Barry
11-30-2009, 11:49 PM
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/images/logo2.gif
Factions join forces
Business interests wary as advocates for environment, labor, housing join with developer in pioneering agreement on Codding's Sonoma Mountain Village
<script type="text/javascript"> var collab_title = 'Factions join forces'; </script>
By MIKE McCOY ([email protected])
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Sunday, November 29, 2009 at 4:03 a.m.
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=SR&Date=20091129&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=911291020&Ref=AR&MaxW=250&border=0
Christopher Chung / PD
Sonoma Mountain Village is Codding Enterprises environmentally
sensitive project built on the former Agilent campus in Rohnert Park.
The mixed use project will include office, retail and residential
space that is pedestrian friendly.
The Sonoma Mountain Village vision of an environment-friendly enclave of homes and businesses has done more than shine a light on what Codding Enterprises hopes will be the future of planetary living.
It also has propelled its partner in the deal -- the Accountable Development Coalition -- into the forefront of a movement that incorporates agreements with union, environmental, affordable housing and wage advocates into the ultimate project approval.
The coalition's role has led to assertions in the business community that its growing influence stems from the potential for lawsuits and for political opposition from a coalition-friendly web of elected and appointed officials if developers rebuff its demands.
The Accountable Development Coalition was created about four years ago and has grown to represent more than a dozen advocacy groups, ranging from the North Bay Labor Council to Sonoma County Conservation Action. It took on a visible role last year when it marshaled its forces to oppose a Lowe's home improvement store in Santa Rosa.
Last month, it raised its profile dramatically when it reached a deal with Codding Enterprises to collaborate in development of the billion-dollar Sonoma Mountain Village in Rohnert Park.
The pact, called a "community benefits agreement," is being touted as the first of its kind in Sonoma County.
Such agreements are an emerging nationwide planning tool in which community groups negotiate contracts with developers to provide benefits -- such as prevailing wages, low-income housing and child care -- in exchange for their support when the projects go before governmental agencies for approval.
"We don't have the kind of leverage government has, but we do have the power of persuasion," said ADC Chairman Michael Allen, a Santa Rosa planning commissioner and former North Bay labor leader.
An even bigger negotiation for the coalition already is under way. Directors of the SMART commuter rail line are requiring developers of the New Railroad Square project in Santa Rosa, site of one of the rail district's main train stations, to negotiate a community benefits agreement specifically with ADC.
Yet, the Sonoma Mountain Village agreement -- which calls for a yearly payment of $6,000 from the Codding company to the coalition for its promotional support -- has raised concerns within the development community. Critics say the coalition is using its ties to elected and appointed city officials to extract concessions and money from developers to support its own causes.
"There are more and more people getting angry about that," said Keith Woods, executive director for the North Coast Builders Exchange, which represents 1,800 predominantly nonunion contractors in Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties.
"These types of agreements almost always try to slice nonunion contractors out of realistic chances to bid on projects," he said.
"They are more like cronies' agreements," Woods said.
Labor, green provisions
The increasing focus on such agreements, and those behind them, sharpened last month when details of the ADC/Codding Enterprises accord were made public.
The pact requires Codding to give preferential treatment to six labor unions; pay prevailing wages on all commercial construction; push to ensure a minimum $13 to $15 hourly wage for those who work at the finished project; support the SMART train; and develop to the highest green-building standards in Sonoma County.
In exchange, the ADC agreed to throw the full weight of its membership behind the project and promised to show up at public hearings, send letters and even put together a traveling "road show" to convince others to support it.
Codding also agreed to pay the ADC $5,000 upon signing the agreement and $6,000 a year for as long as it takes to build the 1,900-unit residential portion of the project. The agreement says the money will "defray a portion of the coalition's expenses to fulfill its obligations to the development" and "to assist in the long-term sustainability of the ADC."
"My personal belief is I think they are bordering on extortion," Woods said.
"That is what the Mafia does in Chicago. They get donations for the Benevolent Society," said architect Scott Bartley, who sits alongside Allen and former ADC vice chairman Nick Caston on Santa Rosa's Planning Commission.
Codding Enterprises development manager Kirstie Moore said that was not the case.
