Richmond is now going through the motions of soliciting alternative uses for Point Molate.  A consultant ($50,000) is gathering and evaluating alternatives.  Add to that the thousands of dollars for the salaries of city legal and administrative staffs.  It is money wasted to cover the rear ends of city council people who back the casino project.
 
The reality of this solicitation process came through at the first workshop on Wednesday August 4.
 
Although the consultants were supposed to be soliciting alternative uses they made no provision for  usable maps of the  area. They made no arrangements for people to have access to the area.  Instead they made clear that alternatives that would pass their preliminary qualifications had to show that they were "financially feasible", implying that any project had to be without city funds. As one person commented at the hearing, the criteria virtually excluded the most likely way that a large public purpose development can take place:  initial seed money from public agencies working with private developers with a long term plan.  Thus the process was wired so that only developer Upstream's Casino proposals would appear to pass financial tests.  See the "idea" form presented at the meeting. 

All proposals that were submitted would be passed on to Upstream and City staff  before being submitted to the City Council. Any business plan for Point Molate that might be  profitable,  or at least financially feasible,  or was just a good idea, would have to be submitted to Upstream for its possible use.  The situation is roughly comparable to the city agreeing tentatively to accept Chrysler's bid for police cars,  but telling people who like to see Ford cars considered as well, that Ford would have to submit its designs to Chrysler for consideration.
 
Why are we wasting city time and money on this charade?  You can find the answer by watching the city council meeting of May 18. 

The city did not have to extend the LDA.  In fact Mayor McLaughlin had placed an item on the agenda to allow the city to begin to entertain alternative uses for  Point Molate.  But during the previous item on the agenda -extending the LDA for 2 months - council member Viramontes waited until public discussion was closed to make a long confusing amendment to extend the LDA for almost a year. It also created the illusion that the city was going to consider new alternatives by setting up the procedure that put Upstream in the driver's seat.  Viramontes claims to oppose the casino but lately every one of her actions has been to smooth the road for it.  

 
For more information on the issues concerning the Casino project at point Molate and alternatives see the Citizens for a Sustainable Point Molate web site. 

 
What you can do.

Richmond residents will have the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on whether we want a casino at Point Molate  on November's ballot thanks to a motion at city council by  Butt, Ritterman and McLaughlin.  Most important is to make sure your neighbors understand what is really going on and vote against the Casino in November.

You can also write letters or call city council members and tell them that you want a process to consider alternative uses for Pt. Molate based on balanced criteria which includes traffic, social impact, and the environment and which allows other developers to present their own proposals.