August 19, 2004

Shedding light on the McKean Road Sports fields project
Dando tries to add clarity—Rules Committee defers audit decision

By Kymberli W. Brady
Staff Writer

In light of recent media coverage and subsequent events that have cast a shadow on the Almaden Youth Association [AYA] and the McKean Road sports fields project, Vice Mayor Pat Dando met with AYA board members and media representatives on Monday in an effort to clarify the ongoing process.

Dando says she scheduled the meetings because of misinterpretations, misinformation and miscommunication that contributed to the controversy.

“I try not to put blame anywhere,” she says. “Somehow, maybe we weren’t clear enough or maybe we didn’t provide enough information to make sure that the community had accurate information reported. If we did not communicate adequately enough, I want to make sure that doesn’t happen again.”

In addition to providing copies of cancelled checks, and signed contracts between the AYA and the city, as well as the city and RBF Consulting, Dando addressed recent article allegations regarding city funding and oversight.

As reported in the July 23 issue of the Almaden Times Weekly, the 2004-2005 District 10 budget shows a line item of $650,000 set aside for sports field development, with a total of $150,000 in grants received by the AYA, and an additional $150,000 yet to be dispersed from a Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund grant. To date, $480,095 has been spent on the project.

“Reports that the city invests $2.6 million for fields with no oversight is clearly not correct,” Dando says. “My staff and I poured over the budget in an effort to figure out where that $2.6 million could possibly have come from—I think I may have found it.”

According to a copy of the District 10 Parks and Community Facilities Capital Program budget, the total use of funds line item of $2.581 million for 2004-2005 includes $132,000 for minor building and park renovations, preliminary studies, and the San Jose Conservation Corp. Of the $1.3 million in reserves, only $650,000 has been earmarked for sports field development, with the balance going toward future parksite acquisition and strategic capital replacement needs.

“In reading the budget, I think they looked at the total and saw $2.581 million and rounded it off to $2.6 million. But, if you look at all those line items, the only amount that goes for the sports fields is the $650,000. The other items are for non AYA related monies.”

However, due to a District 10 surplus last year, Dando plans to add an additional $80-$85,000 in discretionary funds to the project for sports field development, bringing the total to nearly $735,000.

“We had been quite frugal in this office last year and had money left over,” she says. “We gave some to a variety of other organizations, including schools for grants and The Spot.”

Although the 2003-2004 budget shows a $194,000 in District 10 funds were spent on the project, the additional $100,000 taken from the general fund to pay for the amended EIR is not listed, as the money, according to city officials will be reimbursed by the AYA once the project is approved.

“The money that the AYA has actually been handed is $150,000,” explains Dando. “In the scheme of what we do, even though agreements were filed and signed, it probably wasn’t at the forefront of our attorney’s minds or Parks and Rec.”

Ongoing speculation that contracts between the AYA and the city don’t exist was also put to rest, although Dando explains that the documents represent agreements between the AYA and the city. The vernacular may be different, but they are binding none the less.

“To me, a contract and an agreement are about the same thing,” she says.

According to the documents produced, The AYA received a grant for $50,000 toward the cost of the negative declaration and, as agreed, paid the balance of $13,788. The agreement was signed Oct. 3, 2002.

They received an additional grant for $100,000 toward the cost of the initial EIR and, as agreed, paid the balance of $22,307. The agreement was signed Apr. 28, 2003.

The city entered into an agreement with RBF consulting Nov. 17, 2003 and paid $294,000 for the amended EIR, in which $194,000 was paid through District 10 funds. According to the agreement, “a separate cost-sharing agreement with the AYA for the reimbursement of a portion of the District 10 funds will be completed in the future.”

There is one contract that remains to be seen for the $150,000 Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund grant, one that Dando says will be drawn up once the money is dispersed to the AYA. Currently, it remains in the city coffers, and the funds will not be expended until it is known whether or not this will be a project.

A threefold environmental process
Part of the expenditure confusion may lie in the fact that there have been two separate EIR studies done to date. The negative declaration triggered the need for the initial EIR, which indicated the need for more extensive and focused studies on traffic and water, resulting in the amendment to the EIR.

“We have had three review processes on this project,” Dando explains. “Because this is in a sensitive area and the neighbors are concerned. Once we realized the sensitivity of the surrounding area, the neighbors, and our concerns with water and traffic, we felt like the city needed to be more closely involved. We are now the monitor of the amended EIR.”

Audit on hold
At the Rules Committee meeting on Wednesday, Assistant City Manager Mark Linder asked for a deferral on his recommendation to audit the project until next week. Later, he commented on the process.

District 10 candidate Nancy Pyle, who requested the audit, was not present at the meeting.

In speaking to the committee, AYA board member Brad Bosomworth called the project the best of civics in action.

“What the AYA and the city of San Jose are doing is something great,” he said. “We’re working together as a community and a city to fill a dire need in our community. I fear that an audit will implicitly and unnecessarily taint that relationship.”

“The Vice Mayor asked us to get the facts together and make a recommendation as to whether or not an audit should be involved,” said Linder following the meeting. “It’s basically taking a look at what money we’ve put into the project and what it’s going for. I don’t think it’s going to lead to an audit.”

Project may be phased in
According to reports that have started to surface following the release this week of the EIR, the project may be phased in—starting with an initial development of five acres—to accommodate water concerns and allow for additional fundraising on an ongoing basis.

“I think you’ll see the five acres developed,” Dando explains. “Then you take the next five acres and do the heavy fundraising for artificial turf, and develop it more as the money comes in. People get excited when they see something actually starting to happen. I think it would be wise to get the first five acres going.”

Although the project is currently estimated to cost $2 million to $3 million, Dando says some may have assumed that the city would be footing the entire bill, but she remains firm in her assertions that the AYA will be limited by their ability to raise the appropriate funds.

“This is an important project to our community,” she adds. “It’s been underway for 15 years and we have an opportunity to make something really good happen. I don’t want that to be damaged in any way by not being real clear.”