"It wasn't a difficult decision for us when the coalition asked us if we would support them," she said, noting the agreement requires the group to spend considerable time working on the project's behalf.
"It's an investment in our future," she said.
Allen, the coalition's chief negotiator on the Sonoma Mountain Village deal, sees such agreements as "the missing piece" to government-required environmental impact reports.
He said they allow interest groups to negotiate pacts that go beyond what government normally demands -- more parks, better wages, child care, more housing set aside for low-income -- that benefit the larger community.
"I have been frequently told in my life that government sets the minimal standards, but that nothing is stopping society from asking for something better," said Allen, who also is an aide to state Sen. Pat Wiggins of Santa Rosa.
Payments critical to efforts
He said the financial assistance is critical to insuring the ADC can fulfill its end of the contract, noting the ADC is largely a volunteer organization with only one paid staff member.
He said its total annual budget is about $60,000, with about 30 percent to 40 percent financed by unions and the balance coming from grants and other donations.
Implications of the deal between the often-adversarial sides have reverberated throughout Sonoma County.
"It has not made them (Codding Enterprises) popular with other developers," said Rohnert Park Councilman Jake Mackenzie.
Woods said he is especially concerned that the Sonoma Mountain Village deal could become precedent-setting, a move that could cut a lot of his group's members out of work, particularly on government-funded construction projects.
The real battleground, however, looms just ahead.
While Sonoma Mountain Village is a private development, Woods and others point out development of the SMART train and 14 stations along its 70-mile route from Cloverdale to Larkspur will be a $541 million project financed with taxpayer dollars.
Transit village project
At the heart of the issue is the New Railroad Square project, a mixed-use development planned on 5.3 acres by three co-developers given the go-ahead by SMART's directors to convert the SMART-owned property into a transit-oriented village.
The project, including two adjacent acres owned by one of the development companies, would house 279 residential units, including 68 set aside for low-income residents, two acres' worth of retail and commercial development and more than 500 parking spaces.
The estimated cost is $185 million, which includes $16 million in state funding.
SMART's board of directors, which includes several political leaders from Sonoma County and its cities, is requiring the co-developers to negotiate a community benefits agreement with ADC.
Windsor Councilwoman Debora Fudge, a SMART board member, said ADC was brought into the process because it had asked that an agreement be required and also because members of ADC's various groups had been active in pressing SMART officials to make certain demands upon the developer.
"They represented many different groups -- labor, affordable housing, the environment -- it seemed to make sense for efficiency reasons," Fudge said.
San Francisco developer John Stewart, who heads a trio of builders trying to jointly develop the Railroad Square project, said he's never been involved in a community benefits agreement before. He said it could play an important role in avoiding costly delays by seeking consensus from disparate groups while providing a solid front when seeking governmental approvals.
"On a theoretical level, they are attempts to get everyone at the table at the same time. We don't want to have a food fight. We want to flesh out every issue first," he said.
But the use of taxpayer dollars in such a project has heightened the sensitivity over the deal, particularly from those who believe the ADC is attempting to fulfill its own goals -- union jobs, prevailing wages, a greater mix of low-income housing -- at the expense of other stakeholders that include the West End Neighborhood Association, nonunion contractors and the developers themselves.
Consensus called worthwhile
Longtime West End Neighborhood leader Allen Thomas, a former city planning commissioner and now a development consultant, said such agreements can prove worthwhile in reaching consensus.
"The whole concept is to walk into the development department holding hands," he said.
But in ADC's case, Thomas questions why the ADC was SMART's sole negotiating choice, noting his neighborhood adjoins the Railroad Square project. The West End and ADC have differed over the amount and type of low-income housing that will be built.
"Who says they are the community?" he said. "It's more a special-interests agreement than a community benefits agreement."
Stewart, however, has changed that dynamic.
He wasn't comfortable dealing with just the ADC and welcomed others -- the West End group, the Historic Railroad Square Association and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition among others -- to join the talks.
"The community part of community benefits is a bit misleading in ADC's case. To be a community benefit it has to be broad enough to cover everything," Stewart said. "But in ADC's case it really has only four stakeholder positions -- the environment, living wages, affordable housing and labor."
