I say no

It's a fundamental of effective Project Management to engage all stakeholders. Taxpayers in Oakland are affected by changes to Alameda Point. Proximity to the Bay means we also need to ensure environmentalist interests are represented as well. We can have something great at the Point, and the most efficient and effective way to manage the project - with fewest obstacles later on - is to balance the needs of all stakeholders.

I say no

Alameda Point is part of the Bay, I say save the Bay and
save the point for all the bay area residents.

I say no

Of all the issues relating to Alameda Point, the question of whether the development plans should be decided exlusively by Alameda Residents and politicians is the most inconsequential question to ask. The development process is already being driven by outside interests - appropriately. The Department of the Navy controls the land, the Environmental Protection Agency is overseeing the clean-up, and a Southern California company - Suncal - is serving as the Master Developer, and they have hired an outside firm to lead the public engagement process. Get a real question on here, such as whether measure A should be amended to allow transit oriented development at Alameda Point

I say no

As an Oakland resident, I have two reasons for believing that viewpoints beyond Alameda's should be considered.

1) I will be paying for the infrastructure impact on Oakland (especially traffic) with my taxes and my time; and

2) The impact of any development on the San Francisco Bay and surrounding wetlands is a regional issue that concerns me deeply.

I would prefer to see Alameda and surrounding stakeholders enter this process cooperatively, rather than as adversaries.

I say no

If the City of Alameda doesn't solicit and integrate feedback from other stakeholders such as Oakland, then the City is likely to be sued by those other stakeholders. So either way those people outside of Alameda will have an impact on Alameda Point decision; and I think it's better to work with these other people proactively instead of reactively (i.e. via court order).

I say no

I say no