in its current state with the multiple players involved – the Council, the Developer and Staff, and the US Navy, – this is destined to fail.
Why?
We have a City council that has no experience or expertise in Land Development (this is the 2nd time around in trying to get this property developed), yet these people are being asked to make decisions supposedly in the best interest of the residents and taxpayers of Concord. If you needed a heart operation, would ask your barber his opinion on how to perform the operation?
The Council lacks true leadership – our council is made up of the same personnel rotating chairs every few years. They may be nice people, but none of them would be called a strong leader.
The Council is poor at meeting management. At points during the meeting, it was clear that some of the topics were so far out of scope, yet not one council member (looking at you Mr. Mayor), attempted to halt the conversation and return it to the three core issues. Then add in the some of the repetitious and almost verbatim “public comments” and you get a long, unproductive meeting.
The Council has no ability to focus. If the scope of the meeting had been to solely focus on the three issues: 1) the Extension, 2) the transfer of land rights, and 3) reimbursement of expenses; it would have been over by 8 p.m. (instead we went until +11:30 pm)
The Developer is playing games. They tried to call the Councils bluff, by waiting for the day before the Term sheet was due, to leverage additional terms and conditions more to their liking. Can someone please explain why we picked such a trustworthy Developer?
Last night the Council wasted five hours of taxpayer time and money on a decision that could have been easily made without a meeting. The developer, when they accepted their Exclusive Rights Assignment, knew the timeline for the deliverables. They did not deliver. The council should have said, “no” to all of their requests, WITHOUT a meeting. To make matters worse, the developer has had six months to prepare a Term Sheet and we just granted them another nine months! Why perpetuate the mediocrity?
To grant an extension just reconfirms that our council, instead of doing the right thing the right way – just say no – continues to do the “wrong thing the wrong way.”
Our best hope is that come November, the Council members are replaced with people whom are better suited to the task at hand. Otherwise, this situation will end badly.
+1
They probably couldn’t come up with an agreement on how much they should all be paid off to give Seeno what he wants.
9 months to go and think about it!!!!!
And yet the people of Concord keep electing the same people term after term. So the people of Concord are to blame for some of this.
Concord didn’t insist on local labor, they insisted on local union labor.
To cities and counties in the Bay Area, the only legitimate labor is union labor. And this is why this area is such a disaster.
I’m amazed they got it half right. The property transfer was so brazen I expected our moronic leaders to say, “Duh, okay!” immediately. Seeno cannot be trusted. They should never have been selected and should have been dumped now. The council is in too big a rush to further degrade the quality of life in Concord.
Agree
WC-Creeker..
And your not going to be the developer..
Their reputation hurts and helps depending on the suckers you talk to. Their $Money$ is what keeps the wheels greased. Most citizens look at their reputation and the things they have and have not done in the past.
Well, I hate to admit it, but it’s time to change up the City staff working on this project. City council members bank on their staff and/or consultant teams to plan and anticipate these developer “sandbags.” They sandbag the City at the last minute and don’t secure incremental agreements as part of the process, but instead focus on one deadline that is comprehensive and hope it works out. Developers are notorious for this approach; the City’s Economic Development staff should have known that by now.
The City Council should revamp their negotiations team with folks that have experience on this type of developer negotiations. They should also consider adopting agreement milestones that are to be developed and approved by the City and developer over the time of this time extension.
My 2 cents…..
+1
Supposedly we are in a drought and are being forced to conserve water with mandatory water rationing, yet we are proposing to build 13,000 units of housing, new commercial property, and parks that probably need sprinklers to water the newly planted trees and landscaping? WAKE UP! I’ll start taking the water rationing serious when you stop building new housing. I say leave the open space just that, open space. Throw in some walking paths and that’s it.
Yes Yes Yes Dana Estates. If you can’t find a place to live, GO somewhere else. OPEN SPACE, OPEN SPACE with rural paths and trails.
Well, now we all know.
Who owns whom.
The last developer pulled out when they brought up the obvious….using as much union labor as required wouldn’t allow them to make a reasonable return on investment. This will be the same outcome with the new developer unless they are allowed to reduce the open space in favor of more development.
And Debora Allen wants to become a county super based on “common sense solutions.”
Politicians have no “common sense solutions.”
Prove me wrong.