"We don't want to have a whole series of separate negotiations with different parties. We can hear them all at one time. It's a big tent," he said.
Stewart said negotiations have been "constructive," but three sticking points remain between his group and the ADC: Whether prevailing wages must be paid on all private as well as taxpayer-financed portions of the development; the extent to which workers within the finished development will be paid no less than $13.20 an hour; and who should be the tenants of the low-income housing built on-site.
Woods also says that his group "wants a seat at the table" to balance the pro-union stance of the ADC.
The concerns over the ADC's power and influence reach far beyond its member organizations.
Some critics are concerned the ADC's power is heightened in the minds of developers who fear they will have to cave in to its demands rather than see their projects rejected by ADC supporters who sit on various city councils, planning commissions, redevelopment agencies and design review boards throughout Sonoma County.
"I worry developers will think they don't have a choice," said Lisa Schaffner, executive director for the Sonoma County Alliance, a countywide business-oriented group that includes labor unions and agricultural interests as well.
Allen, however, said "There's nothing sinister about what we do."
"We are influential, but a lot of it has to do with having good ideas. I just call it effective civic participation," he said.
Broad political involvement
That participation -- and political involvement -- is extensive.
"The tentacles of the ADC are spread throughout SMART and Santa Rosa," Thomas said.
Besides Caston, several other members of ADC-related groups serve on Santa Rosa's Board of Public Utilities, Personnel Board, Measure "O" Oversight Committee, Community Advisory Board, Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority.
Mayor Susan Gorin was former vice chairwoman of New Economy Working Solutions, an ADC-member group that focuses on jobs, the environment and affordable housing. She resigned when she was named mayor last December.
Gorin, however, noted that while she has cut her ties with the group, most political leaders have had associations with various self-interest organizations in the past.
And while you may share their goals, that doesn't always mean you agree with them, she said. "All elected or appointed officials, I hope, think independently."
You can reach Staff Writer Mike McCoy at 521-5276 or [email protected].
Copyright © 2009 PressDemocrat.com — All rights reserved. Restricted use only.
Factions join forces
Business interests wary as advocates for environment, labor, housing join with developer in pioneering agreement on Codding's Sonoma Mountain Village
<script type="text/javascript"> var collab_title = 'Factions join forces'; </script>
By MIKE McCOY ([email protected])
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Sunday, November 29, 2009 at 4:03 a.m.
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=SR&Date=20091129&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=911291020&Ref=AR&MaxW=250&border=0
Christopher Chung / PD
Sonoma Mountain Village is Codding Enterprises environmentally
sensitive project built on the former Agilent campus in Rohnert Park.
The mixed use project will include office, retail and residential
space that is pedestrian friendly.
The Sonoma Mountain Village vision of an environment-friendly enclave of homes and businesses has done more than shine a light on what Codding Enterprises hopes will be the future of planetary living.
It also has propelled its partner in the deal -- the Accountable Development Coalition -- into the forefront of a movement that incorporates agreements with union, environmental, affordable housing and wage advocates into the ultimate project approval.
The coalition's role has led to assertions in the business community that its growing influence stems from the potential for lawsuits and for political opposition from a coalition-friendly web of elected and appointed officials if developers rebuff its demands.
The Accountable Development Coalition was created about four years ago and has grown to represent more than a dozen advocacy groups, ranging from the North Bay Labor Council to Sonoma County Conservation Action. It took on a visible role last year when it marshaled its forces to oppose a Lowe's home improvement store in Santa Rosa.
Last month, it raised its profile dramatically when it reached a deal with Codding Enterprises to collaborate in development of the billion-dollar Sonoma Mountain Village in Rohnert Park.
The pact, called a "community benefits agreement," is being touted as the first of its kind in Sonoma County.
Such agreements are an emerging nationwide planning tool in which community groups negotiate contracts with developers to provide benefits -- such as prevailing wages, low-income housing and child care -- in exchange for their support when the projects go before governmental agencies for approval.
"We don't have the kind of leverage government has, but we do have the power of persuasion," said ADC Chairman Michael Allen, a Santa Rosa planning commissioner and former North Bay labor leader.
