New Page 1 Campaign IssuesMake a contributionVolunteerMediaBiographyFunContactMuchas GraciasSearchHome


NASA Wind Tunnel

7/13/1999 Council Meeting
Letter of comment on NASA Ames Aerodynamic testing program final environmental impact statement - A Councilmember asked what their options for litigation are if NASA disregards the City's comments.


9/14/1999 Council Meeting
Potential annexation of portions of the Ames/Moffett complex/status of cooperative memorandum of understanding. A Councilmember, responding to Mr. Wesley's comments, clarified that the September 8 letter from NASA states that in the event that the Federal Government decided to declare excess any of the Ames Moffett complex property, including Moffett Federal Airfield, Ames Research Center will provide the appropriate city or cities with adequate notice so than an annexation process can be initiated prior to a disposition or excessing process beginning for the property. She noted that she feels strongly the the annexation issue is a very important part of the MOU and to approve a "gutted" MOU sends the wrong message to the community and gives the impression that this is a meaningful document.


2/6/2001 Special Meeting
A Councilmember said she has a clear understanding of what cannot be done in regard to housing, and she would like to find out what can be done. She said that one of the contradictions in the regulations is that property cannot be leased for more than five years, but private housing contractors get 50-year leases. She said the military legitimately does not know at this point what its eventual need for the six-acre parcel is, and it is understandable that they would not dispose of the property at this point. Initially, she said the City was very interested in that parcel because it is in the middle of the community and if the only way the City could have ever acquired that parcel would have been for a park, then it would not have been turned down. She said parks are not desperately needed in Mountain View and housing is desperately needed.
She expressed interest in finding a way to develop the six-acre parcel for housing. The City desperately needs affordable housing in the community, and the community is getting impatient seeing the parcel remain vacant. She said the concern with privatization is that once the housing contractor gets the property and is given a 50-year lease, the local community is cut out from access to that housing.
She proposed that the Council get the military to designate the six-acre parcel as housing, then privatize it, then contract it out to a local nonprofit as affordable housing. She pointed out that if the Army Corps' first priority is the military, that is important because she sees the military as an important component of the City's affordable housing constituency. But if the Army Corps does not need all of the property, then having a nonprofit housing organization be the privatization contractor opens it up to address some of the City's affordable housing issues.
A Councilmember said it was time to broaden the City’s thinking beyond the property being surplused, and she suggested focusing on working collaboratively with the military on projects that would not involve surplusing the property to address the housing needs of both the military and the City.

7/27/1999 Council Meeting
A Councilmember stated that she wants to make sure that they do not lose their focus in regard to the military housing at Moffett Field because when the Army Corps of Engineers takes over, they will have the option to privatize the housing, and she wants to make sure that it continues to be an important community asset. She commented that plans to privatize the housing would not be in the community's best interest.