An even bigger negotiation for the coalition already is under way. Directors of the SMART commuter rail line are requiring developers of the New Railroad Square project in Santa Rosa, site of one of the rail district's main train stations, to negotiate a community benefits agreement specifically with ADC.
Yet, the Sonoma Mountain Village agreement -- which calls for a yearly payment of $6,000 from the Codding company to the coalition for its promotional support -- has raised concerns within the development community. Critics say the coalition is using its ties to elected and appointed city officials to extract concessions and money from developers to support its own causes.
"There are more and more people getting angry about that," said Keith Woods, executive director for the North Coast Builders Exchange, which represents 1,800 predominantly nonunion contractors in Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties.
"These types of agreements almost always try to slice nonunion contractors out of realistic chances to bid on projects," he said.
"They are more like cronies' agreements," Woods said.
Labor, green provisions
The increasing focus on such agreements, and those behind them, sharpened last month when details of the ADC/Codding Enterprises accord were made public.
The pact requires Codding to give preferential treatment to six labor unions; pay prevailing wages on all commercial construction; push to ensure a minimum $13 to $15 hourly wage for those who work at the finished project; support the SMART train; and develop to the highest green-building standards in Sonoma County.
In exchange, the ADC agreed to throw the full weight of its membership behind the project and promised to show up at public hearings, send letters and even put together a traveling "road show" to convince others to support it.
Codding also agreed to pay the ADC $5,000 upon signing the agreement and $6,000 a year for as long as it takes to build the 1,900-unit residential portion of the project. The agreement says the money will "defray a portion of the coalition's expenses to fulfill its obligations to the development" and "to assist in the long-term sustainability of the ADC."
"My personal belief is I think they are bordering on extortion," Woods said.
"That is what the Mafia does in Chicago. They get donations for the Benevolent Society," said architect Scott Bartley, who sits alongside Allen and former ADC vice chairman Nick Caston on Santa Rosa's Planning Commission.
Codding Enterprises development manager Kirstie Moore said that was not the case.
"It wasn't a difficult decision for us when the coalition asked us if we would support them," she said, noting the agreement requires the group to spend considerable time working on the project's behalf.
"It's an investment in our future," she said.
Allen, the coalition's chief negotiator on the Sonoma Mountain Village deal, sees such agreements as "the missing piece" to government-required environmental impact reports.
He said they allow interest groups to negotiate pacts that go beyond what government normally demands -- more parks, better wages, child care, more housing set aside for low-income -- that benefit the larger community.
"I have been frequently told in my life that government sets the minimal standards, but that nothing is stopping society from asking for something better," said Allen, who also is an aide to state Sen. Pat Wiggins of Santa Rosa.
Payments critical to efforts
He said the financial assistance is critical to insuring the ADC can fulfill its end of the contract, noting the ADC is largely a volunteer organization with only one paid staff member.
He said its total annual budget is about $60,000, with about 30 percent to 40 percent financed by unions and the balance coming from grants and other donations.
Implications of the deal between the often-adversarial sides have reverberated throughout Sonoma County.
"It has not made them (Codding Enterprises) popular with other developers," said Rohnert Park Councilman Jake Mackenzie.
Woods said he is especially concerned that the Sonoma Mountain Village deal could become precedent-setting, a move that could cut a lot of his group's members out of work, particularly on government-funded construction projects.
The real battleground, however, looms just ahead.
While Sonoma Mountain Village is a private development, Woods and others point out development of the SMART train and 14 stations along its 70-mile route from Cloverdale to Larkspur will be a $541 million project financed with taxpayer dollars.
Transit village project
At the heart of the issue is the New Railroad Square project, a mixed-use development planned on 5.3 acres by three co-developers given the go-ahead by SMART's directors to convert the SMART-owned property into a transit-oriented village.
The project, including two adjacent acres owned by one of the development companies, would house 279 residential units, including 68 set aside for low-income residents, two acres' worth of retail and commercial development and more than 500 parking spaces.
The estimated cost is $185 million, which includes $16 million in state funding.
SMART's board of directors, which includes several political leaders from Sonoma County and its cities, is requiring the co-developers to negotiate a community benefits agreement with ADC.
Windsor Councilwoman Debora Fudge, a SMART board member, said ADC was brought into the process because it had asked that an agreement be required and also because members of ADC's various groups had been active in pressing SMART officials to make certain demands upon the developer.
"They represented many different groups -- labor, affordable housing, the environment -- it seemed to make sense for efficiency reasons," Fudge said.
San Francisco developer John Stewart, who heads a trio of builders trying to jointly develop the Railroad Square project, said he's never been involved in a community benefits agreement before. He said it could play an important role in avoiding costly delays by seeking consensus from disparate groups while providing a solid front when seeking governmental approvals.
"On a theoretical level, they are attempts to get everyone at the table at the same time. We don't want to have a food fight. We want to flesh out every issue first," he said.
But the use of taxpayer dollars in such a project has heightened the sensitivity over the deal, particularly from those who believe the ADC is attempting to fulfill its own goals -- union jobs, prevailing wages, a greater mix of low-income housing -- at the expense of other stakeholders that include the West End Neighborhood Association, nonunion contractors and the developers themselves.
Consensus called worthwhile
Longtime West End Neighborhood leader Allen Thomas, a former city planning commissioner and now a development consultant, said such agreements can prove worthwhile in reaching consensus.
"The whole concept is to walk into the development department holding hands," he said.
But in ADC's case, Thomas questions why the ADC was SMART's sole negotiating choice, noting his neighborhood adjoins the Railroad Square project. The West End and ADC have differed over the amount and type of low-income housing that will be built.
"Who says they are the community?" he said. "It's more a special-interests agreement than a community benefits agreement."
Stewart, however, has changed that dynamic.
He wasn't comfortable dealing with just the ADC and welcomed others -- the West End group, the Historic Railroad Square Association and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition among others -- to join the talks.
"The community part of community benefits is a bit misleading in ADC's case. To be a community benefit it has to be broad enough to cover everything," Stewart said. "But in ADC's case it really has only four stakeholder positions -- the environment, living wages, affordable housing and labor."
"We don't want to have a whole series of separate negotiations with different parties. We can hear them all at one time. It's a big tent," he said.
Stewart said negotiations have been "constructive," but three sticking points remain between his group and the ADC: Whether prevailing wages must be paid on all private as well as taxpayer-financed portions of the development; the extent to which workers within the finished development will be paid no less than $13.20 an hour; and who should be the tenants of the low-income housing built on-site.
Woods also says that his group "wants a seat at the table" to balance the pro-union stance of the ADC.
The concerns over the ADC's power and influence reach far beyond its member organizations.
Some critics are concerned the ADC's power is heightened in the minds of developers who fear they will have to cave in to its demands rather than see their projects rejected by ADC supporters who sit on various city councils, planning commissions, redevelopment agencies and design review boards throughout Sonoma County.
"I worry developers will think they don't have a choice," said Lisa Schaffner, executive director for the Sonoma County Alliance, a countywide business-oriented group that includes labor unions and agricultural interests as well.
Allen, however, said "There's nothing sinister about what we do."
"We are influential, but a lot of it has to do with having good ideas. I just call it effective civic participation," he said.
Broad political involvement
That participation -- and political involvement -- is extensive.
"The tentacles of the ADC are spread throughout SMART and Santa Rosa," Thomas said.
Besides Caston, several other members of ADC-related groups serve on Santa Rosa's Board of Public Utilities, Personnel Board, Measure "O" Oversight Committee, Community Advisory Board, Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority.
Mayor Susan Gorin was former vice chairwoman of New Economy Working Solutions, an ADC-member group that focuses on jobs, the environment and affordable housing. She resigned when she was named mayor last December.
Gorin, however, noted that while she has cut her ties with the group, most political leaders have had associations with various self-interest organizations in the past.
And while you may share their goals, that doesn't always mean you agree with them, she said. "All elected or appointed officials, I hope, think independently."
You can reach Staff Writer Mike McCoy at 521-5276 or [email protected].
Copyright © 2009 PressDemocrat.com — All rights reserved. Restricted use only.